يعرض 1 - 10 نتائج من 96 نتيجة بحث عن '"Taylor, Annette K."', وقت الاستعلام: 1.07s تنقيح النتائج
  1. 1
    دورية أكاديمية
  2. 2
    دورية أكاديمية
  3. 3
  4. 4
    دورية أكاديمية

    المصدر: American Journal on Mental Retardation. Jan 2001 106(1):16-27.

    تمت مراجعته من قبل الزملاء: N

    Page Count: 12

  5. 5
    دورية أكاديمية

    مصطلحات موضوعية: Pharmacy and Pharmacology, Health Sciences

    وصف الملف: application/pdf

    العلاقة: Luzum, Jasmine A.; Petry, Natasha; Taylor, Annette K.; Van Driest, Sara L.; Dunnenberger, Henry M.; Cavallari, Larisa H. (2021). "Moving Pharmacogenetics Into Practice: It’s All About the Evidence!." Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics (3): 649-661.; https://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/169310Test; Clinical Pharmacology & Therapeutics; Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium. PGx Dissemination Working Group < https://cpicpgx.org/disseminationTest/ > ( 2021 ).; Mukherjee, C., Sweet, K.M., Luzum, J.A., Abdel‐Rasoul, M., Christman, M.F. & Kitzmiller, J.P. Clinical pharmacogenomics: patient perspectives of pharmacogenomic testing and the incidence of actionable test results in a chronic disease cohort. Per. Med. 14, 383 – 388 ( 2017 ).; Thornley, T., Esquivel, B., Wright, D.J., Dop, H.V.D., Kirkdale, C.L. & Youssef, E. Implementation of a pharmacogenomic testing service through community pharmacy in the Netherlands: results from an early service evaluation. Pharmacy (Basel) 9, 38 ( 2021 ).; Bielinski, S.J. et al. Are patients willing to incur out‐of‐pocket costs for pharmacogenomic testing? Pharmacogenomics J. 17, 1 – 3 ( 2017 ).; Empey, P.E., Pratt, V.M., Hoffman, J.M., Caudle, K.E. & Klein, T.E. Expanding evidence leads to new pharmacogenomics payer coverage. Genet. Med. 23, 830 – 832 ( 2021 ).; Holzer, K. et al. Hmong participants’ reactions to return of individual and community pharmacogenetic research results: "A positive light for our community". J. Commun. Genet. 12, 53 – 65 ( 2021 ).; Lemke, A.A. et al. Patient perspectives following pharmacogenomics results disclosure in an integrated health system. Pharmacogenomics 19, 321 – 331 ( 2018 ).; Christian, C. et al. Pharmacogenomic‐based decision support to predict adherence to medications. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 108, 368 – 376 ( 2020 ).; Truong, T.M., Lipschultz, E., Schierer, E., Danahey, K., Ratain, M.J. & O’Donnell, P.H. Patient insights on features of an effective pharmacogenomics patient portal. Pharmacogenet. Genomics 30, 191 – 200 ( 2020 ).; Drelles, K., Pilarski, R., Manickam, K., Shoben, A.B. & Toland, A.E. Impact of previous genetic counseling and objective numeracy on accurate interpretation of a pharmacogenetics test report. Public Health Genomics 24, 26 – 32 ( 2021 ).; Roden, D.M. et al. Benefit of preemptive pharmacogenetic information on clinical outcome. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 103, 787 – 794 ( 2018 ).; Weitzel, K.W., Cavallari, L.H. & Lesko, L.J. Preemptive panel‐based pharmacogenetic testing: the time is now. Pharm. Res. 34, 1551 – 1555 ( 2017 ).; Zhu, Y. et al. A model‐based cost‐effectiveness analysis of pharmacogenomic panel testing in cardiovascular disease management: preemptive, reactive, or none? Genet. Med. 23, 461 – 470 ( 2020 ).; Van Driest, S.L. et al. Clinically actionable genotypes among 10,000 patients with preemptive pharmacogenomic testing. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 95, 423 – 431 ( 2014 ).; Schildcrout, J.S. et al. Optimizing drug outcomes through pharmacogenetics: a case for preemptive genotyping. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 92, 235 – 242 ( 2012 ).; Saldivar, J.‐S. et al. Initial assessment of the benefits of implementing pharmacogenetics into the medical management of patients in a long‐term care facility. Pharmgenomics Pers. Med. 9, 1 – 6 ( 2016 ).; Halverson, C.M., Pratt, V.M., Skaar, T.C. & Schwartz, P.H. Ending the pharmacogenomic gag rule: the imperative to report all results. Pharmacogenomics 22, 191 – 193 ( 2021 ).; Pratt, V.M. et al. Characterization of 137 genomic DNA reference materials for 28 pharmacogenetic genes: A GeT‐RM collaborative project. J. Mol. Diagn. 18, 109 – 123 ( 2016 ).; United States Food and Drug Administration. The FDA Warns Against the Use of Many Genetic Tests with Unapproved Claims to Predict Patient Response to Specific Medications: FDA Safety Communication < https://www.fda.gov/medicalTest‐devices/safety‐communications/fda‐warns‐against‐use‐many‐genetic‐tests‐unapproved‐claims‐predict‐patient‐response‐specific#actions > ( 2018 ).; Stanek, E.J. et al. Adoption of pharmacogenomic testing by US physicians: results of a nationwide survey. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 91, 450 – 458 ( 2012 ).; Owusu Obeng, A. et al. Physician‐reported benefits and barriers to clinical implementation of genomic medicine: a multi‐site IGNITE‐Network Survey. J. Pers. Med. 8, 24 ( 2018 ).; Woodcock, J. Assessing the clinical utility of diagnostics used in drug therapy. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 88, 765 – 773 ( 2010 ).; Munar, M.Y. & Singh, H. Drug dosing adjustments in patients with chronic kidney disease. Am. Fam. Physician 75, 1487 – 1496 ( 2007 ).; Dunnenberger, H.M. et al. Preemptive clinical pharmacogenetics implementation: current programs in five US medical centers. Annu. Rev. Pharmacol. Toxicol. 55, 89 – 106 ( 2015 ).; Hicks, J.K. et al. Implementation of clinical pharmacogenomics within a large health system: from electronic health record decision support to consultation services. Pharmacotherapy 36, 940 – 948 ( 2016 ).; Cavallari, L.H. et al. The IGNITE Pharmacogenetics Working Group: an opportunity for building evidence with pharmacogenetic implementation in a real‐world setting. Clin. Transl. Sci. 10, 143 – 146 ( 2017 ).; van der Wouden, C.H. et al. Implementing pharmacogenomics in Europe: design and implementation strategy of the ubiquitous pharmacogenomics consortium. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 101, 341 – 358 ( 2017 ).; Petry, N. et al. Implementation of wide‐scale pharmacogenetic testing in primary care. Pharmacogenomics 20, 903 – 913 ( 2019 ).; Luzum, J.A. et al. The Pharmacogenomics Research Network Translational Pharmacogenetics Program: outcomes and metrics of pharmacogenetic implementations across diverse healthcare systems. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 102, 502 – 510 ( 2017 ).; Nissen, S.E. Pharmacogenomics and clopidogrel: irrational exuberance? JAMA 306, 2727 – 2728 ( 2011 ).; van der Wouden, C.H., Swen, J.J., Samwald, M., Mitropoulou, C., Schwab, M. & Guchelaar, H.J. A brighter future for the implementation of pharmacogenomic testing. Eur. J. Hum. Genet. 24, 1658 – 1660 ( 2016 ).; Pirmohamed, M. & Hughes, D.A. Pharmacogenetic tests: the need for a level playing field. Nat. Rev. Drug Discovery 12, 3 – 4 ( 2013 ).; Khoury, M.J. Dealing with the evidence dilemma in genomics and personalized medicine. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 87, 635 – 638 ( 2010 ).; Frueh, F.W. Back to the future: why randomized controlled trials cannot be the answer to pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine. Pharmacogenomics 10, 1077 – 1081 ( 2009 ).; Denny, J.C., Schildcrout, J.S., Pulley, J.M. & Roden, D.M. Response to "Doubt about the feasibility of preemptive genotyping". Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 93, 234 ( 2013 ).; Huddart, R., Sangkuhl, K., Whirl‐Carrillo, M. & Klein, T.E. Are randomized controlled trials necessary to establish the value of implementing pharmacogenomics in the clinic? Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 106, 284 – 286 ( 2019 ).; Bottorff, M.B., Bright, D.R. & Kisor, D.F. Commentary: should pharmacogenomic evidence be considered in clinical decision making? Focus on select cardiovascular drugs. Pharmacotherapy 37, 1005 – 1013 ( 2017 ).; Drozda, K. & Pacanowski, M.A. Clinical trial designs to support clinical utility of pharmacogenomic testing. Pharmacotherapy 37, 1000 – 1004 ( 2017 ).; Caudle, K.E., Gammal, R.S., Whirl‐Carrillo, M., Hoffman, J.M., Relling, M.V. & Klein, T.E. Evidence and resources to implement pharmacogenetic knowledge for precision medicine. Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm. 73, 1977 – 1985 ( 2016 ).; Gillis, N.K. & Innocenti, F. Evidence required to demonstrate clinical utility of pharmacogenetic testing: the debate continues. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 96, 655 – 657 ( 2014 ).; Janssens, A.C. & Deverka, P.A. Useless until proven effective: the clinical utility of preemptive pharmacogenetic testing. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 96, 652 – 654 ( 2014 ).; Ratain, M.J. & Johnson, J.A. Meaningful use of pharmacogenetics. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 96, 650 – 652 ( 2014 ).; Altman, R.B. Pharmacogenomics: "noninferiority" is sufficient for initial implementation. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 89, 348 – 350 ( 2011 ).; Evans, B.J. Establishing clinical utility of pharmacogenetic tests in the post‐FDAAA era. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 88, 749 – 751 ( 2010 ).; Woodcock, J. The human genome and translational research: how much evidence is enough? Health Affairs (Project Hope) 27, 1616 – 1618 ( 2008 ).; Zineh, I. & Lesko, L.J. Pharmacogenetics in medicine: barriers, critical factors and a framework for dialogue. Per. Med. 6, 359 – 361 ( 2009 ).; Koch, B.C., van Schaik, R.H., van Gelder, T. & Mathijssen, R.H. & Rotterdam Clinical Pharmacology‐Pharmacogenetics Group (RCPPG). Doubt about the feasibility of preemptive genotyping. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 93, 233 ( 2013 ).; Wang, B., Canestaro, W.J. & Choudhry, N.K. Clinical evidence supporting pharmacogenomic biomarker testing provided in US Food and Drug Administration drug labels. JAMA Intern. Med. 174, 1938 – 1944 ( 2014 ).; Relling, M.V., Altman, R.B., Goetz, M.P. & Evans, W.E. Clinical implementation of pharmacogenomics: overcoming genetic exceptionalism. Lancet Oncol. 11, 507 – 509 ( 2010 ).; Relling, M.V. & Evans, W.E. Pharmacogenomics in the clinic. Nature 526, 343 – 350 ( 2015 ).; Harris, L.N. et al. Use of biomarkers to guide decisions on adjuvant systemic therapy for women with early‐stage invasive breast cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology Clinical Practice Guideline. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 1134 – 1150 ( 2016 ).; National Comprehensive Cancer Network. NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Breast Cancer < https://www2.triTest‐kobe.org/nccn/guideline/breast/english/breast.pdf > ( 2020 ).; Goetz, M.P. et al. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline for CYP2D6 and tamoxifen therapy. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 103, 770 – 777 ( 2018 ).; Brauch, H., Schroth, W., Eichelbaum, M., Schwab, M. & Harbeck, N. Clinical relevance of CYP2D6 genetics for tamoxifen response in breast cancer. Breast Care 3, 43 – 50 ( 2008 ).; Dean, L. Tamoxifen therapy and CYP2D6 genotype. In Medical Genetics Summaries (eds. Pratt, V.M., Scott, S.A., Pirmohamed, M., Esquivel, B., Kane, M.S. & Kattman, B.L. et al.) 501 – 516 ( National Center for Biotechnology Information, Bethesda, MD, 2019 ).; Early Breast Cancer Trialists’ Collaborative Group (EBCTCG). Aromatase inhibitors versus tamoxifen in early breast cancer: patient‐level meta‐analysis of the randomised trials. Lancet 386, 1341 – 1352 ( 2015 ).; United States Food and Drug Administration. Table of Pharmacogenomic Biomarkers in Drug Labeling < https://www.fda.gov/drugs/scienceTest‐and‐research‐drugs/table‐pharmacogenomic‐biomarkers‐drug‐labeling > ( 2015 ).; United States Food and Drug Administration. Clopidogrel Prescribing Information < https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2021/020839s074lbl.pdfTest > ( 2017 ).; United States Food and Drug Administration. Table of Pharmacogenetic Associations < https://www.fda.gov/medicalTest‐devices/precision‐medicine/table‐pharmacogenetic‐associations > ( 2020 ).; Relling, M.V. & Klein, T.E. CPIC: Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium of the Pharmacogenomics Research Network. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 89, 464 – 467 ( 2011 ).; Swen, J.J. et al. Pharmacogenetics: from bench to byte–an update of guidelines. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 89, 662 – 673 ( 2011 ).; Ross, C.J. et al. The Canadian Pharmacogenomics Network for Drug Safety: a model for safety pharmacology. Thyroid 20, 681 – 687 ( 2010 ).; Caudle, K.E. et al. Incorporation of pharmacogenomics into routine clinical practice: the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guideline development process. Curr. Drug. Metab. 15, 209 – 217 ( 2014 ).; Hewett, M. et al. PharmGKB: the Pharmacogenetics Knowledge Base. Nucleic Acids Res. 30, 163 – 165 ( 2002 ).; United States Food and Drug Administration. Prescribing Information for Tamoxifen < https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2018/021807s005lbl.pdfTest > ( 2018 ).; Caudle, K.E., Keeling, N.J., Klein, T.E., Whirl‐Carrillo, M., Pratt, V.M. & Hoffman, J.M. Standardization can accelerate the adoption of pharmacogenomics: current status and the path forward. Pharmacogenomics 19, 847 – 860 ( 2018 ).; Association for Molecular Pathology. Association for Molecular Pathology Position Statement: Best Practices for Clinical Pharmacogenomic Testing < https://www.amp.org/AMP/assets/File/positionTest‐statements/2019/Best_Practices_for_PGx_9_4_2019.pdf?pass=96 > ( 2019 ).; PharmGKB. The PharmGKB Blog < https://pharmgkb.blogspot.com/2020/05/pharmgkbTest‐response‐to‐fda‐table‐for.html > ( 2020 ).; American Society of Pharmacovigilance. STRIPE Collaborative Community < https://www.stopadr.org/stripeTest > ( 2021 ).; Knepper, T.C. & McLeod, H.L. When will clinical trials finally reflect diversity? Nature 557, 157 – 159 ( 2018 ).; Cavallari, L.H. et al. Multisite investigation of outcomes with implementation of CYP2C19 genotype‐guided antiplatelet therapy after percutaneous coronary intervention. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 11, 181 – 191 ( 2018 ).; Deiman, B.A. et al. Reduced number of cardiovascular events and increased cost‐effectiveness by genotype‐guided antiplatelet therapy in patients undergoing percutaneous coronary interventions in the Netherlands. Neth. Heart J. 24, 589 – 599 ( 2016 ).; Smith, D.M. et al. CYP2D6‐guided opioid therapy improves pain control in CYP2D6 intermediate and poor metabolizers: a pragmatic clinical trial. Genet. Med. 21, 1842 – 1850 ( 2019 ).; Hulot, J.S. et al. Routine CYP2C19 genotyping to adjust thienopyridine treatment after primary PCI for STEMI: results of the GIANT study. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 13, 621 – 630 ( 2020 ).; Brunette, C.A. et al. Pragmatic trials in genomic medicine: the integrating pharmacogenetics in clinical care (I‐PICC) study. Clin. Transl. Sci. 13, 381 – 390 ( 2020 ).; Oslin, D.W. et al. Study design and implementation of the PRecision Medicine In MEntal health Care (PRIME Care) Trial. Contemp. Clin. Trials 101, 106247 ( 2021 ).; Ensom, M.H., Davis, G.A., Cropp, C.D. & Ensom, R.J. Clinical pharmacokinetics in the 21st century. Does the evidence support definitive outcomes? Clin. Pharmacokinet. 34, 265 – 279 ( 1998 ).; McInnes, G.T. The value of therapeutic drug monitoring to the practising physician–an hypothesis in need of testing. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 27, 281 – 284 ( 1989 ).; Spector, R., Park, G.D., Johnson, G.F. & Vesell, E.S. Therapeutic drug monitoring. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 43, 345 – 353 ( 1988 ).; Tonkin, A.L. & Bochner, F. Therapeutic drug monitoring and patient outcome. A review of the issues. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 27, 169 – 174 ( 1994 ).; Vožeh, S. Cost‐effectiveness of therapeutic drug monitoring. Clin. Pharmacokinet. 13, 131 – 140 ( 1987 ).; Watson, I.D. & Thomson, A.H. The value of therapeutic drug monitoring to the practising physician–an hypothesis needing sensible application. Br. J. Clin. Pharmacol. 28, 619 – 620 ( 1989 ).; Regan, M.M. et al. CYP2D6 genotype and tamoxifen response in postmenopausal women with endocrine‐responsive breast cancer: the breast international group 1–98 trial. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 104, 441 – 451 ( 2012 ).; Rae, J.M. et al. CYP2D6 and UGT2B7 genotype and risk of recurrence in tamoxifen‐treated breast cancer patients. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 104, 452 – 460 ( 2012 ).; Goetz, M.P., Ratain, M. & Ingle, J.N. Providing balance in ASCO clinical practice guidelines: CYP2D6 genotyping and tamoxifen efficacy. J. Clin. Oncol. 34, 3944 – 3945 ( 2016 ).; Johnson, J.A., Hamadeh, I.S. & Langaee, T.Y. Loss of heterozygosity at the CYP2D6 locus in breast cancer: implications for tamoxifen pharmacogenetic studies. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 107, dju437 ( 2015 ).; Sanchez‐Spitman, A. et al. Tamoxifen pharmacogenetics and metabolism: Results from the prospective CYPTAM study. J. Clin. Oncol. 37, 636 – 646 ( 2019 ).; Goetz, M.P., Suman, V.J., Nakamura, Y., Kiyotani, K., Jordan, V.C. & Ingle, J.N. Tamoxifen metabolism and breast cancer recurrence: a question unanswered by CYPTAM. J. Clin. Oncol. 37, 1982 – 1983 ( 2019 ).; Schroth, W. et al. Association between CYP2D6 polymorphisms and outcomes among women with early stage breast cancer treated with tamoxifen. JAMA 302, 1429 – 1436 ( 2009 ).; Mulder, T.A.M., de With, M., Del Re, M., Danesi, R. & Mathijssen, R.H.J. & van Schaik, R.H.N. Clinical CYP2D6 genotyping to personalize adjuvant tamoxifen treatment in ER‐positive breast cancer patients: current status of a controversy. Cancers (Basel) 13, 771 ( 2021 ).; DeCensi, A. et al. Association of CYP2D6 genotype and tamoxifen metabolites with breast cancer recurrence in a low‐dose trial. NPJ Breast Cancer 7, 34 ( 2021 ).; Levine, G.N. et al. 2011 ACCF/AHA/SCAI Guideline for Percutaneous Coronary Intervention: a report of the American College of Cardiology Foundation/American Heart Association Task Force on Practice Guidelines and the Society for Cardiovascular Angiography and Interventions. Circulation 124, e574 – e651 ( 2011 ).; Claassens, D.M.F. et al. A genotype‐guided strategy for oral P2Y12 inhibitors in primary PCI. N. Engl. J. Med. 381, 1621 – 1631 ( 2019 ).; Pereira, N.L. et al. Effect of genotype‐guided Oral P2Y12 inhibitor selection vs conventional clopidogrel therapy on ischemic outcomes after percutaneous coronary intervention: The TAILOR‐PCI randomized clinical trial. JAMA 324, 761 – 771 ( 2020 ).; Pereira, N.L. et al. Effect of CYP2C19 genotype on ischemic outcomes during oral P2Y 12 inhibitor therapy: a meta‐analysis. JACC Cardiovasc. Interv. 14, 739 – 750 ( 2021 ).; National Comprehensive Cancer Network. Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia < https://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/all.pdfTest > ( 2021 ).; Relling, M.V. et al. Clinical pharmacogenetics implementation consortium guideline for thiopurine dosing based on TPMT and NUDT15 genotypes: 2018 Update. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 105, 1095 – 1105 ( 2019 ).; Newman, W.G. et al. A pragmatic randomized controlled trial of thiopurine methyltransferase genotyping prior to azathioprine treatment: the TARGET study. Pharmacogenomics 12, 815 – 826 ( 2011 ).; Lichtenstein, G.R., Loftus, E.V., Isaacs, K.L., Regueiro, M.D., Gerson, L.B. & Sands, B.E. ACG clinical guideline: management of Crohn’s disease in adults. Am. J. Gastroenterol. 113, 481 – 517 ( 2018 ).; Shen, W.K. et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/HRS Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Patients With Syncope: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation 136, e60 – e122 ( 2017 ).; Luzum, J.A. & Cheung, J.C. Does cardiology hold pharmacogenetics to an inconsistent standard? A comparison of evidence among recommendations. Pharmacogenomics 19, 1203 – 1216 ( 2018 ).; Shugg, T., Pasternak, A.L., London, B. & Luzum, J.A. Prevalence and types of inconsistencies in clinical pharmacogenetic recommendations among major U.S. sources. NPJ Genom. Med. 5, 48 ( 2020 ).; Rasmussen‐Torvik, L.J. et al. Design and anticipated outcomes of the eMERGE‐PGx project: a multicenter pilot for preemptive pharmacogenomics in electronic health record systems. Clin. Pharmacol. Ther. 96, 482 – 489 ( 2014 ).; Harris, P.A., Taylor, R., Thielke, R., Payne, J., Gonzalez, N. & Conde, J.G. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)–a metadata‐driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J. Biomed. Inform. 42, 377 – 381 ( 2009 ).; Ballinger, T.J. et al. Discerning the clinical relevance of biomarkers in early stage breast cancer. Breast Cancer Res. Treat. 164, 89 – 97 ( 2017 ).; Arwood, M.J. et al. Design and early implementation successes and challenges of a pharmacogenetics consult clinic. J. Clin. Med. 9, 2274 ( 2020 ).; Lee, Y.M., Manzoor, B.S., Cavallari, L.H. & Nutescu, E.A. Facilitators and barriers to the adoption of pharmacogenetic testing in an inner‐city population. Pharmacotherapy 38, 205 – 216 ( 2018 ).

  6. 6
    دورية أكاديمية
  7. 7
    دورية أكاديمية
  8. 8
    دورية أكاديمية
  9. 9
    دورية أكاديمية
  10. 10
    دورية أكاديمية