Research of Russian physicians’ opinions on tuberculosis pharmacogenetics

Abstract

BACKGROUND: There is currently no widespread implementation of pharmacogenetic testing (PGx) methods in the practice of phthisiology service. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine how informed and prepared phthisiologists, residents, and postgraduate students of the Russian Medical Academy of Continuing Professional Education (RMACPE, Moscow) use PGx techniques in their work to improve treatment safety, predict the occurrence of adverse reactions (ADRs), and personalize therapy. METHODS: A survey was conducted among phthisiologists (n = 314) living in different regions of the Russian Federation and studying at RMACPE, such as residents and post-graduate students (n = 185). The survey was developed on the Testograf.ru web platform and had 25 questions for physicians and 22 for residents and post-graduate students. RESULTS: More than 50% of respondents are ready to use PGx in clinical practice and thus are aware of the method’s possibilities. At the same time only a small part of participants were aware of the pharmgkb.org resource. The absence of PGx in clinical guidelines and treatment standards, according to 50.95% of phthisiologists and 55.13% of students of RMACPE, the absence of large-scale randomized clinical trials, according to 37.26% of phthisiologists and 43.33% of students, and the lack of physician knowledge on PGx, according to 41.08% of phthisiologists and 57.83% of students, are all factors that prevent the implementation of PGx in Russia. CONCLUSION: According to the survey, the overwhelming majority of participants recognize the importance of PGx and are willing to use the method in practice. However, there is a low level of awareness among all respondents about the possibilities of PGx and the pharmgkb.org resource. The implementation of this service could significantly increase patient compliance, lower ADRs, and enhance anti-tuberculosis (TB) therapy quality.

Genetic Variations and Antibiotic-Related Adverse Events

“…Although with exceptions [ 84 , 85 ], studies have shown that subjects carrying the CYP2E1 c1/c1 genotype are 2.5 times more likely to develop hepatotoxicity when compared to those with other genotypes [ 86 , 87 ]. The risk of liver damage increased 7-fold when this genetic variant was associated with NAT2 mutations, as the number of toxic metabolites was significantly increased [ 88 ]. An increased risk of liver damage was also reported in children with the CYP2E1*6 allele and *1A-*6-*1D haplotype [ 89 ].…”