Search

Objective: The implementation of pharmacogenetics (PGx) in clinical practice is an essential tool for personalized medicine. However, clinical laboratories must validate their procedures before being used to perform PGx studies in patients, in order to confirm that they are adequate for the intended purposes., Methods: We designed a validation process for our in-house pharmacogenetic PCR-based method assay., Results: The concordance to reference, repeatability and reproducibility was 100%. Sensitivity and specificity were 100% for the detection of variant diplotypes in CYP2C9, CYP3A5, TPMT, DPYD and UGT1A1 genes. The sensitivity was lower in the detection of CYP2C19 variants due to a limitation in the design that prevents the detection of CYP2C19 *2/*10 diplotype., Conclusions: The success of implementing clinical pharmacogenetic testing into routine clinical practice is dependent on the precision of genotyping. Limitations must be bearing in mind to guarantee the quality of PGx assays in clinical laboratory practice. We provided objective evidence that the necessary requirements in our laboratory-development assay were fulfilled., (Copyright © 2021 Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The promoter hypermethylation of the methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase gene is a frequently used biomarker in daily clinical practice as it is associated with a favorable prognosis in glioblastoma patients treated with temozolamide. Due to the absence of adequately standardized techniques, international harmonization of the MGMT methylation biomarker is still an unmet clinical need for the diagnosis and treatment of glioblastoma patients., Results: In this study we carried out a clinical validation of a quantitative assay for MGMT methylation detection by comparing a novel quantitative MSP using double-probe (dp_qMSP) with the conventional MSP in 100 FFPE glioblastoma samples. We performed both technologies and established the best cutoff for the identification of positive-methylated samples using the quantitative data obtained from dp_qMSP. Kaplan-Meier curves and ROC time dependent curves were employed for the comparison of both methodologies., Conclusions: We obtained similar results using both assays in the same cohort of patients, in terms of progression free survival and overall survival according to Kaplan-Meier curves. In addition, the results of ROC(t) curves showed that dp_qMSP increases the area under curve time-dependent in comparison with MSP for predicting progression free survival and overall survival over time. We concluded that dp_qMSP is an alternative methodology compatible with the results obtained with the conventional MSP. Our assay will improve the therapeutic management of glioblastoma patients, being a more sensitive and competitive alternative methodology that ensures the standardization of the MGMT-biomarker making it reliable and suitable for clinical use.