Multi-gene Pharmacogenomic Testing That Includes Decision-Support Tools to Guide Medication Selection for Major Depression: A Health Technology Assessment

Ontario Health
Record ID 32018000729
English
Original Title: Multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing to guide medication selection for people with major depression
Authors' objectives: This health technology assessment evaluates the effectiveness, safety, and cost-effectiveness of multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes decision-support tools to guide medication selection for people with major depression. It also evaluates the budget impact of publicly funding multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing to guide medication selection for people with major depression and the experiences, preferences, and values of people with major depression.
Authors' results and conclusions: Results We included 14 studies in the clinical evidence review that evaluated six multi-gene pharmacogenomic tests. Although all tests included decision-support tools, they otherwise differed greatly, as did study design, populations included in studies, and outcomes reported. Little or no improvement was observed on change in HAM-D17 depression score compared with treatment as usual for any test evaluated (GRADE: Low–Very Low). GeneSight– and NeuroIDgenetix–guided medication selection led to statistically significant improvements in response (GRADE: Low–Very Low) and remission (GRADE: Low–Very Low) , while treatment guided by CNSdose led to significant improvement in remission rates (GRADE: Low), but the study did not report on response. Results were inconsistent and uncertain for the impact of Neuropharmagen, and no significant improvement was observed for Genecept or another unspecified test for either response or remission (GRADE: Low–Very Low). Neuropharmagen may reduce adverse events and CNSDose may reduce intolerability to medication, while no difference was observed in adverse events with GeneSight, Genecept, or another unspecified test (GRADE: Moderate–Very Low). No studies reported data on suicide, treatment adherence, relapse, recovery, or recurrence of depression symptoms. Conclusions: Multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes decision-support tools to guide medication selection for depression varies widely. Differences between individual tests must be considered, as clinical utility observed with one test might not apply to other tests. Overall, effectiveness was inconsistent among the six multi-gene pharmacogenomic tests we identified. Multi-gene pharmacogenomic tests may result in little or no difference in improvement in depression scores compared with treatment as usual, but some tests may improve response to treatment or remission from depression. The impact on adverse events is uncertain. The evidence, however, is uncertain, and therefore our confidence that these observed effects reflect the true effects is low to very low. For the management of major depression in people who had inadequate response to at least one medication, some multi-gene pharmacogenomic tests that include decision support tools are associated with additional costs and QALYs over the 1-year time horizon, and maybe be cost-effective at the willingness-to-pay amount of $100,000 per QALY. Publicly funding multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing in Ontario would result in additional annual costs of between $3.5 million and $16.8 million, with a total budget impact of about $52 million over the next 5 years. People with major depression and caregivers generally supported multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing because they believed it could provide guidance that fit their values. They hoped such guidance would speed symptom relief, would reduce side and help inform their medication choices. Some patients expressed concerns over maintaining confidentiality of test results and the possibility that physicians would sacrifice patient-centred care to follow pharmacogenomic guidance.
Authors' recomendations: Ontario Health, based on the guidance of the Ontario Health Technology Advisory Committee, recommends against publicly funding multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes decision-support tools for guiding medication selection for people with major depression.
Authors' methods: We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included study using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool and the Risk of Bias Assessment Tool for Nonrandomized studies (RoBANS) and the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic literature search of the economic evidence to review published cost-effectiveness studies on multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes a decision-support tool in people with major depression. We developed a state-transition model and conducted a probabilistic analysis to determine the incremental cost of multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing versus treatment as usual per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) gained for people with major depression who had inadequate response to one or more antidepressant medications. In the reference case (with GeneSight-guided care), we considered a 1-year time horizon with an Ontario Ministry of Health perspective. We also estimated the 5-year budget impact of publicly funding multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing for people with major depression in Ontario. To contextualize the potential value of multi-gene pharmacogenomic testing that includes decision-support tools, we spoke with people who have major depression and their families.
Details
Project Status: Completed
Year Published: 2021
Requestor: OHTAC/Ministry of Health
English language abstract: An English language summary is available
Publication Type: Full HTA
Country: Canada
Province: Ontario
Pubmed ID: 34484487
MeSH Terms
  • Pharmacogenomic Testing
  • Depressive Disorder, Major
  • Drug Therapy
  • Antidepressive Agents
  • Pharmacogenetics
Keywords
  • pharmacogenomic testing
  • decision-support tools
  • major depression
  • cost-effectiveness
  • budget impact
Contact
Organisation Name: Ontario Health
Contact Address: 130 Bloor Street West, 10th Floor
Contact Name: Nancy Sikich
Contact Email: OH-HQO_hta-reg@ontariohealth.ca
Copyright: © Queen’s Printer for Ontario, 2021
This is a bibliographic record of a published health technology assessment from a member of INAHTA or other HTA producer. No evaluation of the quality of this assessment has been made for the HTA database.