Pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics: origin, status, and the hope for personalized medicine.

Pharmacogenetics arose with studies of single genes, which had major effects on the action of particular drugs. It turned into pharmacogenomics through realization that the controls of most drug responses are multifactorial. Then, variable gene expression posed new problems, for example what do drugs do to genes, or how useful is any genetic pretesting of a person? A common disease may be caused by different groups of genes in different people, who therefore require different drugs for treatment. Personalized medicine is currently represented by a physician's attention to a patients age, sex, or ethnic background, that is groups showing smaller genetic variation than is typical for general humanity. Occasionally, there is also the use of single-gene pretesting of a patient before drug administration. Over time, improvements in multigenic testing promise to increase the role of personalized medicine. However, the many pharmacogenomic complexities, and particularly time-dependent changes of gene expression, will never allow personalized medicine to become an error-free entity.

Detailed characterization of experimentally derived human hepatic CYP1A1 activity and expression using differential inhibition of ethoxyresorufin O-deethylation by fluvoxamine.

OBJECTIVE: To characterize the distribution of mathematically derived human hepatic CYP1A1 activity using differential inhibition of ethoxyresorufin O-deethylation (EROD) by fluvoxamine. METHODS: Quantitative CYP1A1- and CYP1A2-mediated EROD activities were determined in 42 human livers using differential inhibition of EROD by fluvoxamine. CYP1A2-specific activity was also measured by phenacetin O-deethylation and caffeine 3-demethylation. Distributions of CYP1A1-mediated EROD and CYP1-A2 probe activities were analyzed using cumulative distribution (probit) plots and the Kolgomorov-Smirnov test. Age effect on CYP1A1- and CYP1A2-mediated EROD activities was evaluated using descriptive statistics and analysis of variance. RESULTS: The derived CYP1A1 protein concentration of 0.58 +/- 1.04 pmol/mg was only 4% of the derived CYP1A2. Since CYP1A1 is intrinsically far more active than CYP1A2 in mediating EROD, contribution of CYP1A1 to EROD represented approximately 25-40% of CYP1A2 contribution. Three of the 42 livers exhibited no CYP1A1-mediated EROD. Approximately 8% of the individuals showed high CYP1A1 activity phenotype based on cumulative distribution curve analysis. Hepatic CYP1A1 activity was more variable than that of CYP1A2. The variance of CYP1A1-mediated EROD was significantly different from that of CYP1A2, using the Kolgomorov-Smirnov statistical test. Even though not statistically significant, an age-related pattern in CYP1A1-mediated activity was identified: activity was high in the pre-puberty group, then decreased in the young/mature adult group and, finally, a slight increase was observed in old age. CONCLUSIONS: Distribution pattern in CYP1A1-mediated EROD suggests that the low derived CYP1A1 expression is most likely induced rather than constitutive. CYP1A1 activity deviates from log-normal distribution; the variations in hepatic CYP1A1 activity may affect the conversion of procarcinogens to carcinogens. The age-related trend in CYP1A1-mediated EROD activity hints that CYP1A1 responsiveness to inducers may change with age as well as with exposure to environmental inducers. These findings prompt (1) future genotyping studies to determine whether increased CYP1A1 inducibility is a result of genetic factors and (2) studies to address whether CYP1A1 inducibility changes with age.

CYP1A2 activity as measured by a caffeine test predicts clozapine and active metabolite steady-state concentrationin patients with schizophrenia.

Clozapine is an atypical antipsychotic drug and displays efficacy in 30% to 60% of patients with schizophrenia who do not respond to traditional antipsychotics. A clozapine concentration greater than 1,150 nmol/L increases the probability of antipsychotic efficacy. However, plasma clozapine concentration can vary more than 45-fold during long-term treatment. The aim of this study was to assess the contribution of CYP1A2 to variability in steady-state concentration of clozapine and its active metabolite norclozapine. Patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder were prospectively monitored during clozapine treatment (N = 18). The in vivo CYP1A2 activity was measured using the caffeine metabolic ratio (CMR) in overnight urine. Trough plasma samples were drawn after at least 5 days of treatment with a constant regimen of clozapine. A significant negative association was found between the CMR and the dose-corrected clozapine (r(s) = -0.87,p < 0.01) and norclozapine (r(s) = -0.76,p < 0.01) concentrations. Nonsmokers displayed a higher clozapine (3.2-fold) and norclozapine (2.3-fold) concentration than smokers (p < 0.05). Furthermore, there was marked person-to-person variation in CYP1A2 activity during multiple-dose clozapine treatment (coefficient of variation = 60%). Age, weight, serum creatinine, and grapefruit juice consumption did not significantly contribute to variability in clozapine and norclozapine concentration (p > 0.05). In conclusion, CYP1A2 is one of the important contributors to disposition of clozapine during multiple-dose treatment. Although further in vitro experiments are necessary, the precise metabolic pathways catalyzed by CYP1A2 seem to be subsequent to the formation of norclozapine, hitherto less recognized quantitatively important alternate disposition routes, or both. From a clinical perspective, an environmentally induced or constitutively high CYP1A2 expression can lead to a decrease in steady-state concentration of clozapine as well as its active metabolite norclozapine. Thus, interindividual variability in CYP1A2 activity may potentially explain treatment resistance to clozapine in some patients. CYP1A2 phenotyping with a simple caffeine test may contribute to individualization of clozapine dosage and differentiate between treat ment noncompliance and high CYP1A2 activity.

What will be the role of pharmacogenetics in evaluating drug safety and minimising adverse effects?

In the US, adverse drug reactions (ADRs) rank between the fourth to sixth leading cause of death, ahead of pneumonia and diabetes mellitus. An important reason for the high incidence of serious and fatal ADRs is that the existing drug development paradigms do not generate adequate information on the mechanistic sources of marked variability in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of new therapeutic candidates, precluding treatments from being tailored for individual patients. Pharmacogenetics is the study of the hereditary basis of person-to-person variations in drug response. The focus of pharmacogenetic investigations has traditionally been unusual and extreme drug responses resulting from a single gene effect. The Human Genome Project and recent advancements in molecular genetics now present an unprecedented opportunity to study all genes in the human genome, including genes for drug metabolism, drug targets and postreceptor second messenger machinery, in relation to variability in drug safety and efficacy. In addition to sequence variations in the genome, high throughput and genome-wide transcript profiling for differentially regulated mRNA species before and during drug treatment will serve as important tools to uncover novel mechanisms of drug action. Pharmacogenetic-guided drug discovery and development represent a departure from the conventional approach which markets drugs for broad patient populations, rather than smaller groups of patients in whom drugs may work more optimally. Pharmacogenetics provides a rational framework to minimise the uncertainty in outcome of drug therapy and clinical trials and thereby should significantly reduce the risk of drug toxicity.

Perspectives in pharmacogenetics.

The historical perspective of pharmacogenetics is presented to a large extent from a personal view, since I happened to get into this field of science at the time of its beginning, and since pharmacogenetics has remained the backbone of my scientific career. Pharmacogenetics initially emphasized observations of interpersonal variability, but the attention on interethnic differences soon followed. Technical advances led to the identification of many responsible gene alterations in both individuals and in populations. Included is a relatively extensive discussion in which the effects and the different consequences of monogenic (mendelian) and multigenic (multifactorial) variation are compared.

Treatment-resistance to clozapine in association with ultrarapid CYP1A2 activity and the C-->A polymorphism in intron 1 of the CYP1A2 gene: effect of grapefruit juice and low-dose fluvoxamine.

Antipsychotic response to clozapine varies markedly among patients with schizophrenia. The disposition of clozapine is dependent, in part, on the cytochrome P-450 (CYP) 1A2 enzyme in vivo. In theory, a very high CYP1A2 activity may lead to subtherapeutic concentrations and treatment resistance to clozapine. This prospective case study evaluates the clinical significance of ultrarapid CYP1A2 activity and a recently discovered single nucleotide (C --> A) polymorphism in intron 1 of the CYP1A2 gene (CYP1A2*F) for treatment resistance to clozapine. In addition, we describe the effect of grapefruit juice or low-dose fluvoxamine (25-50 mg/d) coadministration on clozapine and active metabolite norclozapine steady-state plasma concentration and antipsychotic response.

Evaluation of the genetic component of variability in CYP3A4 activity: a repeated drug administration method.

The CYP3A4 enzyme contributes to the disposition of more than 60 therapeutically important drugs and displays marked person-to-person variability of the catalytic function. However, the extent of genetic contribution to variability in CYP3A4 activity remains elusive. Recently, we showed that a comparison of between- (SDb2) and within-person (SDW2) variances provides an estimate of the genetic component of variability in drug disposition. The aim of the present analysis was to assess the genetic control of CYP3A4 activity in vivo. A computerized literature search was conducted covering 1966 to September 1999 to identify studies reporting repeated administration of CYP3A4 substrates. The genetic contribution (rGC) to disposition of each CYP3A4 substrate was obtained by the formula (SDb2-SDW2)/SDb2. The rGC values approaching 1.0, point to overwhelming genetic control, whereas those close to zero suggest that environmental factors dominate. A total of 16 studies with 10 different CYP3A4 substrates were identified (n = 161 subjects). The rGC for hepatic CYP3A4 activity as measured by midazolam plasma clearance or the erythromycin breath test was 0.96 (0.92-0.98) (95% Cl) and 0.89 (0.65-0.98), respectively (P < 0.05). The point estimates of rGC for composite (hepatic + intestinal) CYP3A4 activity measured after oral administration of cyclosporine, ethinylestradiol, ethylmorphine, nifedipine and nitrendipine, ranged from 0.66-0.98 (median: 0.83) (P < 0.05). Cyclosporine data suggested a higher genetic control of CYP3A4 at night than during the day. These data indicate that further molecular genetic investigations are warranted to identify genetic variants at CYP3A4 or elsewhere in the genome which contribute to regulation of CYP3A4 activity.

A functional polymorphism of the cytochrome P450 1A2 (CYP1A2) gene: association with tardive dyskinesia in schizophrenia.

Tardive dyskinesia (TD) is a common and potentially irreversible side effect associated with long-term treatment with typical antipsychotics. Approximately, 80% or more of patients with schizophrenia are smokers. Smoking is a potent inducer of the CYP1A2 enzyme, and is known to cause a significant decrease in plasma concentrations of some antipsychotics. Therefore, person-to-person differences in the extent of CYP1A2 induction by smoking may contribute to risk for the development of TD. Recently, a (C-->A) genetic polymorphism in the first intron of the CYP1A2 gene was found to be associated with variation in CYP1A2 inducibility in healthy volunteer smokers. The aim of this study was to test the clinical importance of the (C-->A) polymorphism in CYP1A2 in relation to TD severity. A total of 85 patients with schizophrenia were assessed for TD severity using the Abnormal Involuntary Movement Scale (AIMS), and were subsequently genotyped for the (C-->A) polymorphism in CYP1A2. The mean AIMS score in patients with the (C/C) genotype (associated with reduced CYP1A2 inducibility) was 2.7- and 3.4-fold greater than in those with the (A/C) or (A/A) genotype, respectively (F[2,82] = 7.4, P = 0.0007). Further, a subanalysis in the 44 known smokers in our sample, revealed a more pronounced effect. The means AIMS score in smokers was 5.4- and 4. 7-fold greater in (C/C) homozygotes when compared to heterozygotes and (A/A) homozygotes, respectively (F[2,41] = 3.7, P = 0.008). These data suggest that the (C-->A) genetic polymorphism in the CYP1A2 gene may serve as a genetic risk factor for the development of TD in patients with schizophrenia. Further studies in independent samples are warranted to evaluate the applicability of our findings to the general patient population receiving antipsychotic medications.

Hypothesis: comparisons of inter- and intra-individual variations can substitute for twin studies in drug research.

Twin studies are useful devices to determine the heritability of persistent but variable characteristics that tend to differ among individuals. Drug responses are not persistent affairs; they are temporary characteristics. One therefore may ask whether twin studies are necessary to assess the genetic element in pharmacological responsiveness. To measure the genetic component contributing to their variability, it seems logical to investigate the response variation by repeated drug administration to given individuals, and to compare the variability of the responses within and between individuals. We attempt here to describe a theoretical background of this venture, and to show some results of the exercise. Potential sources of error or uncertainty are discussed.

Serotonin subtype 2 receptor genes and clinical response to clozapine in schizophrenia patients.

Using a pharmacogenetic approach in 185 schizophrenics who have been prospectively assessed for clozapine response, we have examined the hypothesis that polymorphisms in the 5-HT2A (HTR2A), and 5-HT2C (HTR2C) genes are involved in its variable response. A-1438 A-->G polymorphism in the putative promoter and a silent T-->C 102 substitution in HTR2A were in almost complete linkage disequilibrium, and neither was associated with response (T-->C. 102 allele: chi 2 = 0.02; 1 df, p = .90; genotype: chi 2 = 0.02, 2 df, p = .99). A his452tyr HTR2A polymorphism was found to be associated with clozapine response (his452tyr allele: chi 2 = 6.43, 1 df, p = .01 [p = .04, Bonferroni corrected]; genotype: chi 2 = 6.54, 2 df, p = .04 [p = .16, Bonferroni corrected]). No HTR2A haplotype was associated with response. Interethnic differences were observed in the frequencies of the cys23ser HTR2C polymorphism. This polymorphism was not significantly associated with response in either of the ethnic groups (Caucasian and African American genotype: chi 2 = 3.46, 2 df, p = .18; chi 2 = .31, 2 df, p = .86, respectively). Although replication is required, the overall results suggest that the his452tyr HTR2A polymorphism may be involved in clozapine response.

Determinants of interindividual variability and extent of CYP2D6 and CYP1A2 inhibition by paroxetine and fluvoxamine in vivo.

Major depression may require antidepressant treatment for several years. This necessitates consideration of the long-term effects of antidepressants on multiple clinical endpoints. The antidepressants paroxetine and fluvoxamine are potent in vitro inhibitors of CYP2D6 and CYP1A2 isozymes, respectively. CYP2D6 and CYP1A2 are important for the clearance of 30 or more frequently used medications. Moreover, CYP1A2 also contributes to metabolism of 17beta-estradiol and metabolic activation of environmental procarcinogens (e.g., arylamines in cigarette smoke). The aim of this study was to assess the determinants of interindividual variability and extent of CYP2D6 and CYP1A2 inhibition during paroxetine and fluvoxamine treatment. Healthy volunteers and patients received caffeine (100 mg) and dextromethorphan (30 mg) at baseline and at steady state of paroxetine (10-20 mg/day, 5-74 days, N = 13) or fluvoxamine (50-100 mg/day, 5-43 days, N = 8). The caffeine metabolic ratio (CMR) and the log O-demethylation ratio (ODMR) of dextromethorphan in overnight urine were used as in vivo indices of the CYP1A2 and CYP2D6 isozyme activities, respectively. All subjects had an extensive metabolizer phenotype for CYP2D6. After fluvoxamine treatment, baseline CMR 5.1 +/- 1.4 (mean +/- SD) decreased to 2.7 +/- 1.1 (p < 0.01). Paroxetine did not have a significant effect on CMR (p > 0.05). In seven of eight subjects in the fluvoxamine group, posttreatment CMR was comparable with the minimum CMR value (2.0) attainable in nonsmoking healthy volunteers. After paroxetine treatment, log ODMR changed from a baseline value of -2.28 +/- 0.37 to -1.13 +/- 0.44, indicating significant inhibition of CYP2D6 (p < 0.001). Subjects' CYP2D6 phenotype did not change after paroxetine treatment. Fluvoxamine had no significant effect on log ODMR (p > 0.05). The extent of inhibition of CYP2D6 and CYP1A2 by paroxetine and fluvoxamine, respectively, displayed a positive correlation with baseline enzyme activity (p < 0.05). In addition, a negative association was found between the plasma paroxetine concentration and the CYP2D6 activity after paroxetine treatment (r = -0.47, p < 0.05). These data indicate that paroxetine and fluvoxamine treatment with minimum clinically effective doses significantly inhibit CYP2D6 and CYP1A2, respectively. The extent of inhibition of CYP2D6 by paroxetine and of CYP1A2 by fluvoxamine is dependent in part on the baseline enzyme activity. The interindividual variability in CYP2D6 inhibition by paroxetine can also be explained by variability in plasma paroxetine concentration. Most patients treated with fluvoxamine (50-100 mg/day) will reach population minimums for CYP1A2 activity. These results have potential implications for interindividual variability in the risk for drug-drug interactions mediated by CYP2D6 and CYP1A2 as well as for the disposition of 17beta-estradiol and environmental procarcinogens.