Feasibility of hepatic fine needle aspiration as a minimally invasive sampling method for gene expression quantification of pharmacogenetic targets in dogs.

BACKGROUND: Quantifying hepatic gene expression is important for many pharmacogenetic studies. However, this usually requires biopsy (BX), which is invasive. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to determine the feasibility of using minimally invasive fine needle aspirate (FNA) to quantify hepatic gene expression and to assess expression variability between different sampling sites. METHODS: Biopsy and FNA samples were acquired from central and peripheral locations of the right and left lateral liver lobes of a dog. Relative expression of ABCB1, GSTT1 and CYP3A12 were measured via reverse transcriptase, quantitative PCR. The effect of sampling method, lobe and location within the lobe on gene expression was assessed using a three-way ANOVA. RESULTS: Relative expression of ABCB1 and GSTT1 were not statistically different between sampling methods but CYP3A12 expression was higher in samples collected by BX (p = .013). Lobe sampled affected ABCB1 expression (p = .001) and site within lobe affected ABCB1 (p = .018) and GSTT1 (p = .025) expression. CONCLUSIONS: FNA appears to be a feasible technique for minimally invasive evaluation of hepatic gene expression but results should not be directly compared to biopsy samples. Sampling location impacts expression of some targets; combination of FNAs from multiple sites may reduce variation.

Pharmacogenetic testing in primary care practice: opinions of physicians, pharmacists and patients.

Aim: Although health authorities have set pharmacogenetic (PGx) markers on labels of hundreds of drugs, the use of PGx in clinical care remains infrequent. The adoption of PGx will depend on the opinions of physicians, pharmacists and patients. Materials & methods: Qualitative focus group interviews were performed with 23 physicians, 11 pharmacists and 30 patients. Results: Majority of the participants showed enthusiasm toward the implementation of PGx in clinics. Lack of knowledge on PGx, roles of healthcare providers, factors in favor and challenges of PGx implementation, ethical and insurance issues, educational and tools needs were the key themes that emerged from the interviews. Conclusion: Several barriers impede the uptake of PGx in clinics, however, opinions of physicians, pharmacists and patients are mostly favorable.