Key result
CYP2C19 genotyping was feasible in everyday clinical practice, with a median time to result of 4:04 hours in non-urgent PCI patients and 2:24 hours in STEMI patients.
Why the study?
Is CYP2C19 genotyping feasible and what is the time to result in patients using antiplatelet therapy in acute and non-acute settings?
Observational (n=3,594)
Is CYP2C19 genotyping feasible and what is the time to result in patients using antiplatelet therapy in acute and non-acute settings?
CYP2C19 genotyping is feasible in everyday clinical practice for both acute and non-acute settings, with results typically available within 2.5 to 4 hours.
Supports feasibility of CYP2C19 genotyping in PCI/STEMI; leaves open clinical utility of genotype-guided antiplatelet therapy.
AIM: A tailored antiplatelet strategy based on CYP2C19 genotype may reduce atherothrombotic and bleeding events. We describe our experience with CYP2C19 genotyping, using on-site TaqMan or Spartan genotyping or shipment to a central laboratory. METHODOLOGY: Data from two ongoing projects were used: Popular Risk Score project (non-urgent percutaneous coronary intervention patients) and the Popular Genetics study (ST-segment elevation myocardial infarction patients). For both projects, the time to genotyping result was calculated. RESULTS: In the Popular Risk Score project (n = 2556), median time from blood collection to genotyping result was 4:04 h. In the Popular Genetics study (n = 1038), median time from randomization to genotyping result was 2:24 h. CONCLUSION: CYP2C19 genotyping is feasible in everyday clinical practice, both in the acute and non-acute settings.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bergmeijer et al. (2018) conducted an observational in Patients using antiplatelet therapy (non-urgent PCI and STEMI) (n=3,594). CYP2C19 genotyping was evaluated on Time to genotyping result. CYP2C19 genotyping was feasible in everyday clinical practice, with a median time to result of 4:04 hours in non-urgent PCI patients and 2:24 hours in STEMI patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: