↓ Skip to main content

Dove Medical Press

Pharmacogenetic polymorphism as an independent risk factor for frequent hospitalizations in older adults with polypharmacy: a pilot study

Overview of attention for article published in Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine, October 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
2 news outlets
twitter
5 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
35 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 Mendeley
Title
Pharmacogenetic polymorphism as an independent risk factor for frequent hospitalizations in older adults with polypharmacy: a pilot study
Published in
Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine, October 2016
DOI 10.2147/pgpm.s117014
Pubmed ID
Authors

Joseph Finkelstein, Carol Friedman, George Hripcsak, Manuel Cabrera

Abstract

Pharmacogenetic testing identifies genetic biomarkers that are predictive of individual sensitivity to particular drugs. A significant proportion of medications that are widely prescribed for older adults are metabolized by enzymes that are encoded by highly polymorphic genes. Pharmacogenetic testing is increasingly used to optimize the medication regimen; however, its potential in older adults with polypharmacy has not been systematically explored. Following the initial case-series study, this study hypothesized that frequently hospitalized older adults with polypharmacy have higher frequency of pharmacogenetic polymorphism as compared to older adults with polypharmacy who are rarely admitted to a hospital. To test this hypothesis, a nested case-control study was conducted with pharmacogenetic polymorphism as an exposure and hospitalization rate as an outcome. In this study, frequently hospitalized older adults (≥65 years of age) with polypharmacy were matched with rarely hospitalized older adults with poly-pharmacy by age, gender, race, ethnicity, and chronic disease score. Average age and number of prescription drugs did not differ in cases and controls (77.2±5.0 and 78.3±5.1 years, 14.3±5.3 and 14.0±2.9 medications, respectively). No statistically significant difference in sociodemographic, clinical, and behavioral characteristics that are known to affect hospitalization risk was found between the cases and controls. Major pharmacogenetic polymorphism defined as presence of at least one allelic combination resulting in poor or rapid metabolizer status was identified in all the cases. No major pharmacogenetic polymorphisms were detected in controls. Based on the exact McNemar's test, the difference in major pharmacogenetic polymorphism frequency between cases and controls was statistically significant (p<0.05). In 50% of cases, more than one major pharmacogenetic polymorphism was found. The frequency of CYP2C19 rapid metabolizer, CYP3A4/5 poor metabolizer, VKORC1 low sensitivity, and CYP2D6 rapid metabolizer status in cases was 67%, 33%, 33%, and 17%, respectively, which significantly exceeded respective prevalence in general population. The mean number of major gene-drug interactions found in cases was 2.8±2.2, whereas no major drug-gene interactions were identified in controls. The difference in the number of major drug-gene interactions between cases and controls was statistically significant (p<0.05). The pilot data supported the hypothesis that pharmacogenetic polymorphism may represent an independent risk factor for frequent hospitalizations in older adults with polypharmacy. Due to small sample size, the results of this proof-of-concept study cannot be conclusive. Further work on the utility of pharmacogenetic testing for optimization of medication regimens in this vulnerable group of older adults is warranted.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 69 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 16%
Researcher 11 16%
Student > Bachelor 7 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 9%
Student > Master 6 9%
Other 15 21%
Unknown 14 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 17 24%
Medicine and Dentistry 9 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 9%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 5 7%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 6%
Other 11 16%
Unknown 18 26%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 20. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 November 2018.
All research outputs
#1,890,679
of 25,748,735 outputs
Outputs from Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,463
of 333,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Pharmacogenomics and Personalized Medicine
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,748,735 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 19.5. This one scored the same or higher as 0 of them.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,762 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them