OBJECTIVE: To discover DNA methylation markers for allopurinol-induced SCAR which may improve the prediction accuracy of genetic testing.
STUDY DESIGN: The study was designed as a retrospective case-control clinical study in multicenter hospitals across Taiwan, Mainland China, Malaysia and Canada. 125 cases of allopurinol-induced SCAR patients and 139 cases of allopurinol tolerant controls were enrolled in this study during 2005 to 2021.
RESULTS: The results of genome-wide DNA methylation assay of 62 patients revealed that ITGB2 showed strong discriminative ability of allopurinol-induced SCAR in both HLA-B*58:01 positive and negative patients with AUC value of 0.9364 (95% CI 0.8682-1.000). In validation study, significant hypermethylation of ITGB2 were further validated in allopurinol-induced SCAR patients compared to tolerant controls, especially in those without HLA-B*58:01(AUC value of 0.8814 (95% CI 0.7121-1.000)). Additionally, the methylation levels of 2 sites on ITGB2 were associated with SCAR phenotypes. Combination of HLA-B*58:01 genotyping and ITGB2 methylation status could improve the prediction accuracy of allopurinol-induced SCAR with the AUC value up to 0.9387 (95% CI 0.9089-0.9684), while the AUC value of HLA-B*58:01 genotyping alone was 0.8557 (95% CI 0.8030-0.9083).
CONCLUSIONS: Our study uncovers differentially methylated genes between allopurinol-induced SCAR patients and tolerant controls with positive or negative HLA-B*58:01 allele and provides the novel epigenetic marker that improves the prediction accuracy of genetic testing for prevention of allopurinol-induced SCAR.
METHODS: This qualitative study used in-depth interviews and focus group discussions to obtain information from patients with gout under follow-up in primary care and doctors who cared for them. Patients and doctors shared their gout management experiences and views on implementing HLA-B*58:01 screening in primary care. Data were coded and analysed using thematic analysis.
RESULTS: 18 patients and 18 doctors from three different healthcare settings (university hospital, public health clinics, private general practitioner clinics) participated. The acceptability to HLA-B*58:01 screening was good among the doctors and patients. We discovered inadequate disclosure of severe side effects of allopurinol by doctors due to concerns about medication refusal by patients, which could potentially be improved by introducing HLA-B*58:01 testing. Barriers to implementation included out-of-pocket costs for patients, the cost-effectiveness of this implementation, lack of established alternative treatment pathway besides allopurinol, counselling burden and concern about genetic data security. Our participants preferred targeted screening for high-risk populations instead of universal screening.
CONCLUSION: Implementing HLA-B*58:01 testing in primary care is potentially feasible if a cost-effective, targeted screening policy on high-risk groups can be developed. A clear treatment pathway for patients who test positive should be made available.
METHODS: A hybrid model of a decision tree and Markov model was developed to evaluate 3 strategies for treating newly diagnosed epilepsy among adults: (i) CBZ initiation without HLA-B*15:02 screening (current practice); (ii) universal HLA-B*15:02 screening prior to CBZ initiation; and (iii) alternative prescribing without HLA-B*15:02 screening. The model was populated with real-world inputs derived from the Malaysian population. From a societal perspective, base-case analysis and sensitivity analyses estimated the costs and outcomes over a lifetime. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were calculated.
RESULTS: In the base-cases analysis, universal HLA-B*15:02 screening yielded the lowest total costs and the highest total quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) gained. Compared with current practice, universal screening was less costly by USD100 and more effective by QALYs increase of 0.1306, while alternative prescribing resulted in 0.1383 QALYs loss at additional costs of USD332. The highest seizure remission rate (56%) was estimated for universal HLA-B*15:02 screening vs. current practice (54%) and alternative prescribing (48%).
CONCLUSION: Our study suggests that universal HLA-B*15:02 screening is a cost-effective intervention in Malaysia. With the demonstrated value of real-world evidence in economic evaluations, more relevant standardization efforts should be emphasized to better inform decision-making.
Materials and Methods: The primary analysis was based on population control studies. Data were pooled by means of a random-effects model, and sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative likelihood ratios (LR+ and LR-), diagnostic odds ratios (DOR), and areas under the summary receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were calculated.
Results: In 23 population control studies, HLA-B*15:02 was measured in 373 patients with CBZ-induced TEN/SJS and 3452 patients without CBZ-induced TEN/SJS. The pooled sensitivity, specificity, LR+, LR-, DOR, and AUC were 0.67 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.63-0.72), 0.98 (95% CI = 0.98-0.99), 19.73 (95% CI = 10.54-36.92), 0.34 (95% CI = 0.23-0.49), 71.38 (95% CI = 34.89-146.05), and 0.96 (95% CI = 0.92-0.98), respectively. Subgroup analyses for Han Chinese, Thai, and Malaysian populations yielded similar findings. Specifically, racial/ethnic subgroup analyses revealed similar findings with respect to DOR for Han Chinese (99.28; 95% CI = 22.20-443.88), Thai (61.01; 95% CI = 23.05-161.44), and Malaysian (30; 95% CI = 7.08-126.68) populations, which are similar to the pooled DOR for the relationship between the HLA-B*15:02 allele and CBZ-induced TEN/SJS across all populations (71.38; 95% CI = 34.89-146.05).
Conclusions: The present study reveals that CBZ is the leading cause of TEN/SJS in many countries. Screening of HLA-B*15:02 may help patients to prevent the occurrence of CBZ-induced TEN/SJS, especially in populations with a higher (≥5%) risk allele frequency.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 140 patients who had compatible ABO blood type with negative T-cell lymphocytotoxicity crossmatch were included in the study and 25% of them were spousal transplant donors. No remarkable differences in acute rejection rate, graft survival, patient survival and serum creatinine level were observed between the spousal and living-related donor groups.
RESULTS: The spousal donor group had a higher degree of HLA mismatch than the living-related donor group. HLA-A mismatch was associated with increased rejection risk at 6 months (odds ratio [OR], 2.75; P = 0.04), 1 year (OR, 2.54; P = 0.03) and 3 years (OR, 3.69; P = 0.001). It was also observed in the deleterious effects of HLA-B and HLA-DQ loci when the number of antigen mismatches increased. The risk was 7 times higher in patients with ≥1 mismatch at HLA-A, HLA-B and HLA-DR loci than those who did not have a mismatch at these loci at 6 months (P = 0.01), 1 year (P = 0.03) and 3 years (P = 0.003).
CONCLUSION: A good match for HLA-A, HLA-B, HLA-DR and HLA-DQ can prevent acute rejection risk in renal transplant patients. Consequently, spousal donor transplants could be a safe intervention in renal patients.
METHODS: DNA was extracted from eighty-six patients. The patients were genotyped by AS-PCR. Computational modeling of the HLA-B*15:02 followed by docking studies were performed to screen 26 AEDs that may induce ADR among HLA-B*15:02 carriers.
RESULTS: Odd ratio for CBZ induced SJS/TEN and HLA-B*15:02 was 609.0 (95% CI: 23-15873; p=0.0002). Molecular modeling studies showed that acetazolamide, ethosuxiamide, lamotrigine, oxcarbazepine, phenobarbital, phenytoin, primidone and sodium-valproate may induce ADR in HLA-B*15:02 carriers alike CBZ. Conclusion. We confirmed HLA-B*15:02 as a predictor of SJS/TEN and recommend pre-screening. Computational prediction of DIHR is useful in personalized medicine.