Pharmacogenomics can identify polymorphisms in genes involved in drug pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics determining differences in efficacy and safety and causing inter-individual variability in drug response. Therefore, pharmacogenomics can help clinicians in optimizing therapy based on patient’s genotype, also in psychiatric and neurological settings. However, pharmacogenetic screenings for psychotropic drugs are not routinely employed in diagnosis and monitoring of patients treated with mood stabilizers, such as carbamazepine and valproate, because their benefit in clinical practice is still controversial. In this review, we summarize the current knowledge on pharmacogenetic biomarkers of these anticonvulsant drugs.

Rheumatoid arthritis (RA) is a chronic inflammatory disease that is very complex and heterogeneous. If not adequately treated, RA patients are likely to manifest excess of morbidity and disability with an important impact on the quality of life. Pharmacological treatment is based on the administration of the disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs (DMARDs), subdivided into conventional synthetic (csDMARDs), targeted synthetic (tsDMARDs), and biological (bDMARDs). bDMARDs are now frequently administered in patients, both as alternative treatment and together with csDMARDs. Unfortunately, there is a therapeutic response variability both to old and new drugs. Therefore, to identify pre-therapeutic and on-treatment predictors of response is a priority. This review aims to summarize recent advances in understanding the causes of the variability in treatment response in RA, with particular attention to predictive potential of autoantibodies and DMARD pharmacogenetics. In recent years, several biomarkers have been proposed to personalize the therapy. Unfortunately, a magic bullet does not exist, as many factors concur to disease susceptibility and treatment outcomes, acting around the patient’s congenital background. Models integrating demographic, clinical, biochemical, and genetic data are needed to enhance the predictive capacity of specific factors singularly considered to optimize RA treatment in light of multidisciplinary patient management.

Fluoropyrimidines (FP) are mainly metabolised by dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), encoded by the DPYD gene. FP pharmacogenetics, including four DPYD polymorphisms (DPYD-PGx), is recommended to tailor the FP-based chemotherapy. These polymorphisms increase the risk of severe toxicity; thus, the DPYD-PGx should be performed prior to starting FP. Other factors influence FP safety, therefore phenotyping methods, such as the measurement of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) clearance and DPD activity, could complement the DPYD-PGx. We describe a case series of patients in whom we performed DPYD-PGx (by real-time PCR), 5-FU clearance and a dihydrouracil/uracil ratio (as the phenotyping analysis) and a continuous clinical monitoring. Patients who had already experienced severe toxicity were then identified as carriers of DPYD variants. The plasmatic dihydrouracil/uracil ratio (by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC)) ranged between 1.77 and 7.38. 5-FU clearance (by ultra-HPLC with tandem mass spectrometry) was measured in 3/11 patients. In one of them, it reduced after the 5-FU dosage was halved; in the other case, it remained high despite a drastic dosage reduction. Moreover, we performed a systematic review on genotyping/phenotyping combinations used as predictive factors of FP safety. Measuring the plasmatic 5-FU clearance and/or dihydrouracil/uracil (UH2/U) ratio could improve the predictive potential of DPYD-PGx. The upfront DPYD-PGx combined with clinical monitoring and feasible phenotyping method is essential to optimising FP-based chemotherapy.

Hospital-acquired pneumonia (HAP) and ventilation-associated pneumonia (VAP) are challenging clinical conditions due to the challenging tissue penetrability of the lung. This study aims to evaluate the potential role of fosfomycin (FOS) associated with ceftazidime/avibactam (CZA) in improving the outcome in this setting. We performed a retrospective study including people with HAP or VAP treated with CZA or CZA+FOS for at least 72 h. Clinical data were collected from the SUSANA study, a multicentric cohort to monitor the efficacy and safety of the newer antimicrobial agents. A total of 75 nosocomial pneumonia episodes were included in the analysis. Of these, 34 received CZA alone and 41 in combination with FOS (CZA+FOS). People treated with CZA alone were older, more frequently male, received a prolonged infusion more frequently, and were less frequently affected by carbapenem-resistant infections (p = 0.01, p = 0.06, p < 0.001, p = 0.03, respectively). No difference was found in terms of survival at 28 days from treatment start between CZA and CZA+FOS at the multivariate analysis (HR = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.07–1.39; p = 0.128), while prolonged infusion showed a lower mortality rate at 28 days (HR = 0.34; 95% CI = 0.14–0.96; p = 0.04). Regarding safety, three adverse events (one acute kidney failure, one multiorgan failure, and one urticaria) were reported. Our study found no significant association between combination therapy and mortality. Further investigations, with larger and more homogeneous samples, are needed to evaluate the role of combination therapy in this setting.