IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pmed00/1003344.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

STrengthening the Reporting Of Pharmacogenetic Studies: Development of the STROPS guideline

Author

Listed:
  • Marty Chaplin
  • Jamie J Kirkham
  • Kerry Dwan
  • Derek J Sloan
  • Geraint Davies
  • Andrea L Jorgensen

Abstract

Background: Large sample sizes are often required to detect statistically significant associations between pharmacogenetic markers and treatment response. Meta-analysis may be performed to synthesize data from several studies, increasing sample size and, consequently, power to detect significant genetic effects. However, performing robust synthesis of data from pharmacogenetic studies is often challenging because of poor reporting of key data in study reports. There is currently no guideline for the reporting of pharmacogenetic studies that has been developed using a widely accepted robust methodology. The objective of this project was to develop the STrengthening the Reporting Of Pharmacogenetic Studies (STROPS) guideline. Methods and findings: We established a preliminary checklist of reporting items to be considered for inclusion in the guideline. We invited representatives of key stakeholder groups to participate in a 2-round Delphi survey. A total of 52 individuals participated in both rounds of the survey, scoring items with regards to their importance for inclusion in the STROPS guideline. We then held a consensus meeting, at which 8 individuals considered the results of the Delphi survey and voted on whether each item ought to be included in the final guideline. The STROPS guideline consists of 54 items and is accompanied by an explanation and elaboration document. The guideline contains items that are particularly important in the field of pharmacogenetics, such as the drug regimen of interest and whether adherence to treatment was accounted for in the conducted analyses. The guideline also requires that outcomes be clearly defined and justified, because in pharmacogenetic studies, there may be a greater number of possible outcomes than in other types of study (for example, disease–gene association studies). A limitation of this project is that our consensus meeting involved a small number of individuals, the majority of whom are based in the United Kingdom. Conclusions: Our aim is for the STROPS guideline to improve the transparency of reporting of pharmacogenetic studies and also to facilitate the conduct of high-quality systematic reviews and meta-analyses. We encourage authors to adhere to the STROPS guideline when publishing pharmacogenetic studies. Marty Chaplin and co-authors recount the development of a guideline for reporting pharmacogenetic studies.

Suggested Citation

  • Marty Chaplin & Jamie J Kirkham & Kerry Dwan & Derek J Sloan & Geraint Davies & Andrea L Jorgensen, 2020. "STrengthening the Reporting Of Pharmacogenetic Studies: Development of the STROPS guideline," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(9), pages 1-11, September.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003344
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1003344
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003344
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1003344&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003344?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. A Cecile J W Janssens & John P A Ioannidis & Cornelia M van Duijn & Julian Little & Muin J Khoury & for the GRIPS Group, 2011. "Strengthening the Reporting of Genetic Risk Prediction Studies: The GRIPS Statement," PLOS Medicine, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(3), pages 1-4, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Luke Jostins & Adam P Levine & Jeffrey C Barrett, 2013. "Using Genetic Prediction from Known Complex Disease Loci to Guide the Design of Next-Generation Sequencing Experiments," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(10), pages 1-7, October.
    2. Matthew R Behrend & María-Gloria Basáñez & Jonathan I D Hamley & Travis C Porco & Wilma A Stolk & Martin Walker & Sake J de Vlas & for the NTD Modelling Consortium, 2020. "Modelling for policy: The five principles of the Neglected Tropical Diseases Modelling Consortium," PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(4), pages 1-17, April.
    3. Hong-Lian Ruan & Hai-De Qin & Yin Yao Shugart & Jin-Xin Bei & Fu-Tian Luo & Yi-Xin Zeng & Wei-Hua Jia, 2013. "Developing Genetic Epidemiological Models to Predict Risk for Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma in High-Risk Population of China," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 8(2), pages 1-8, February.
    4. Hirofumi Nakaoka & Tailin Cui & Atsushi Tajima & Akira Oka & Shigeki Mitsunaga & Koichi Kashiwase & Yasuhiko Homma & Shinji Sato & Yasuo Suzuki & Hidetoshi Inoko & Ituro Inoue, 2011. "A Systems Genetics Approach Provides a Bridge from Discovered Genetic Variants to Biological Pathways in Rheumatoid Arthritis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(9), pages 1-16, September.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pmed00:1003344. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosmedicine (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.