Gene Sight For Antidepressants
Posted 06 February 2020 - 05:39 PM
Posted 06 February 2020 - 05:57 PM
Not nearly enough research to say whether these are worth pursuing or not.
They "boast" on their website of 7 papers printed in peer-reviewed journals. From a researchers perspective, this is nothing. If it were that close to the mark, research would be all over it.
Not to say that there is nothing in it, but Genesight is a company trying to sell something. It is far from a science at present in my opinion.
Posted 07 February 2020 - 09:17 AM
Pretty much agree with IUN here. There have been nearly 100 genes linked to emotional issues. Well documented but the tests may show you have one of the gene mutations but when it comes to predicting what meds to take or not to take the results are iffy at best.
Posted Yesterday, 05:11 PM
Hello! New user here, but soon to be withdrawal-ee. I've been on Cymbalta for almost 10 years and I know it can't be the end all, be all for me.
The reason I'm commenting is to just try and give some perspective where I can. Hi! I'm also an employee for the company that created the GeneSight test. The thing about this test, is it's not an arrow to point to the perfect medication, or even say one that will work for certain, but mainly is used to best prevent bad reactions that are gene-affiliated. It may not be a direct answer, but it's a nudge in some direction. It's certainly better than going in blind. I just got my own results back, and I'm meeting with my psychiatrist in 2 weeks (damn wait times). I will be happy to share my experience, but so far, the moderate reaction meds listed for the antidepressants contain all of my previously failed prescriptions (pre-cymbalta). I know it may not mean much as it can sound bias (I don't blame you), but Myriad (the parent company of Assurex/GeneSight) is incredibly patient-oriented and does everything they can to help.
I just wanted to share my experience.
Posted Yesterday, 05:44 PM
Thanks for your input MentalHealthGal...
There have been talks about what you speak of. I won't beat around the bush in saying that after a lot of reading about services offered, I think there is some distance to cover before the gene methodology gives a marked effect beyond that of anti-depressent roulette, but that is not to say I am not open to people trying these methods.
Ray Kurzweil and Ben Goertzel said we would have immortality sorted by now!! So, we all need to learn.
Please do let us know what the upshot of your results are.
Posted Yesterday, 05:47 PM
We have had a few members get genetic screening with mixed results. I agree with you, good potential down the road but not yet to the point of picking the best antidepressants that may work.
Always glad to learn more about things and look forward to adding your experiences with this to our ebook.
Posted Today, 12:52 PM
This is so interesting. I was very curious about this test actually but it makes sense that it's not necessarily medically significant at this point.
@Cmgoudy, I was looking at the sample report on their site: https://genesight.co...tropic3_0_2.pdf
It looks like all the medications should have one or multiple numbers next to them, that would then match up to the key at the bottom.
I assume moderate just means it may or may not be an issue. Not very helpful is it? lol
Posted Today, 05:00 PM
Woh... what is with that sample?
So you have an age-old tricyclic, an SNRI and a new kid on the block. If you were considering a tricyclic you wouldn't be looking at SNRI as you should have been there and done that... so that leaves a 10% choice of the market.
That is quite a bold statement.
Posted Today, 05:05 PM
Biggest study to date says it all;
"There is uncertainty about the use of GeneSight Psychotropic pharmacogenomic genetic panel to guide medication selection. It was associated with improvements in some patient outcomes, but not others. As well, our confidence in these findings is low because of limitations in the body of evidence"
Currently no better than trial and error. But that is not to say that it cannot improve with time.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users