View Full Version : Genecept Assay

10-16-16, 04:39 PM
I just found information about this and it sounds incredibly legit!! I would do the clinical trial (see below) but it is only looking at MDD.

I'm going to call them and see if I get a copy of all of the results including ADHD and Anxiety so I can get on the correct meds for all three.

If not I have an appointment with my pdoc in November and think I'm going to see if he'll order it for me if I my insurance will pay most of it. It's hard to find a price anywhere but saw $4,000 by a Reddit user. :(

Clinical Trial! Genecept Assay™ vs. Treatment-as-Usual to Evaluate Efficacy of Assay-Guided Treatment in Adults With MDD

Anyone try this or any of the genetics tests???

10-16-16, 04:47 PM
What is this and what is MDD?

Little Missy
10-16-16, 06:21 PM
What is this and what is MDD?

Major Depressive Disorder. I think.:confused:

10-16-16, 07:09 PM
I guess there must be so much money to be made from patents in pharmacogenetics that much less is being published than I would expect. It's hard to find anything published more recently than 2008, and even harder to find the full text available for free.

But what I did find suggests it is still early days on these tests to get them to a point where they will reveal the Holy Grail of what pharmaceutical for which patient symptoms. Here's just a 2-sentence sample from a 2016 article entitled "Limitations in Genetic Testing in Psychiatry"

Psychiatric Diagnosis
Numerous markers have been associated with psychiatric disorders, including genes for BDNF (brain-derived neurotrophic factor), FOS (FBJ murine osteosarcoma viral oncogene homolog), COMT, DRD1, DRD2, DISC1, GABABR1 (γ-aminobutyric acid B receptor 1), NR4A2 (nuclear receptor subfamily 4, group A, member 2), ADORA2A (adenosine A2a receptor), CACNA1C (calcium channel gene), sirtuin 1, LHPP, 5HTR1A, RNA-binding proteins, and genes for myelination, glutaminergic and GABAergic neurotransmission, oxidative stress, signal transduction, response to the environment, cell survival and proliferation, and cell shrinkage and apoptosis, among others [8,9,10,11,12,13]. Yet no genetic marker has yet been shown to be useful in prospectively identifying any specific psychiatric disorder [14]

It's obvious that a ton of work is being pursued, but that the more they learn the more complications arise. For example, even in individuals who share a particular gene variant, it may be expressed differently in the presence of certain factors, and differently in different parts of the body.

Current genotyping approaches in psychiatry consider the presence or absence of a particular allele or group of alleles, but expression of those genes may be suppressed, modified, or enhanced by a number of factors, including circadian transcription patterns, epistasis (gene interactions), regulatory regions, epigenetic factors, and noncoding RNA [14]

At least the author has a sense of humour:
Where Do We Go from Here?
Psychiatrists, whose work frequently involves ambiguous clinical problems, and who must often consider contradictory elements of patient presentations and avoid premature closure, can have a remarkably low tolerance for ambiguity, conflict, and delayed gratification when it comes to the latest laboratory study.

To be fair, psychiatry is probably going to be the last frontier in this technology because of the ambiguities and comorbidities involved. Cancer treatment is much farther along.

So don't get your hopes up that there will be anything actionable very soon. But thanks for sharing this very tantallizing study!

10-17-16, 03:39 AM
This sounds similar to several other genetic tests marketed to help patients and their doctors choose medications.

These tests -- at least, today's models -- cannot tell you with any certainty what medications will work or not work for you, nor which medications will have intolerable side effects.

What they can tell you is whether or not you have any of a small number of known gene variants that exert some influence on a part of a pathway that's one of several pathways that's in some way related to medication response. Sometimes this may be useful information. Often, it isn't.

I don't mean to be a wet blanket -- this type of testing isn't totally worthless in all cases, and I'm strongly in favor of developing tests that could help reduce the "hit or miss" nature of psychopharmacology -- but I agree with 20thCfox that it's wise to temper your expectations.

Also, for what it's worth, I did have similar (different brand) testing done at one point after poor responses to several medications, and it didn't tell me anything useful.
A psychologist at the clinic I go to told me that there was one guy who was told that a certain medication likely wouldn't work for him -- but it was actually the only medication that really worked for him!
Again -- occasionally it will catch something, like a genetic variant that causes a person to metabolize certain meds super-rapidly or super-slowly, and that could be useful. But there are also limitations to the utility of these studies, which the glossy marketing brochures don't mention (or if they do, it's in tiny, tiny print)...