Literature DB >> 16086421

How low is too low? Use of cluster analysis to define low levels of mercaptopurine metabolites.

Fatoumata Traore1, Mary Ann O'Riordan, Carolyn Myers, Karen Groth, Ahna Hoff, Anne Angiolillo, Susan Rheingold, Dennis Drotar, Eric Kodish.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: To group patients receiving treatment for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) according to their oral mercaptopurine (6-MP) metabolite levels and to establish cut-off points to screen for potential poor clinical outcome. PROCEDURE: Methodological study using 6-MP metabolite levels from 48 adolescent ALL patients enrolled in a multicenter adherence study. Cluster analysis was the primary analytical technique. We used two validation methods (a split-sampling and a simulation technique) for validating the results.
RESULTS: Four clusters were retained in our initial analysis using our first group of patients (n = 27). Three clusters (labeled 1, 2, and 4) exhibited the expected negative correlation between the two metabolites, that is, "high" values of one were associated with "low" values of the other. One cluster (labeled 3) had "low" levels for both TGN and MMP. Five of the 27 adolescents had their 6-MP "held" during the study. Post-hoc examination of the results revealed that all five grouped in Cluster 3 during the time that their medications were stopped, but grouped in other clusters at other times. The median ANC was highest in Cluster 3, consistent with low therapeutic drug levels. Parameters were reproducible with both validation methods. Values below the respective 75th centile for both TGN and MMP in Cluster 3 for the complete sample (n = 48) are suggested as representing a potentially higher risk for relapse.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides an objective method for identifying patients at risk for treatment failure due to suboptimal 6-MP therapy; the clinical significance of this approach should be examined in future studies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16086421     DOI: 10.1002/pbc.20518

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Pediatr Blood Cancer        ISSN: 1545-5009            Impact factor:   3.167


  5 in total

1.  Electronic monitoring of medication adherence in early maintenance phase treatment for pediatric leukemia and lymphoma: identifying patterns of nonadherence.

Authors:  Jennifer M Rohan; Dennis Drotar; Melissa Alderfer; Crista Wetherington Donewar; Linda Ewing; Ernest R Katz; Anna Muriel
Journal:  J Pediatr Psychol       Date:  2013-12-23

2.  Compliance with a protocol for acute lymphoblastic leukemia in childhood.

Authors:  Benigna Maria de Oliveira; Maria Thereza Macedo Valadares; Marcilene Rezende Silva; Marcos Borato Viana
Journal:  Rev Bras Hematol Hemoter       Date:  2011

3.  The development of an objective methodology to measure medication adherence to oral thiopurines in paediatric patients with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia--an exploratory study.

Authors:  Ahmed F Hawwa; Jeff S Millership; Paul S Collier; Anthony McCarthy; Sid Dempsey; Carole Cairns; James C McElnay
Journal:  Eur J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2009-07-28       Impact factor: 2.953

4.  Adherence to 6-Mercaptopurine in children and adolescents with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia.

Authors:  Mervat Alsous; Rana Abu Farha; Eman Alefishat; Suha Al Omar; Deema Momani; Alia Gharabli; James McElnay; Robert Horne; Rawad Rihani
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2017-09-06       Impact factor: 3.240

5.  When Multiple Objective Measures of Medication Adherence Indicate Incongruent Adherence Results: An Example with Pediatric Cancer.

Authors:  Caitlin J Cain; Andrea R Meisman; Kirstin Drucker; Evrosina I Isaac; Tanvi Verma; Jordyn Griffin; Jennifer M Rohan
Journal:  Int J Environ Res Public Health       Date:  2020-03-17       Impact factor: 3.390

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.