AIMS: Thiotepa is widely used in high-dose chemotherapy. Previous studies have shown relations between exposure and severe organ toxicity. Thiotepa is metabolized by cytochrome P450 and glutathione S-transferase enzymes. Polymorphisms of these enzymes may affect elimination of thiotepa and tepa, its main metabolite. The purpose of this study was to evaluate effects of known allelic variants in CYP2B6, CYP3A4, CYP3A5, GSTA1 and GSTP1 genes on pharmacokinetics of thiotepa and tepa. METHODS: White patients (n = 124) received a high-dose regimen consisting of cyclophosphamide, thiotepa and carboplatin as intravenous infusions. Genomic DNA was analysed using polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. Plasma concentrations of thiotepa and tepa were determined using validated GC and LC-MS/MS methods. Relations between allelic variants and elimination pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated using nonlinear mixed effects modelling (nonmem). RESULTS: The polymorphisms CYP2B6 C1459T, CYP3A4*1B, CYP3A5*3, GSTA1 (C-69T, G-52A) and GSTP1 C341T had a significant effect on clearance of thiotepa or tepa. Although significant, most effects were generally not large. Clearance of thiotepa and tepa was predominantly affected by GSTP1 C341T polymorphism, which had a frequency of 9.3%. This polymorphism increased non-inducible thiotepa clearance by 52% [95% confidence interval (CI) 41, 64, P < 0.001] and decreased tepa clearance by 32% (95% CI 29, 35, P < 0.001) in heterozygous patients, which resulted in an increase in combined exposure to thiotepa and tepa of 45% in homozygous patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that the presently evaluated variant alleles explain only a small part of the substantial interindividual variability in thiotepa and tepa pharmacokinetics. Patients homozygous for the GSTP1 C341T allele may have enhanced exposure to thiotepa and tepa.
AIMS: Thiotepa is widely used in high-dose chemotherapy. Previous studies have shown relations between exposure and severe organ toxicity. Thiotepa is metabolized by cytochrome P450 and glutathione S-transferase enzymes. Polymorphisms of these enzymes may affect elimination of thiotepa and tepa, its main metabolite. The purpose of this study was to evaluate effects of known allelic variants in CYP2B6, CYP3A4, CYP3A5, GSTA1 and GSTP1 genes on pharmacokinetics of thiotepa and tepa. METHODS: White patients (n = 124) received a high-dose regimen consisting of cyclophosphamide, thiotepa and carboplatin as intravenous infusions. Genomic DNA was analysed using polymerase chain reaction and sequencing. Plasma concentrations of thiotepa and tepa were determined using validated GC and LC-MS/MS methods. Relations between allelic variants and elimination pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated using nonlinear mixed effects modelling (nonmem). RESULTS: The polymorphisms CYP2B6C1459T, CYP3A4*1B, CYP3A5*3, GSTA1 (C-69T, G-52A) and GSTP1C341T had a significant effect on clearance of thiotepa or tepa. Although significant, most effects were generally not large. Clearance of thiotepa and tepa was predominantly affected by GSTP1C341T polymorphism, which had a frequency of 9.3%. This polymorphism increased non-inducible thiotepa clearance by 52% [95% confidence interval (CI) 41, 64, P < 0.001] and decreased tepa clearance by 32% (95% CI 29, 35, P < 0.001) in heterozygous patients, which resulted in an increase in combined exposure to thiotepa and tepa of 45% in homozygous patients. CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that the presently evaluated variant alleles explain only a small part of the substantial interindividual variability in thiotepa and tepa pharmacokinetics. Patients homozygous for the GSTP1C341T allele may have enhanced exposure to thiotepa and tepa.
Authors: Anja Henningsson; Sharon Marsh; Walter J Loos; Mats O Karlsson; Adam Garsa; Klaus Mross; Stephan Mielke; Lucia Viganò; Alberta Locatelli; Jaap Verweij; Alex Sparreboom; Howard L McLeod Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2005-11-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Dennis A Hesselink; Teun van Gelder; Ron H N van Schaik; Aggie H M M Balk; Ilse P van der Heiden; Thea van Dam; Marloes van der Werf; Willem Weimar; Ron A A Mathot Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: S Rodenhuis; A Westermann; M J Holtkamp; W J Nooijen; J W Baars; E van der Wall; I C Slaper-Cortenbach; J H Schornagel Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1996-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Milly E de Jonge; Alwin D R Huitema; Annemarie C Tukker; Selma M van Dam; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; Jos H Beijnen Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2005-01-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: S Rodenhuis; J W Baars; J H Schornagel; L T Vlasveld; I Mandjes; H M Pinedo; D J Richel Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 1992-12 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Caroline F Thorn; Jatinder K Lamba; Vishal Lamba; Teri E Klein; Russ B Altman Journal: Pharmacogenet Genomics Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Lawrence Howell; Rosalind E Jenkins; Stephen Lynch; Carrie Duckworth; B Kevin Park; Christopher Goldring Journal: Arch Toxicol Date: 2021-05-29 Impact factor: 5.153