Y-W Lim1, B-C Goh2, L-Z Wang1, S-H Tan1, B Y S Chuah1, S-E Lim1, P Iau3, S A Buhari3, C-W Chan3, N B Sukri1, M T Cordero1, R Soo1, S-C Lee4. 1. Department of Haematology-Oncology, National University Health System. 2. Department of Haematology-Oncology, National University Health System; Experimental Therapeutics Program, Cancer Science Institute. 3. Department of Surgery, National University Health System, Singapore. 4. Department of Haematology-Oncology, National University Health System; Experimental Therapeutics Program, Cancer Science Institute. Electronic address: Soo_Chin_Lee@nuhs.edu.sg.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We previously found 70 mg flat-dose docetaxel coadministered with ketoconazole to modulate CYP3A4 to be the maximum tolerated dose that resulted in comparable docetaxel area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) as 75-100 mg/m² docetaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared cycle 1 docetaxel pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics between ketoconazole-modulated (70 mg flat-dose docetaxel, n = 31) and conventional-dosed docetaxel (75 mg/m², n = 51) in chemonaive breast cancer patients in two sequential phase II studies. RESULTS: Ketoconazole-modulated docetaxel resulted in reduced docetaxel clearance (22.05 ± 8.29 versus 36.52 ± 13.39 l/h, P < 0.001), similar docetaxel AUC (3.93 ± 2.77 versus 3.77 ± 2.70 mg/l·h, P = 0.794) and tumor efficacy (cycle 1 responder 52% versus 55%) and less day 8 neutrophil suppression (1.24 ± 1.02 × 10⁹/l versus 0.47 ± 0.56 × 10⁹/l, P < 0.001), grade 4 neutropenia (32.3% versus 72.0%, P < 0.001) and febrile neutropenia (3.2 versus 23.5%, P = 0.015), compared with conventional-dosed docetaxel. Chinese had the lowest docetaxel clearance, highest AUC and most myelosuppression, followed by Malays and Indians, in response to ketoconazole-modulated docetaxel, while no significant interethnic differences were observed with conventional-dosed docetaxel. CONCLUSIONS: Ketoconazole-modulated docetaxel achieved similar docetaxel AUC and tumor efficacy but reduced neutrophil suppression and febrile neutropenia at ∼40% reduced dose, representing a feasible alternative to conventional-dosed docetaxel. Interethnic differences in CYP3A4 inhibition by ketoconazole exist and are important when evaluating the impact of concomitant medications.
BACKGROUND: We previously found 70 mg flat-dose docetaxel coadministered with ketoconazole to modulate CYP3A4 to be the maximum tolerated dose that resulted in comparable docetaxel area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) as 75-100 mg/m² docetaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We compared cycle 1 docetaxel pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics between ketoconazole-modulated (70 mg flat-dose docetaxel, n = 31) and conventional-dosed docetaxel (75 mg/m², n = 51) in chemonaive breast cancerpatients in two sequential phase II studies. RESULTS:Ketoconazole-modulated docetaxel resulted in reduced docetaxel clearance (22.05 ± 8.29 versus 36.52 ± 13.39 l/h, P < 0.001), similar docetaxel AUC (3.93 ± 2.77 versus 3.77 ± 2.70 mg/l·h, P = 0.794) and tumor efficacy (cycle 1 responder 52% versus 55%) and less day 8 neutrophil suppression (1.24 ± 1.02 × 10⁹/l versus 0.47 ± 0.56 × 10⁹/l, P < 0.001), grade 4 neutropenia (32.3% versus 72.0%, P < 0.001) and febrile neutropenia (3.2 versus 23.5%, P = 0.015), compared with conventional-dosed docetaxel. Chinese had the lowest docetaxel clearance, highest AUC and most myelosuppression, followed by Malays and Indians, in response to ketoconazole-modulated docetaxel, while no significant interethnic differences were observed with conventional-dosed docetaxel. CONCLUSIONS:Ketoconazole-modulated docetaxel achieved similar docetaxel AUC and tumor efficacy but reduced neutrophil suppression and febrile neutropenia at ∼40% reduced dose, representing a feasible alternative to conventional-dosed docetaxel. Interethnic differences in CYP3A4 inhibition by ketoconazole exist and are important when evaluating the impact of concomitant medications.
Authors: Worapol Ngamcherdtrakul; Daniel S Bejan; William Cruz-Muñoz; Moataz Reda; Husam Y Zaidan; Natnaree Siriwon; Suphalak Marshall; Ruijie Wang; Molly A Nelson; Justin P C Rehwaldt; Joe W Gray; Kullervo Hynynen; Wassana Yantasee Journal: Small Date: 2022-01-27 Impact factor: 13.281
Authors: Jacob W Greenberg; Hogyoung Kim; Louis S Krane; Ahmed A Moustafa; Amrita Datta; Pedro C Barata; A Hamid Boulares; Asim B Abdel-Mageed Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-05-13 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Daniel Doheny; Sara Manore; Sherona R Sirkisoon; Dongqin Zhu; Noah R Aguayo; Alexandria Harrison; Mariana Najjar; Marlyn Anguelov; Anderson O'Brien Cox; Cristina M Furdui; Kounosuke Watabe; Thomas Hollis; Alexandra Thomas; Roy Strowd; Hui-Wen Lo Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-08-31 Impact factor: 6.575