BACKGROUND: Intra-patient variability in sorafenib pharmacokinetics has been poorly investigated to date. We hypothesized that sorafenib clearance could decrease over time, as seen with imatinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sorafenib plasma concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography, every 2 weeks, in consecutive hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with sorafenib. Sorafenib dose-normalized area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) was determined from a population pharmacokinetics model, and its kinetics was analyzed in order to identify possible alterations of exposure over time. RESULTS: Fifteen hepatocellular carcinoma patients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, in whom sorafenib dosing remained unchanged from initiation of treatment to disease progression, were eligible for this analysis. Sorafenib AUC significantly decreased over time: the median AUC during the third month of treatment was lower than that observed after one month of treatment (43.0 vs. 60.3 mg/L.h, p = 0.008). Most importantly, median sorafenib AUC at the time of progression was almost two-fold lower than that observed after one month of therapy (33.2 vs. 60.3 mg/L.h, p = 0.007). These findings suggest an induction of expression of efflux transporters in the gut wall, or an induction of sorafenib metabolism. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with progressive disease in whom exposure markedly decreased from baseline, sorafenib dose escalation could be considered, aiming to restore an adequate drug exposure and possibly anti-tumor activity.
BACKGROUND: Intra-patient variability in sorafenib pharmacokinetics has been poorly investigated to date. We hypothesized that sorafenib clearance could decrease over time, as seen with imatinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sorafenib plasma concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography, every 2 weeks, in consecutive hepatocellular carcinomapatients treated with sorafenib. Sorafenib dose-normalized area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) was determined from a population pharmacokinetics model, and its kinetics was analyzed in order to identify possible alterations of exposure over time. RESULTS: Fifteen hepatocellular carcinomapatients with Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, in whom sorafenib dosing remained unchanged from initiation of treatment to disease progression, were eligible for this analysis. Sorafenib AUC significantly decreased over time: the median AUC during the third month of treatment was lower than that observed after one month of treatment (43.0 vs. 60.3 mg/L.h, p = 0.008). Most importantly, median sorafenib AUC at the time of progression was almost two-fold lower than that observed after one month of therapy (33.2 vs. 60.3 mg/L.h, p = 0.007). These findings suggest an induction of expression of efflux transporters in the gut wall, or an induction of sorafenib metabolism. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with progressive disease in whom exposure markedly decreased from baseline, sorafenib dose escalation could be considered, aiming to restore an adequate drug exposure and possibly anti-tumor activity.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Thomas E Hutson; Joaquim Bellmunt; Camillo Porta; Cezary Szczylik; Michael Staehler; Andrea Nadel; Sibyl Anderson; Ronald Bukowski; Tim Eisen; Bernard Escudier Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2010-07-23 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Bernard Escudier; Tim Eisen; Walter M Stadler; Cezary Szczylik; Stéphane Oudard; Michael Siebels; Sylvie Negrier; Christine Chevreau; Ewa Solska; Apurva A Desai; Frédéric Rolland; Tomasz Demkow; Thomas E Hutson; Martin Gore; Scott Freeman; Brian Schwartz; Minghua Shan; Ronit Simantov; Ronald M Bukowski Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-01-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Ian Judson; Peiming Ma; Bin Peng; Jaap Verweij; Amy Racine; Eugenio Donato di Paola; Martine van Glabbeke; Sasa Dimitrijevic; Michelle Scurr; Herlinde Dumez; Allan van Oosterom Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2004-12-09 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Dirk Strumberg; Jeffrey W Clark; Ahmad Awada; Malcolm J Moore; Heike Richly; Alain Hendlisz; Hal W Hirte; Joseph P Eder; Heinz-Josef Lenz; Brian Schwartz Journal: Oncologist Date: 2007-04
Authors: B Blanchet; B Billemont; J Cramard; A S Benichou; S Chhun; L Harcouet; S Ropert; A Dauphin; F Goldwasser; M Tod Journal: J Pharm Biomed Anal Date: 2009-02-20 Impact factor: 3.935
Authors: Josep M Llovet; Sergio Ricci; Vincenzo Mazzaferro; Philip Hilgard; Edward Gane; Jean-Frédéric Blanc; Andre Cosme de Oliveira; Armando Santoro; Jean-Luc Raoul; Alejandro Forner; Myron Schwartz; Camillo Porta; Stefan Zeuzem; Luigi Bolondi; Tim F Greten; Peter R Galle; Jean-François Seitz; Ivan Borbath; Dieter Häussinger; Tom Giannaris; Minghua Shan; Marius Moscovici; Dimitris Voliotis; Jordi Bruix Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-07-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Jurjen S Lagas; Robert A B van Waterschoot; Rolf W Sparidans; Els Wagenaar; Jos H Beijnen; Alfred H Schinkel Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2010-01-26 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Nienke A G Lankheet; Ingrid M E Desar; Sasja F Mulder; David M Burger; Dinemarie M Kweekel; Carla M L van Herpen; Winette T A van der Graaf; Nielka P van Erp Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2017-07-04 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Huixin Yu; Neeltje Steeghs; Cynthia M Nijenhuis; Jan H M Schellens; Jos H Beijnen; Alwin D R Huitema Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: R Cabrera; A R Limaye; P Horne; R Mills; C Soldevila-Pico; V Clark; G Morelli; R Firpi; D R Nelson Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2012-10-24 Impact factor: 8.171