BACKGROUND: This study was initiated to assess the quantitative impact of patient anthropometrics and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) mutations on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and to explore limited sampling strategies of 5FU. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included 32 patients with gastrointestinal malignancies, receiving 46-h continuous-infusional 5FU and performed PK-sampling at baseline, 15, 30, 45 min, 1 and 2 h after the start of infusion and at the end of infusion, for 2 subsequent cycles. Plasma concentrations of 5FU, 5-fluorodihydrouracil (5FUH2), uracil (U) and 5,6-dihydrouracil (UH2) were determined using LC-MS/MS and submitted to population PK analysis using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. Broad genotyping of DPYD was performed, and the potential impact of the DPYD genotype on the elimination of 5FU was assessed. Limited sampling strategies were evaluated for their accuracy to predict steady-state concentrations of 5FU (CSS(5FU)), using data simulations based on the final PK-model. RESULTS: The area-under-the concentration-time curve of 5FU (AUC(5FU)) was found to be <20 mg h/L in 33 occasions (58 %), between 20 and 30 mg h/L in 17 occasions (30 %) and >30 mg h/L in 7 occasions (12 %). Men had a 26 % higher elimination of 5FU and a 18 % higher apparent elimination of 5FUH2. Accordingly, women had a higher AUC(5FU) compared to men (22 vs. 18 mg h/L, p = 0.04). No DPYD risk variants were found, and the DPYD variants detected (c.496A>G, c.1601G>A, c.1627A>G) were not significantly associated with the elimination of 5FU. Individual baseline UH(2)/U ratio was significantly associated with AUC(5FU) (R = -0.49, p < 0.001). Limited sampling strategies with time-points <3 h after the start of infusion were not adequate to predict CSS(5FU). Female gender was the only predictor of nausea/emesis in the multivariate model. CONCLUSIONS: Gender-specific elimination of 5FU is supported by the present data and may partly explain the gender-specific association between DPYD risk variants and 5FU-specific toxicity.
BACKGROUND: This study was initiated to assess the quantitative impact of patient anthropometrics and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) mutations on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and to explore limited sampling strategies of 5FU. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included 32 patients with gastrointestinal malignancies, receiving 46-h continuous-infusional 5FU and performed PK-sampling at baseline, 15, 30, 45 min, 1 and 2 h after the start of infusion and at the end of infusion, for 2 subsequent cycles. Plasma concentrations of 5FU, 5-fluorodihydrouracil (5FUH2), uracil (U) and 5,6-dihydrouracil (UH2) were determined using LC-MS/MS and submitted to population PK analysis using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. Broad genotyping of DPYD was performed, and the potential impact of the DPYD genotype on the elimination of 5FU was assessed. Limited sampling strategies were evaluated for their accuracy to predict steady-state concentrations of 5FU (CSS(5FU)), using data simulations based on the final PK-model. RESULTS: The area-under-the concentration-time curve of 5FU (AUC(5FU)) was found to be <20 mg h/L in 33 occasions (58 %), between 20 and 30 mg h/L in 17 occasions (30 %) and >30 mg h/L in 7 occasions (12 %). Men had a 26 % higher elimination of 5FU and a 18 % higher apparent elimination of 5FUH2. Accordingly, women had a higher AUC(5FU) compared to men (22 vs. 18 mg h/L, p = 0.04). No DPYD risk variants were found, and the DPYD variants detected (c.496A>G, c.1601G>A, c.1627A>G) were not significantly associated with the elimination of 5FU. Individual baseline UH(2)/U ratio was significantly associated with AUC(5FU) (R = -0.49, p < 0.001). Limited sampling strategies with time-points <3 h after the start of infusion were not adequate to predict CSS(5FU). Female gender was the only predictor of nausea/emesis in the multivariate model. CONCLUSIONS: Gender-specific elimination of 5FU is supported by the present data and may partly explain the gender-specific association between DPYD risk variants and 5FU-specific toxicity.
Authors: Jan H Beumer; Edward Chu; Carmen Allegra; Yusuke Tanigawara; Gerard Milano; Robert Diasio; Tae Won Kim; Ron H Mathijssen; Li Zhang; Dirk Arnold; Katsuki Muneoka; Narikazu Boku; Markus Joerger Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2018-09-11 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Ursina B M Begré; Markus Jörger; Stefan Aebi; Ursula Amstutz; Carlo R Largiadèr Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2022-05-18 Impact factor: 5.988
Authors: Joyce Oi Yan Chan; Marie Moullet; Beth Williamson; Rosalinda H Arends; Venkatesh Pilla Reddy Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2022-06-06 Impact factor: 5.988
Authors: Mathew Hall; Vaishali A Krishnanandan; Matthew C Cheung; Natalie G Coburn; Barbara Haas; Kelvin K W Chan; Michael J Raphael Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2022-08-08 Impact factor: 11.816
Authors: Manon Launay; Joseph Ciccolini; Claire Fournel; Carmelo Blanquicett; Charlotte Dupuis; Nicolas Fakhry; Florence Duffaud; Sébastien Salas; Bruno Lacarelle Journal: Clin Cancer Drugs Date: 2017
Authors: Gini F Fleming; Philip Schumm; Greg Friberg; Mark J Ratain; Uchenna O Njiaju; Richard L Schilsky Journal: BMC Cancer Date: 2015-02-18 Impact factor: 4.430
Authors: Anna D Wagner; Axel Grothey; Thierry Andre; Jesse G Dixon; Norman Wolmark; Daniel G Haller; Carmen J Allegra; Aimery de Gramont; Eric VanCutsem; Steven R Alberts; Thomas J George; Michael J O'Connell; Christopher Twelves; Julien Taieb; Leonard B Saltz; Charles D Blanke; Edoardo Francini; Rachel Kerr; Greg Yothers; Jean F Seitz; Silvia Marsoni; Richard M Goldberg; Qian Shi Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2021-04-06 Impact factor: 13.506