Daniel L Hertz1, Anna C Snavely2, Howard L McLeod3, Christine M Walko3, Joseph G Ibrahim4, Steven Anderson5, Karen E Weck4, Gustav Magrinat6, Oludamilola Olajide7, Susan Moore7, Rachel Raab8, Daniel R Carrizosa9, Steven Corso10, Garry Schwartz11, Jeffrey M Peppercorn12, James P Evans4, David R Jones13, Zeruesenay Desta13, David A Flockhart13, Lisa A Carey4, William J Irvin4,14. 1. University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI48109-1065, USA. 2. RTI International, Research Triangle Park, NC, 27709-2194, USA. 3. Moffitt Cancer Center, Tampa, FL, 33612, USA. 4. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. 5. Laboratory Corporation of America, Burlington, NC, 27215, USA. 6. Moses Cone Health Cancer Center, Greensboro, NC, 27401-1020, USA. 7. Rex Hematology Oncology Associates, Raleigh, NC, 27607, USA. 8. Brody School of Medicine at East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, 27834, USA. 9. Levine Cancer Institute, Charlotte, NC, 28204, USA. 10. Palmetto Hematology Oncology, Spartanburg, SC, 29303, USA. 11. Levine Cancer Institute Concord, Concord, NC, 28025, USA. 12. Duke Cancer Institute, Durham, NC, 27705, USA. 13. Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 47405, USA. 14. Bon Secours Cancer Institute, Richmond, VA, 23230, USA.
Abstract
AIMS: A prospectively enrolled patient cohort was used to assess whether the prediction of CYP2D6 phenotype activity from genotype data could be improved by reclassification of diplotypes or alleles. METHODS: Three hundred and fifty-five patients receiving tamoxifen 20 mg were genotyped for CYP2D6 and tamoxifen metabolite concentrations were measured. The endoxifen : N-desmethly-tamoxifen metabolic ratio, as a surrogate of CYP2D6 activity, was compared across four diplotypes (EM/IM, EM/PM, IM/IM, IM/PM) that are typically collapsed into an intermediate metabolizer (IM) phenotype. The relative metabolic activity of each allele type (UM, EM, IM, and PM) and each EM and IM allele was estimated for comparison with the activity scores typically assigned, 2, 1, 0.5 and 0, respectively. RESULTS: Each of the four IM diplotypes have distinct CYP2D6 activity from each other and from the EM and PM phenotype groups (each P < 0.05). Setting the activity of an EM allele at 1.0, the relative activities of a UM, IM and PM allele were 0.85, 0.67 and 0.52, respectively. The activity of the EM alleles were statistically different (P < 0.0001), with the CYP2D6*2 allele (scaled activity = 0.63) closer in activity to an IM than an EM allele. The activity of the IM alleles were also statistically different (P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: The current systems for translating CYP2D6 genotype into phenotype are not optimally calibrated, particularly in regards to IM diplotypes and the *2 allele. Additional research is needed to improve the prediction of CYP2D6 activity from genetic data for individualized dosing of CYP2D6 dependent drugs.
AIMS: A prospectively enrolled patient cohort was used to assess whether the prediction of CYP2D6 phenotype activity from genotype data could be improved by reclassification of diplotypes or alleles. METHODS: Three hundred and fifty-five patients receiving tamoxifen 20 mg were genotyped for CYP2D6 and tamoxifen metabolite concentrations were measured. The endoxifen : N-desmethly-tamoxifen metabolic ratio, as a surrogate of CYP2D6 activity, was compared across four diplotypes (EM/IM, EM/PM, IM/IM, IM/PM) that are typically collapsed into an intermediate metabolizer (IM) phenotype. The relative metabolic activity of each allele type (UM, EM, IM, and PM) and each EM and IM allele was estimated for comparison with the activity scores typically assigned, 2, 1, 0.5 and 0, respectively. RESULTS: Each of the four IM diplotypes have distinct CYP2D6 activity from each other and from the EM and PM phenotype groups (each P < 0.05). Setting the activity of an EM allele at 1.0, the relative activities of a UM, IM and PM allele were 0.85, 0.67 and 0.52, respectively. The activity of the EM alleles were statistically different (P < 0.0001), with the CYP2D6*2 allele (scaled activity = 0.63) closer in activity to an IM than an EM allele. The activity of the IM alleles were also statistically different (P = 0.014). CONCLUSION: The current systems for translating CYP2D6 genotype into phenotype are not optimally calibrated, particularly in regards to IM diplotypes and the *2 allele. Additional research is needed to improve the prediction of CYP2D6 activity from genetic data for individualized dosing of CYP2D6 dependent drugs.
Authors: T E Mürdter; W Schroth; L Bacchus-Gerybadze; S Winter; G Heinkele; W Simon; P A Fasching; T Fehm; M Eichelbaum; M Schwab; H Brauch Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2011-03-30 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Vered Stearns; Michael D Johnson; James M Rae; Alan Morocho; Antonella Novielli; Pankaj Bhargava; Daniel F Hayes; Zeruesenay Desta; David A Flockhart Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2003-12-03 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Lauren A Marcath; Allison M Deal; Emily Van Wieren; William Danko; Christine M Walko; Joseph G Ibrahim; Karen E Weck; David R Jones; Zeruesenay Desta; Howard L McLeod; Lisa A Carey; William J Irvin; Daniel L Hertz Journal: Pharmacogenet Genomics Date: 2017-11 Impact factor: 2.089
Authors: Charity Nofziger; Amy J Turner; Katrin Sangkuhl; Michelle Whirl-Carrillo; José A G Agúndez; John L Black; Henry M Dunnenberger; Gualberto Ruano; Martin A Kennedy; Michael S Phillips; Houda Hachad; Teri E Klein; Andrea Gaedigk Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2019-12-09 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: Wanqiong Qiao; Yao Yang; Robert Sebra; Geetu Mendiratta; Andrea Gaedigk; Robert J Desnick; Stuart A Scott Journal: Hum Mutat Date: 2015-12-18 Impact factor: 4.878
Authors: Daniel L Hertz; Allison Deal; Joseph G Ibrahim; Christine M Walko; Karen E Weck; Steven Anderson; Gustav Magrinat; Oludamilola Olajide; Susan Moore; Rachel Raab; Daniel R Carrizosa; Steven Corso; Garry Schwartz; Mark Graham; Jeffrey M Peppercorn; David R Jones; Zeruesenay Desta; David A Flockhart; James P Evans; Howard L McLeod; Lisa A Carey; William J Irvin Journal: Oncologist Date: 2016-05-25
Authors: Werner Schroth; Stefan Winter; Thomas Mürdter; Elke Schaeffeler; Diana Eccles; Bryony Eccles; Balram Chowbay; Chiea C Khor; Arafat Tfayli; Nathalie K Zgheib; Michel Eichelbaum; Matthias Schwab; Hiltrud Brauch Journal: Front Pharmacol Date: 2017-08-24 Impact factor: 5.810
Authors: Andrea Gaedigk; Katrin Sangkuhl; Michelle Whirl-Carrillo; Teri Klein; J Steven Leeder Journal: Genet Med Date: 2016-07-07 Impact factor: 8.822