Deepam Pushpam1, Sameer Bakhshi2. 1. Department of Medical Oncology, Dr. B. R. A. Institute Rotary Cancer Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, 110029, India. 2. Department of Medical Oncology, Dr. B. R. A. Institute Rotary Cancer Hospital, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, Ansari Nagar, New Delhi, 110029, India. sambakh@hotmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: In this review, we have summarized the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and adverse effects of imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib, bosutinib, ponatinib and radotinib with focus on pharmacogenomic studies with clinical end points. We have discussed the key phase 3 trials of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) comparing with each other, treatment free remission (TFR) and selection of TKI. Upcoming concepts and related trials in the management of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) along with future directions have been touched upon. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed, Embase, Google, Cochrane library and Medline were searched to identify relevant literature for the review. Clinicaltrial.gov was searched for upcoming data and trials. RESULTS: There are lot of gap in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of TKI. Imatinib appears to be the safest TKI. Newer TKI's achieve better achievement of therapeutic milestones, deeper molecular response and less chances of progression of CML compared to imatinib. Newer TKI appears to be better choice for achieving TFR. When the objective is survival, imatinib is still the TKI of choice. Primary prophylaxis with antiplatelet drugs for TKI having cardiovascular and thromboembolic side effects should be considered. CONCLUSION: Pharmacogenetic data of TKI is still immature to guide in therapeutic decision making in clinical practice. There is need for further research in pharmacology and pharmacogenomics of newer TKI's. Randomized controlled trials are required to decide the optimum TKI for TFR. Safe and effective TKI for targeting T315I mutation, CML accelerated phase and blast crisis are an active area of research.
OBJECTIVE: In this review, we have summarized the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and adverse effects of imatinib, dasatinib, nilotinib, bosutinib, ponatinib and radotinib with focus on pharmacogenomic studies with clinical end points. We have discussed the key phase 3 trials of tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) comparing with each other, treatment free remission (TFR) and selection of TKI. Upcoming concepts and related trials in the management of chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) along with future directions have been touched upon. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: PubMed, Embase, Google, Cochrane library and Medline were searched to identify relevant literature for the review. Clinicaltrial.gov was searched for upcoming data and trials. RESULTS: There are lot of gap in pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of TKI. Imatinib appears to be the safest TKI. Newer TKI's achieve better achievement of therapeutic milestones, deeper molecular response and less chances of progression of CML compared to imatinib. Newer TKI appears to be better choice for achieving TFR. When the objective is survival, imatinib is still the TKI of choice. Primary prophylaxis with antiplatelet drugs for TKI having cardiovascular and thromboembolic side effects should be considered. CONCLUSION: Pharmacogenetic data of TKI is still immature to guide in therapeutic decision making in clinical practice. There is need for further research in pharmacology and pharmacogenomics of newer TKI's. Randomized controlled trials are required to decide the optimum TKI for TFR. Safe and effective TKI for targeting T315I mutation, CML accelerated phase and blast crisis are an active area of research.
Entities:
Keywords:
Gene polymorphism and imatinib; Pharmacology of tyrosine kinase inhibitors; Selection of tyrosine kinase inhibitors; Tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic myeloid leukemia
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: David J Dorer; Ronald K Knickerbocker; Michele Baccarani; Jorge E Cortes; Andreas Hochhaus; Moshe Talpaz; Frank G Haluska Journal: Leuk Res Date: 2016-07-22 Impact factor: 3.156
Authors: Richard A Larson; Ophelia Q P Yin; Andreas Hochhaus; Giuseppe Saglio; Richard E Clark; Hirohisa Nakamae; Neil J Gallagher; Eren Demirhan; Timothy P Hughes; Hagop M Kantarjian; Philipp D le Coutre Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2011-12-30 Impact factor: 2.953
Authors: Jorge E Cortes; Carlo Gambacorti-Passerini; Michael W Deininger; Michael J Mauro; Charles Chuah; Dong-Wook Kim; Irina Dyagil; Nataliia Glushko; Dragana Milojkovic; Philipp le Coutre; Valentin Garcia-Gutierrez; Laurence Reilly; Allison Jeynes-Ellis; Eric Leip; Nathalie Bardy-Bouxin; Andreas Hochhaus; Tim H Brümmendorf Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2017-11-01 Impact factor: 50.717
Authors: Guray Saydam; Ridvan Ali; Ahmet Muzaffer Demir; Ahmet Emre Eskazan; Birol Guvenc; Ibrahim Celalettin Haznedaroglu; Mehmet Ali Ozcan; Ozan Salim; Mehmet Sonmez; Ayse Tulin Tuglular; Mehmet Turgut; Ali Unal; Birkan Aver; Sirac Bozkurt; Begum Ozdengulsun; Osman Ilhan Journal: Int J Hematol Oncol Date: 2022-05-24