Issues and limitations of available biomarkers for fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy toxicity, a narrative review of the literature

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the impacts of germline pharmacogenomics on severe toxicity and symptom burden in adult patients with cancer

The clinical application of Pharmacogenomics (PGx) has improved patient safety. However, comprehensive PGx testing has not been widely adopted in clinical practice, and significant opportunities exist to further optimize PGx in cancer care. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to evaluate the safety outcomes of reported PGx-guided strategies (Analysis 1) and identify well-studied emerging pharmacogenomic variants that predict severe toxicity and symptom burden (Analysis 2) in patients with cancer. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, clinicaltrials.gov, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform from inception to January 2023 for clinical trials or comparative studies evaluating PGx strategies or unconfirmed pharmacogenomic variants. The primary outcomes were severe adverse events (SAE; ≥ grade 3) or symptom burden with pain and vomiting as defined by trial protocols and assessed by trial investigators. We calculated pooled overall relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (95%CI) using random effects models. PROSPERO, registration number CRD42023421277. Of 6811 records screened, six studies were included for Analysis 1, 55 studies for Analysis 2. Meta-analysis 1 (five trials, 1892 participants) showed a lower absolute incidence of SAEs with PGx-guided strategies compared to usual therapy, 16.1% versus 34.0% (RR = 0.72, 95%CI 0.57-0.91, p = 0.006, I2 = 34%). Meta-analyses 2 identified nine medicine(class)-variant pairs of interest across the TYMS, ABCB1, UGT1A1, HLA-DRB1, and OPRM1 genes. Application of PGx significantly reduced rates of SAEs in patients with cancer. Emergent medicine-variant pairs herald further research into the expansion and optimization of PGx to improve systemic anti-cancer and supportive care medicine safety and efficacy.

Phenotype versus genotype to optimize cancer dosing in the clinical setting-focus on 5-fluorouracil and tyrosine kinase inhibitors

Cancer medicines often have narrow therapeutic windows; toxicity can be severe and sometimes fatal, but inadequate dose intensity reduces efficacy and survival. Determining the optimal dose for each patient is difficult, with body-surface area used most commonly for chemotherapy and flat dosing for tyrosine kinase inhibitors, despite accumulating evidence of a wide range of exposures in individual patients with many receiving a suboptimal dose with these strategies. Therapeutic drug monitoring (measuring the drug concentration in a biological fluid, usually plasma) (TDM) is an accepted and well validated method to guide dose adjustments for individual patients to improve this. However, implementing TDM in routine care has been difficult outside a research context. The development of genotyping of various proteins involved in drug elimination and activity has gained prominence, with several but not all Guideline groups recommending dose reductions for particular variant genotypes. However, there is increasing concern that dosing recommendations are based on limited data sets and may lead to unnecessary underdosing and increased cancer mortality. This Review discusses the evidence surrounding genotyping and TDM to guide decisions around best practice.

Complete DPYD genotyping combined with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase phenotyping to prevent fluoropyrimidine toxicity: A retrospective study

INTRODUCTION

In April 2019, French authorities mandated dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) screening, specifically testing uracilemia, to mitigate the risk of toxicity associated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. However, this subject is still of debate as there is no consensus on a standardized DPD deficiency screening test. We conducted a real-life retrospective study with the aim of assessing the impact of DPD screening on the occurrence of severe toxicity and exploring the potential benefits of complete genotyping using next-generation sequencing.

METHODS

All adult patients consecutively treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or its oral prodrug at six cancer centers between March 2018 and February 2019 were considered for inclusion. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency screening included gene encoding DPD (DPYD) genotyping using complete genome sequencing and DPD phenotyping (uracilemia or dihydrouracilemia/uracilemia ratio) or both tests. Associations between each DPD screening method and (i) severe (grade ≥3) early toxicity and (ii) fluoropyrimidine dose reduction in the second chemotherapy cycle were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Furthermore, we assessed the concordance between DPD genotype and phenotype using Cohen's kappa.

RESULTS

A total of 551 patients were included. Most patients were tested for DPD deficiency (86%) including DPYD genotyping only (6%), DPD phenotyping only (8%), or both (72%). Complete DPD deficiency was not detected in the study population. Severe early toxicity events were observed in 73 patients (13%), with two patients (0.30%) presenting grade 5 toxicity. Despite the numerically higher toxicity rate in untested patients, the occurrence of severe toxicity was not significantly associated with the DPD screening method (p = 0.69). Concordance between the DPD genotype and phenotype was weak (Cohen's kappa of 0.14).

CONCLUSION

Due to insufficient numbers, our study was not able to demonstrate any added value of DPYD genotyping using complete genome sequencing to prevent 5-FU toxicity. The optimal strategy for DPD screening before fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy requires further clinical evaluation.

Recent Contributions of Mass Spectrometry-Based "Omics" in the Studies of Breast Cancer

Breast cancer (BC) is one of the most heterogeneous groups of cancer. As every biotype of BC is unique and presents a particular "omic" signature, they are increasingly characterized nowadays with novel mass spectrometry (MS) strategies. BC therapeutic approaches are primarily based on the two features of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2) and estrogen receptor (ER) positivity. Various strategic MS implementations are reported in studies of BC also involving data independent acquisitions (DIAs) of MS which report novel differential proteomic, lipidomic, proteogenomic, phosphoproteomic, and metabolomic characterizations associated with the disease and its therapeutics. Recently many "omic" studies have aimed to identify distinct subsidiary biotypes for diagnosis, prognosis, and targets of treatment. Along with these, drug-induced-resistance phenotypes are characterized by "omic" changes. These identifying aspects of the disease may influence treatment outcomes in the near future. Drug quantifications and characterizations are also done regularly and have implications in therapeutic monitoring and in drug efficacy assessments. We report these studies, mentioning their implications toward the understanding of BC. We briefly provide the MS instrumentation principles that are adopted in such studies as an overview with a brief outlook on DIA-MS strategies. In all of these, we have chosen a model cancer for its revelations through MS-based "omics".

Implementation of pharmacogenetic testing in oncology: DPYD-guided dosing to prevent fluoropyrimidine toxicity in British Columbia

Background: Fluoropyrimidine toxicity is often due to variations in the gene (DPYD) encoding dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). DPYD genotyping can be used to adjust doses to reduce the likelihood of fluoropyrimidine toxicity while maintaining therapeutically effective drug levels. Methods: A multiplex QPCR assay was locally developed to allow genotyping for six DPYD variants. The test was offered prospectively for all patients starting on fluoropyrimidines at the BC Cancer Centre in Vancouver and then across B.C., Canada as well as retrospectively for patients suspected to have had an adverse reaction to therapy. Dose adjustments were made for variant carriers. The incidence of toxicity in the first three cycles was compared between DPYD variant allele carriers and non-variant carriers. Subsequent to an initial implementation phase, this test was made available province-wide. Results: In 9 months, 186 patients were tested and 14 were found to be heterozygous variant carriers. Fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity was higher in DPYD variant carriers. Of 127 non-variant carriers who have completed chemotherapy, 18 (14%) experienced severe (grade ≥3, Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 5.0). Of note, 22% (3 patients) of the variant carriers experienced severe toxicity even after DPYD-guided dose reductions. For one of these carriers who experienced severe thrombocytopenia within the first week, DPYD testing likely prevented lethal toxicity. In DPYD variant carriers who tolerate reduced doses, a later 25% increase led to chemotherapy discontinuation. As a result, a recommendation was made to clinicians based on available literature and expert opinion specifying that variant carriers who tolerated two cycles without toxicity can have a dose escalation of only 10%. Conclusion: DPYD-guided dose reductions were a feasible and acceptable method of preventing severe toxicity in DPYD variant carriers. Even with dose reductions, there were variant carriers who still experienced severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity, highlighting the importance of adhering to guideline-recommended dose reductions. Following the completion of the pilot phase of this study, DPYD genotyping was made available province-wide in British Columbia.

Case report: 5-Fluorouracil treatment in patient with an important partial DPD deficiency

Esophageal cancer is a cancer with poor prognosis and the standard 1^st line treatment for metastatic or recurrent EC is systemic chemotherapy with doublet chemotherapy based on platinum and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). However, 5-FU could be a source of severe treatment-related toxicities due to deficiency of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). In this case report, a 74-year-old man with metastatic esophageal cancer was found to have partial DPD deficiency based on uracilemia measurements (about 90 ng/mL). Despite this, 5-FU was safely administered thanks to therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). The case report highlights the importance of TDM in administering 5-FU to patients with partial DPD deficiency, as it allows individualized dosing and prevents severe toxicity.

Impact of renal impairment on dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) phenotyping

BACKGROUND

The chemotherapeutic agent 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is catabolized by dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), the deficiency of which may lead to severe toxicity or death. Since 2019, DPD deficiency testing, based on uracilemia, is mandatory in France and recommended in Europe before initiating fluoropyrimidine-based regimens. However, it has been recently shown that renal impairment may impact uracil concentration and thus DPD phenotyping.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The impact of renal function on uracilemia and DPD phenotype was studied on 3039 samples obtained from three French centers. We also explored the influence of dialysis and measured glomerular filtration rate (mGFR) on both parameters. Finally, using patients as their own controls, we assessed as to what extent modifications in renal function impacted uracilemia and DPD phenotyping.

RESULTS

We observed that uracilemia and DPD-deficient phenotypes increased concomitantly to the severity of renal impairment based on the estimated GFR, independently and more critically than hepatic function. This observation was confirmed with the mGFR. The risk of being classified 'DPD deficient' based on uracilemia was statistically higher in patients with renal impairment or dialyzed if uracilemia was measured before dialysis but not after. Indeed, the rate of DPD deficiency decreased from 86.4% before dialysis to 13.7% after. Moreover, for patients with transient renal impairment, the rate of DPD deficiency dropped dramatically from 83.3% to 16.7% when patients restored their renal function, especially in patients with an uracilemia close to 16 ng/ml.

CONCLUSIONS

DPD deficiency testing using uracilemia could be misleading in patients with renal impairment. When possible, uracilemia should be reassessed in case of transient renal impairment. For patients under dialysis, testing of DPD deficiency should be carried out on samples taken after dialysis. Hence, 5-FU therapeutic drug monitoring would be particularly helpful to guide dose adjustments in patients with elevated uracil and renal impairment.

Lipid Nanocarrier-Based Drug Delivery Systems: Therapeutic Advances in the Treatment of Lung Cancer

Although various treatments are currently being developed, lung cancer still has a very high mortality rate. Moreover, while various strategies for the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer are being used in clinical settings, in many cases, lung cancer does not respond to treatment and presents reducing survival rates. Cancer nanotechnology, also known as nanotechnology in cancer, is a relatively new topic of study that brings together scientists from a variety of fields, including chemistry, biology, engineering, and medicine. The use of lipid-based nanocarriers to aid drug distribution has already had a significant impact in several scientific fields. Lipid-based nanocarriers have been demonstrated to help stabilize therapeutic compounds, overcome barriers to cellular and tissue absorption, and improve in vivo drug delivery to specific target areas. For this reason, lipid-based nanocarriers are being actively researched and used for lung cancer treatment and vaccine development. This review discusses the improvements in drug delivery achieved with lipid-based nanocarriers, the obstacles that still exist with in vivo applications, and the current clinical and experimental applications of lipid-based nanocarriers in lung cancer treatment and management.

Quantitative impact of pre-analytical process on plasma uracil when testing for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency

AIMS

Determining dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) activity by measuring patient's uracil (U) plasma concentration is mandatory before fluoropyrimidine (FP) administration in France. In this study, we aimed to refine the pre-analytical recommendations for determining U and dihydrouracil (UH₂ ) concentrations, as they are essential in reliable DPD-deficiency testing.

METHODS

U and UH₂ concentrations were collected from 14 hospital laboratories. Stability in whole blood and plasma after centrifugation, the type of anticoagulant and long-term plasma storage were evaluated. The variation induced by time and temperature was calculated and compared to an acceptability range of ±20%. Inter-occasion variability (IOV) of U and UH₂ was assessed in 573 patients double sampled for DPD-deficiency testing.

RESULTS

Storage of blood samples before centrifugation at room temperature (RT) should not exceed 1 h, whereas cold (+4°C) storage maintains the stability of uracil after 5 hours. For patients correctly double sampled, IOV of U reached 22.4% for U (SD = 17.9%, range = 0-99%). Notably, 17% of them were assigned with a different phenotype (normal or DPD-deficient) based on the analysis of their two samples. For those having at least one non-compliant sample, this percentage increased up to 33.8%. The moment of blood collection did not affect the DPD phenotyping result.

CONCLUSION

Caution should be taken when interpreting U concentrations if the time before centrifugation exceeds 1 hour at RT, since it rises significantly afterwards. Not respecting the pre-analytical conditions for DPD phenotyping increases the risk of DPD status misclassification.

Renal impairment and abnormal liver function tests in pre-therapeutic phenotype-based DPD deficiency screening using uracilemia: a comprehensive population-based study in 1138 patients

Background

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency screening is a pre-therapeutic standard to prevent severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity. Although several screening methods exist, the accuracy of their results remains debatable. In France, the uracilemia measurement is considered the standard in DPD deficiency screening. The objective of this study was to describe the hyperuracilemia (⩾16 ng/mL) rate and investigate the influence of hepatic and renal impairment in uracilemia measurements since the guidelines were implemented.

Patients and methods

Using a cohort of 1138 patients screened between 18 October 2018 and 18 October 2021, basic demographic characteristics, date of blood sampling, and potential biological confounders including liver function tests [aspartate aminotransaminase (AST), alanine aminotransaminase (ALT), gamma-glutamyl transferase (γGT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and bilirubin] and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) were collected. The second same-patient uracilemia analysis was also performed. Temporal change was graphically represented while potential confounders were stratified to show linearity when suspected.

Results

Hyperuracilemia was diagnosed in 12.7% (n = 150) samples with 6.7%, 5.4%, 0.5%, and 0.08% between 16 and 20 ng/mL, 20 and 50 ng/mL, 50 and 150 ng/mL, and >150 ng/mL, respectively. The median uracilemia concentration was 9.4 ng/mL (range: 1.2 and 172.3 ng/mL) and the monthly hyperuracilemia rate decreased steadily from >30% to around 9%. Older age, normalized AST, γGT, ALP results, bilirubin levels, and decreased eGFR were linearly associated with higher plasma uracil concentrations (all p < 0.001). In the adjusted multivariate linear model, AST, eGFR, and ALP remained associated with uracilemia (p < 0.05). When measured twice in 39 patients, the median uracilemia rate of change was -2.5%, which subsequently changed the diagnosis in nine patients (23.1%).

Conclusions

Better respect of pre-analytical conditions may explain the steady decrease in monthly hyperuracilemia rates over the 3 years. Elevated AST, ALP levels, and reduced eGFR could induce a false increase in uracilemia and second uracilemia measurements modified the first DPD deficiency diagnosis in almost 25% of the patients.

5-Fluorouracil and actinomycin D lead to erythema multiforme drug eruption in chemotherapy of invasive mole: Case report and literature review

RATIONALE

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) and actinomycin D (ActD) are often used in chemotherapy for various cancers. Side effects are more common in bone marrow suppression, liver function impairment, and gastrointestinal responses. Skin effects are rare and easy to be ignored by doctors and patients, which can lead to life-threatening consequence.

PATIENT CONCERNS

We reported a 45-year-old woman patient developed skin erythema and fingernail belt in chemotherapy of 5-FU and ActD.

DIAGNOSIS

Erythema multiforme drug eruption.

INTERVENTIONS

Laboratory tests including blood and urine routine, liver and kidney function, electrolytes and coagulation function and close observation.

OUTCOMES

The rash was gone and the nail change returned.

LESSONS

Delays in diagnosis or treatment may lead to serious consequence. We should pay attention to the dosage of 5-FU and ActD, monitor adverse reactions strictly, to reduce occurrence of skin malignant events.

Biosensing chips for cancer diagnosis and treatment: a new wave towards clinical innovation

Recent technological advances in nanoscience and material designing have led to the development of point-of-care devices for biomolecule sensing and cancer diagnosis. In situ and portable sensing devices for bedside, diagnosis can effectively improve the patient’s clinical outcomes and reduce the mortality rate. Detection of exosomal RNAs by immuno-biochip with increased sensitivity and specificity to diagnose cancer has raised the understanding of the tumor microenvironment and many other technology-based biosensing devices hold great promise for clinical innovations to conquer the unbeatable fort of cancer metastasis. Electrochemical biosensors are the most sensitive category of biomolecule detection sensors with significantly low concentrations down to the atomic level. In this sense, this review addresses the recent advances in cancer detection and diagnosis by developing significant biological sensing devices that are believed to have better sensing potential than existing facilities.

Predicting Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Deficiency and Related 5-Fluorouracil Toxicity: Opportunities and Challenges of DPYD Exon Sequencing and the Role of Phenotyping Assays

Deficiency of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), encoded by the DPYD gene, is associated with severe toxicity induced by the anti-cancer drug 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU). DPYD genotyping of four recommended polymorphisms is widely used to predict toxicity, yet their prediction power is limited. Increasing availability of next generation sequencing (NGS) will allow us to screen rare variants, predicting a larger fraction of DPD deficiencies. Genotype−phenotype correlations were investigated by performing DPYD exon sequencing in 94 patients assessed for DPD deficiency by the 5-FU degradation rate (5-FUDR) assay. Association of common variants with 5-FUDR was analyzed with the SNPStats software. Functional interpretation of rare variants was performed by in-silico analysis (using the HSF system and PredictSNP) and literature review. A total of 23 rare variants and 8 common variants were detected. Among common variants, a significant association was found between homozygosity for the rs72728438 (c.1974+75A>G) and decreased 5-FUDR. Haplotype analysis did not detect significant associations with 5-FUDR. Overall, in our sample cohort, NGS exon sequencing allowed us to explain 42.5% of the total DPD deficiencies. NGS sharply improves prediction of DPD deficiencies, yet a broader collection of genotype−phenotype association data is needed to enable the clinical use of sequencing data.

DPYD genotyping and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) phenotyping in clinical oncology. A clinically focused minireview

BACKGROUND

In clinical oncology, systemic 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and its oral pro-drugs are used to treat a broad group of solid tumours. Patients with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) enzyme deficiency are at elevated risk of toxicity if treated with standard doses of 5-FU. DPYD genotyping and measurements of plasma uracil concentration (DPD phenotyping) can be applied as tests for DPD deficiency. In April 2020, the European Medicines Agency recommended pre-treatment DPD testing to reduce the risk of 5-FU-related toxicity.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study is to present the current evidence for DPD testing in routine oncological practice.

METHODS

Two systematic literature searches were performed following the PRISMA guidelines. We identified studies examining the possible benefit of DPYD genotyping or DPD phenotyping on the toxicity risk.

FINDINGS

Nine and 12 studies met the criteria for using DPYD genotyping and DPD phenotyping, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The evidence supporting either DPYD genotyping or DPD phenotyping as pre-treatment tests to reduce 5-FU toxicity is poor. Further evidence is still needed to fully understand and guide clinicians to dose by DPD activity.

Impact of Guidelines Regarding Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase (DPD) Deficiency Screening Using Uracil-Based Phenotyping on the Reduction of Severe Side Effect of 5-Fluorouracil-Based Chemotherapy: A Propension Score Analysis

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency is associated with severe fluoropyrimidines-induced toxicity. As of September 2018, French recommendations call for screening for DPD deficiency by plasma uracil quantification prior to all fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. A dose reduction of fluoropyrimidine is recommended when uracil concentration is equal to or greater than 16 ng/mL. This matched retrospective study assessed the impact of DPD screening on the reduction of severe side effects and on the management of DPD-deficient patients. Using a propensity score, we balanced the factors influencing 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) toxicity. Then, the severity scores (G3 and G4 severity as well as their frequency) of patients who did not benefit from DPD screening were compared with those of patients who benefited from DPD screening for each treatment cycle (from 1 to 4). Among 349 screened patients, 198 treated patients were included. Among them, 31 (15.7%) had DPD deficiency (median uracilemia 19.8 ng/mL (range: 16.1−172.3)). The median toxicity severity score was higher in the unscreened group for each treatment cycle (0 vs. 1, p < 0.001 at each cycle from 1 to 4) as well as the cumulative score during all courses of treatment (p = 0.028). DPD-deficient patients received a significantly lower dose of 5-FU (p < 0.001). This study suggests that pretherapeutic plasmatic uracil assessment, along with 5-FU dosage adjustment, may be beneficial in reducing 5-FU toxicity in real-life patients.

Effect of Ketorolac on Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of 5-Fluorouracil: In Vivo and In Vitro Study

Background. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of ketorolac on the pharmacokinetics of 5-FU and its effect on the efficacy of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) on the HT-29 cell line. Methods. Cell culture: the HT-29 cell line was treated with different concentrations of 5-FU, ketorolac, and combination of 5-FU and ketorolac for 24 and 48 hours. The cell viability (%) was calculated by the MTT assay. Animal study: rats were randomly divided into control and pretreatment groups. The control group received physiological saline, whereas the pretreatment group received ketorolac by intraperitoneal (i.p.) injections on a daily basis for 14 days. On the 15th day, both groups received 5-FU (i.p.). Blood samples were collected at different times for HPLC analysis, and 5-FU pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated. Results. At cell culture study, in a certain concentration range, combination therapy showed synergistic effects (<0.05). However, at concentrations above this range, combination therapy showed antagonistic effects on 5-FU efficacy (<0.05). According to the pharmacokinetic analysis, pretreatment with ketorolac resulted in a significant increase in AUC, Cmax, and Tmax of 5-FU (<0.05) and a significant decrease in V/F and Cl/F of 5-FU (<0.05). Conclusions. Combination therapy with ketorolac and 5-FU, depending on time and concentration, has a synergistic effect on reducing the viability of cancer cells. Also, ketorolac is able to alter the pharmacokinetics of 5-FU. Since there is a close relationship between pharmacokinetic parameters of 5-FU and its effectiveness/toxicity, it seems that these changes are towards creating a synergistic effect on 5-FU cytotoxicity. These results suggest the need to optimize the dose of these drugs in order to increase clinical efficacy and reduce the toxicity associated with them.

Renal impairment and DPD testing: watch out for false-positive results!

Measuring uracil (U) levels in plasma is a convenient surrogate to establish DPD status in patients scheduled with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or capecitabine. To what extent renal impairment could impact on U levels and thus be a confounding factor is a rising concern. Here, we report the case of a cancer patient with severe renal impairment scheduled for 5-FU-based regimen. Determination of his DPD status was complicated because of his condition and the influence of intermittent hemodialysis when monitoring U levels. The patient was initially identified as markedly DPD-deficient upon U measurement (i.e., U = 40 ng/ml), but further monitoring between and immediately after dialysis showed mild deficiency only (i.e., U = 34 and U = 19 ng/ml, respectively). Despite this discrepancy, starting dose of 5-FU was cut by 50% upon treatment initiation. Tolerance was good and 5-FU dosing was next shifted to 25% reduction, then further shifted to normal dosing at the 5^th course, with still no sign for drug-related toxicities. Further DPYD genotyping showed none of the 4 allelic variants usually associated with loss of DPD activity. Of note, the excellent tolerance upon standard dosing strongly suggests that this patient was actually not DPD-deficient, despite U values always above normal concentrations. This case report highlights how critical is the information regarding the renal function of patients with cancer when phenotyping DPD using U plasma as a surrogate, and that U accumulation in patients with such condition is likely to yield false-positive results.

Optimizing the prescription doses and tolerability of systemic therapy in head and neck cancer patients

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck accounts for 330 000 deaths and 650 000 cases worldwide annually. Systemic therapy is an essential pillar of multimodal therapy despite being accompanied with substantial toxicity. This article reviews the latest advances in systemic therapy for the treatment of locoregionally advanced and reccurent/metastatic head and neck cancer from a tolerability perspective.

RECENT FINDINGS

Multiple recent attempts have been made to optimize tolerability (and efficacy) of systemic therapy utilizing new regimens, modified prescription doses, drugs such as immunotherapies or genotyping to tailor the systemic therapy to the individual patient.

SUMMARY

Although treatment benefit has to be weighed against potential toxicity, it is reasonable to anticipate potential side effects of systemic therapies. In a vulnerable elderly or Asian patient population upfront dose modifications of cytotoxic chemotherapies might be reasonable. Special attention should be laid on the patient's nutritional status and early intervention recommended. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase genotyping can predict 5-fluorouracil toxicity and identify patients for whom alternative regimens are more suitable. As for immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, despite being well tolerated, the identification of biomarkers to predict reduced tolerability or severe toxicity would be highly desirable.

Somatic Genomic Testing in Patients With Metastatic or Advanced Cancer: ASCO Provisional Clinical Opinion

PURPOSE

An ASCO provisional clinical opinion offers timely clinical direction to ASCO's membership following publication or presentation of potentially practice-changing data from major studies. This provisional clinical opinion addresses the appropriate use of tumor genomic testing in patients with metastatic or advanced solid tumors.

CLINICAL CONTEXT

An increasing number of therapies are approved to treat cancers harboring specific genomic biomarkers. However, there is a lack of clarity as to when tumor genomic sequencing should be ordered, what type of assays should be performed, and how to interpret the results for treatment selection.

PROVISIONAL CLINICAL OPINION

Patients with metastatic or advanced cancer should undergo genomic sequencing in a certified laboratory if the presence of one or more specific genomic alterations has regulatory approval as biomarkers to guide the use of or exclusion from certain treatments for their disease. Multigene panel-based assays should be used if more than one biomarker-linked therapy is approved for the patient's disease. Site-agnostic approvals for any cancer with a high tumor mutation burden, mismatch repair deficiency, or neurotrophic tyrosine receptor kinase (NTRK) fusions provide a rationale for genomic testing for all solid tumors. Multigene testing may also assist in treatment selection by identifying additional targets when there are few or no genotype-based therapy approvals for the patient's disease. For treatment planning, the clinician should consider the functional impact of the targeted alteration and expected efficacy of genomic biomarker-linked options relative to other approved or investigational treatments.Additional information is available at www.asco.org/assays-and-predictive-markers-guidelines.

Current status and future outlooks on therapeutic drug monitoring of fluorouracil

INTRODUCTION

: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of the anticancer drug fluorouracil (5FU) as a method to support dose adjustments has been researched and discussed extensively. Despite manifold evidence of the advantages of 5FU-TDM, traditional body surface area (BSA)-guided dosing is still widely applied.

AREAS COVERED

: This review covers the latest evidence on 5FU-TDM based on a literature search in PubMed between June and September 2021. It particularly highlights new approaches of implementing 5FU-TDM into precision medicine by combining TDM with pharmacogenetic testing and/or pharmacometric models. This review further discusses remaining obstacles in order to incorporate 5FU-TDM into clinical routine.

EXPERT OPINION

: New data on 5FU-TDM further strengthen the advantages compared to BSA-guided dosing as it is able to reduce pharmacokinetic variability and thereby improve treatment efficacy and safety. Interprofessional collaboration has the potential to overcome the remaining barriers for its implementation. Pre-emptive pharmacogenetic testing followed by 5FU-TDM can further improve 5FU exposure in a substantial proportion of patients. Developing a model framework integrating pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of 5FU will be crucial to fully advance into the precision medicine era. Model applications can potentially support clinicians in dose finding before starting chemotherapy. Additionally, TDM provides further assistance in continuously improving model predictions.

A narrative review of genetic factors affecting fluoropyrimidine toxicity

OBJECTIVE

Our objective is to document progress in developing personalized therapy with fluoropyrimidine drugs (FPs) to improve outcomes for cancer patients and to identify areas requiring further investigation.

BACKGROUND

FPs including 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), are among the most widely used drugs for treating colorectal cancer (CRC) and other gastrointestinal (GI) malignancies. While FPs confer a survival benefit for CRC patients, serious systemic toxicities, including neutropenia, occur in ~30% of patients with lethality in 0.5-1% of patients. While serious systemic toxicities may occur in any patient, patients with polymorphisms in DPYD, which encodes the rate-limiting enzyme for pyrimidine degradation are at very high risk. Other genetic factors affecting risk for 5-FU toxicity, including miR-27a, are under investigation.

METHODS

Literature used to inform the text of this article was selected from PubMed.gov from the National Library of Medicine while regulatory documents were identified via Google search.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical studies to date have validated four DPYD polymorphisms (DPYD*2A, DPYD*13, c.2846A>T, HapB3) associated with serious toxicities in patients treated with 5-FU. Genetic screening for these is being implemented in the Netherlands and the UK and has been shown to be a cost-effective way to improve outcomes. Factors other than DPYD polymorphisms (e.g., miR-27a, TYMS, ENOSF1, p53) also affect 5-FU toxicity. Functional testing for deficient pyrimidine catabolism {defined as [U] >16 ng/mL or [UH2]:[U] <10} is being implemented in France and has demonstrated utility in identifying patients with elevated risk for 5-FU toxicity. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) from plasma levels of 5-FU during first cycle treatment also is being used to improve outcomes and pharmacokinetic-based dosing is being used to increase the percent of patients within optimal area under the curve (AUC) (18-28 mg*h/L) values. Patients maintained in the optimal AUC range experienced significantly reduced systemic toxicities. As understanding the genetic basis for increased risk of 5-FU toxicity becomes more refined, the development of functional-based methods to optimize treatment is likely to become more widespread.