Cost-effectiveness of screening for DPYD polymorphisms to prevent neutropenia in cancer patients treated with fluoropyrimidines

Upfront DPYD Genotype-Guided Treatment for Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy in Advanced and Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

OBJECTIVES

Fluoropyrimidines are the most widely used chemotherapy drugs for advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Individuals with certain DPYD gene variants are exposed to an increased risk of severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicities. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of preemptive DPYD genotyping to guide fluoropyrimidine therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic CRC.

METHODS

Overall survival of DPYD wild-type patients who received a standard dose and variant carriers treated with a reduced dose were analyzed by parametric survival models. A decision tree and a partitioned survival analysis model with a lifetime horizon were designed, taking the Iranian healthcare perspective. Input parameters were extracted from the literature or expert opinion. To address parameter uncertainty, scenario and sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Compared with no screening, the genotype-guided treatment strategy was cost-saving ($41.7). Nevertheless, due to a possible reduction in the survival of patients receiving reduced-dose regimens, it was associated with fewer quality-adjusted life-years (9.45 vs 9.28). In sensitivity analyses, the prevalence of DPYD variants had the most significant impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The genotyping strategy would remain cost-saving, as long as the genotyping cost is < $49 per test. In a scenario in which we assumed equal efficacy for the 2 strategies, genotyping was the dominant strategy, associated with less costs (∼$1) and more quality-adjusted life-years (0.1292).

CONCLUSIONS

DPYD genotyping to guide fluoropyrimidine treatment in patients with advanced or metastatic CRC is cost-saving from the perspective of the Iranian health system.

Challenges and opportunities in building a health economic framework for personalized medicine in oncology

Personalized medicine has allowed for knowledge at an individual level for several diseases and this has led to improvements in prevention and treatment of various types of neoplasms. Despite the greater availability of tests, the costs of genomic testing and targeted therapies are still high for most patients, especially in low- and middle-income countries. Although value frameworks and health technology assessment are fundamental to allow decision-making by policymakers, there are several concerns in terms of personalized medicine pharmacoeconomics. A global effort may improve these tools in order to allow access to personalized medicine for an increasing number of patients with cancer.

Budget impact and transferability of cost-effectiveness of DPYD testing in metastatic breast cancer in three health systems

The cost-effectiveness and budget impact of introducing extended DPYD testing prior to fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer patients in the UK, The Netherlands and Hungary were examined. DPYD testing with ToxNav© was cost-effective in all three countries. In the UK and The Netherlands, the ToxNav strategy led to more quality-adjusted life years and fewer costs to the health systems compared with no genetic testing and standard dosing of capecitabine/5-fluorouracil. In Hungary, the ToxNav strategy produced more quality-adjusted life years at a higher cost compared with no testing and standard dose. The ToxNav strategy was found to offer budget savings in the UK and in The Netherlands, while in Hungary it resulted in additional budget costs.

Cost-effectiveness of extended DPYD testing before fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy in metastatic breast cancer in the UK

The aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of ToxNav©, a multivariant genetic test, to screen for DPYD followed by personalized chemotherapy dosing for metastatic breast cancer in the UK compared with no testing followed by standard dose, standard of care. In the main analysis, ToxNav was dominant over standard of care, producing 0.19 additional quality-adjusted life years and savings of £78,000 per patient over a lifetime. The mean additional quality-adjusted life years per person from 1000 simulations was 0.23 savings (95% CI: 0.22-0.24) at £99,000 (95% CI: £95-102,000). Varying input parameters independently by range of 20% was unlikely to change the results in the main analysis. The probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed ~97% probability of the ToxNav strategy to be dominant.

Cost Effectiveness of Pharmacogenetic Testing for Drugs with Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guidelines: A Systematic Review

The objective of this study was to evaluate the evidence on cost-effectiveness of pharmacogenetic (PGx)-guided treatment for drugs with Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines. A systematic review was conducted using multiple biomedical literature databases from inception to June 2021. Full articles comparing PGx-guided with nonguided treatment were included for data extraction. Quality of Health Economic Studies (QHES) was used to assess robustness of each study (0-100). Data are reported using descriptive statistics. Of 108 studies evaluating 39 drugs, 77 (71%) showed PGx testing was cost-effective (CE) (N = 48) or cost-saving (CS) (N = 29); 21 (20%) were not CE; 10 (9%) were uncertain. Clopidogrel had the most articles (N = 23), of which 22 demonstrated CE or CS, followed by warfarin (N = 16), of which 7 demonstrated CE or CS. Of 26 studies evaluating human leukocyte antigen (HLA) testing for abacavir (N = 8), allopurinol (N = 10), or carbamazepine/phenytoin (N = 8), 15 demonstrated CE or CS. Nine of 11 antidepressant articles demonstrated CE or CS. The median QHES score reflected high-quality studies (91; range 48-100). Most studies evaluating cost-effectiveness favored PGx testing. Limited data exist on cost-effectiveness of preemptive and multigene testing across disease states.

Cost-effectiveness of DPYD Genotyping Prior to Fluoropyrimidine-based Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Colon Cancer

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy substantially reduces recurrence and mortality after resection of stage 3 colon cancer. While standard doses of 5-fluorouracil and capecitabine are safe for most patients, the risk of severe toxicity is increased for the approximately 6% of patients with dihydropyimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency caused by pathogenic DPYD gene variants. Pre-treatment screening for pathogenic DPYD gene variants reduces severe toxicity but has not been widely adopted in the United States.

METHODS

We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of DPYD genotyping prior to fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy for stage 3 colon cancer, covering the c.1129-5923C>G (HapB3), c.1679T>G (*13), c.1905+1G>A (*2A), and c.2846A>T gene variants. We used a Markov model with a 5-year horizon, taking a United States healthcare perspective. Simulated patients with pathogenic DPYD gene variants received reduced-dose fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for DPYD genotyping.

RESULTS

Compared with no screening for DPD deficiency, DPYD genotyping increased per-patient costs by $78 and improved survival by 0.0038 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), leading to an ICER of $20,506/QALY. In 1-way sensitivity analyses, The ICER exceeded $50,000 per QALY when the cost of the DPYD genotyping assay was greater than $286. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY DPYD genotyping was preferred to no screening in 96.2% of iterations.

CONCLUSION

Among patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for stage 3 colon cancer, screening for DPD deficiency with DPYD genotyping is a cost-effective strategy for preventing infrequent but severe and sometimes fatal toxicities of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy.

Advancing Pharmacogenomics from Single-Gene to Preemptive Testing

Pharmacogenomic testing can be an effective tool to enhance medication safety and efficacy. Pharmacogenomically actionable medications are widely used, and approximately 90-95% of individuals have an actionable genotype for at least one pharmacogene. For pharmacogenomic testing to have the greatest impact on medication safety and clinical care, genetic information should be made available at the time of prescribing (preemptive testing). However, the use of preemptive pharmacogenomic testing is associated with some logistical concerns, such as consistent reimbursement, processes for reporting preemptive results over an individual's lifetime, and result portability. Lessons can be learned from institutions that have implemented preemptive pharmacogenomic testing. In this review, we discuss the rationale and best practices for implementing pharmacogenomics preemptively.

Testing for Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Deficiency to Individualize 5-Fluorouracil Therapy

Simple Summary

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) is a chemotherapy drug that is commonly used to treat multiple cancers. Many people who are treated with 5-FU experience severe toxicity to the drug, and in severe cases, patients can die. This review discusses current methods for identifying people who are at high risk for severe side effects to 5-FU therapy.

Abstract

Severe adverse events (toxicity) related to the use of the commonly used chemotherapeutic drug 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) affect one in three patients and are the primary reason cited for premature discontinuation of therapy. Deficiency of the 5-FU catabolic enzyme dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD, encoded by DPYD) has been recognized for the past 3 decades as a pharmacogenetic syndrome associated with high risk of 5-FU toxicity. An appreciable fraction of patients with DPD deficiency that receive 5-FU-based chemotherapy die as a result of toxicity. In this manuscript, we review recent progress in identifying actionable markers of DPD deficiency and the current status of integrating those markers into the clinical decision-making process. The limitations of currently available tests, as well as the regulatory status of pre-therapeutic DPYD testing, are also discussed.

Can upfront DPYD extended variant testing reduce toxicity and associated hospital costs of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy? A propensity score matched analysis of 2022 UK patients

Aim

To independently assess the impact of mandatory testing using an extended DPYD variant panel (ToxNav®) and consequent dose adjustment of Capecitabine/5-FU on recorded quantitative toxicity, symptoms of depression, and hospital costs.

Methods

We used propensity score matching (PSM) to match 466 patients tested with ToxNav® with 1556 patients from a historical cohort, and performed regression analysis to estimate the impact of ToxNav®on toxicity, depression, and hospital costs.

Results

ToxNav® appeared to reduce the likelihood of experiencing moderate (OR: 0.59; 95%CI: 0.45–0.77) and severe anaemia (OR: 0.55; 95%CI: 0.33–0.90), and experience of pain for more than 4 days a week (OR: 0.50; 95%CI: 0.30–0.83), while it increased the likelihood of mild neutropenia (OR: 1.73; 95%CI: 1.27–2.35). It also reduced the cost of chemotherapy by 12% (95%CI: 3–31) or £9765, the cost of non-elective hospitalisation by 23% (95%CI: 8–36) or £2331, and the cost of critical care by 21% (95%CI: 2–36) or £1219 per patient. For the DPYD variant associated with critical risk of toxicity (rs3918290), the improved non-elective hospital costs were > £20,000, whereas variants associated with hand-foot syndrome toxicity had no detectable cost improvement.

Conclusion

Upfront testing of DPYD variants appears to reduce the toxicity burden of Capecitabine and 5-FU in cancer patients and can lead to substantial hospital cost savings, only if the dose management of the drugs in response to variants detected is standardised and regulated.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12885-022-09576-3.

Clinical Relevance of Novel Polymorphisms in the Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase (DPYD) Gene in Patients with Severe Fluoropyrimidine Toxicity: A Spanish Case-Control Study

Among cancer patients treated with fluoropyrimidines, 10-40% develop severe toxicity. Polymorphism of the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) gene may reduce DPD function, the main enzyme responsible for the metabolism of fluoropyrimidines. This leads to drug accumulation and to an increased risk of toxicity. Routine genotyping of this gene, which usually includes DPYD *HapB3, *2A, *13 and c.2846A > T (D949V) variants, helps predict approximately 20-30% of toxicity cases. For DPD intermediate (IM) or poor (PM) metabolizers, a dose adjustment or drug switch is warranted to avoid toxicity, respectively. Societies such as the Spanish Society of Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics (SEFF), the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) or the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) and regulatory agencies (e.g., the Spanish Medicines Agency, AEMPS) already recommend DPYD routine genotyping. However, the predictive capacity of genotyping is currently still limited. This can be explained by the presence of unknown polymorphisms affecting the function of the enzyme. In this case-control work, 11 cases of severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity in patients who did not carry any of the four variants mentioned above were matched with 22 controls, who did not develop toxicity and did not carry any variant. The DPYD exome was sequenced (Sanger) in search of potentially pathogenic mutations. DPYD rs367619008 (c.187 A > G, p.Lys63Glu), rs200643089 (c.2324 T > G, p.Leu775Trp) and rs76387818 (c.1084G > A, p.Val362Ile) increased the percentage of explained toxicities to 38-48%. Moreover, there was an intronic variant considered potentially pathogenic: rs944174134 (c.322-63G > A). Further studies are needed to confirm its clinical relevance. The remaining variants were considered non-pathogenic.

Consensus of experts from the Spanish Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics Society and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology for the genotyping of DPYD in cancer patients who are candidates for treatment with fluoropyrimidines

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) and oral fluoropyrimidines, such as capecitabine, are widely used in the treatment of cancer, especially gastrointestinal tumors and breast cancer, but their administration can produce serious and even lethal toxicity. This toxicity is often related to the partial or complete deficiency of the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) enzyme, which causes a reduction in clearance and a longer half-life of 5-FU. It is advisable to determine if a DPD deficiency exists before administering these drugs by genotyping DPYD gene polymorphisms. The objective of this consensus of experts, in which representatives from the Spanish Pharmacogenetics and Pharmacogenomics Society and the Spanish Society of Medical Oncology participated, is to establish clear recommendations for the implementation of genotype and/or phenotype testing for DPD deficiency in patients who are candidates to receive fluoropyrimidines. The genotyping of DPYD previous to treatment classifies individuals as normal, intermediate, or poor metabolizers. Normal metabolizers do not require changes in the initial dose, intermediate metabolizers should start treatment with fluoropyrimidines at doses reduced to 50%, and poor metabolizers are contraindicated for fluoropyrimidines.

Real-World Evaluation of Universal Germline Screening for Cancer Treatment-Relevant Pharmacogenes

The purpose of this study was to determine the frequency of clinically actionable treatment-relevant germline pharmacogenomic variants in patients with cancer and assess the real-world clinical utility of universal screening using whole-exome sequencing in this population. Cancer patients underwent research-grade germline whole-exome sequencing as a component of sequencing for somatic variants. Analysis in a clinical bioinformatics pipeline identified clinically actionable pharmacogenomic variants. Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium guidelines defined clinical actionability. We assessed clinical utility by reviewing electronic health records to determine the frequency of patients receiving pharmacogenomically actionable anti-cancer agents and associated outcomes. This observational study evaluated 291 patients with cancer. More than 90% carried any clinically relevant pharmacogenetic variant. At least one disease-relevant variant impacting anti-cancer agents was identified in 26.5% (77/291). Nine patients with toxicity-associated pharmacogenomic variants were treated with a relevant medication: seven UGT1A1 intermediate metabolizers were treated with irinotecan, one intermediate DPYD metabolizer was treated with 5-fluorouracil, and one TPMT poor metabolizer was treated with mercaptopurine. These individuals were more likely to experience treatment-associated toxicities than their wild-type counterparts (p = 0.0567). One UGT1A1 heterozygote died after a single dose of irinotecan due to irinotecan-related adverse effects. Identifying germline pharmacogenomic variants was feasible using whole-exome sequencing. Actionable pharmacogenetic variants are common and relevant to patients undergoing cancer treatment. Universal pharmacogenomic screening can be performed using whole-exome sequencing data originally obtained for quality control purposes and could be considered for patients who are candidates for irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil, capecitabine, and mercaptopurine.

Fluoropyrimidine-Induced Severe Toxicities Associated with Rare DPYD Polymorphisms: Case Series from Saudi Arabia and a Review of the Literature

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is the major enzyme in the catabolism of 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) and its prodrug capecitabine. We report cases from our institute with colorectal cancer who experienced severe toxicities to standard dose 5-FU based chemotherapy. DPYD gene sequencing revealed rare different polymorphisms that prompted dose adjustments of administered 5-FU and capecitabine. To our knowledge, this is the first case series looking at DPYD polymorphisms in the Saudi Arabian population.

The Road so Far in Colorectal Cancer Pharmacogenomics: Are We Closer to Individualised Treatment?

In recent decades, survival rates in colorectal cancer have improved greatly due to pharmacological treatment. However, many patients end up developing adverse drug reactions that can be severe or even life threatening, and that affect their quality of life. These remain a limitation, as they may force dose reduction or treatment discontinuation, diminishing treatment efficacy. From candidate gene approaches to genome-wide analysis, pharmacogenomic knowledge has advanced greatly, yet there is still huge and unexploited potential in the use of novel technologies such as next-generation sequencing strategies. This review summarises the road of colorectal cancer pharmacogenomics so far, presents considerations and directions to be taken for further works and discusses the path towards implementation into clinical practice.

New DPYD variants causing DPD deficiency in patients treated with fluoropyrimidine

PURPOSE

Several clinical guidelines recommend genetic screening of DPYD, including coverage of the variants c.1905 + 1G>A(DPYD*2A), c.1679T>G(DPYD*13), c.2846A>T, and c.1129-5923C>G, before initiating treatment with fluoropyrimidines. However, this screening is often inadequate at predicting the occurrence of severe fluoropyrimidine-induced toxicity in patients.

METHODS

Using a complementary approach combining whole DPYD exome sequencing and in silico and structural analysis, as well as phenotyping of DPD by measuring uracilemia (U), dihydrouracilemia (UH₂), and the UH₂/U ratio in plasma, we were able to characterize and interpret DPYD variants in 28 patients with severe fluoropyrimidine-induced toxicity after negative screening.

RESULTS

Twenty-five out of 28 patients (90%) had at least 1 variant in the DPYD coding sequence, and 42% of the variants (6/14) were classified as potentially deleterious by at least 2 of the following algorithms: SIFT, Poly-Phen-2, and DPYD varifier. We identified two very rare deleterious mutations, namely, c.2087G>A (p.R696H) and c.2324T>G (p.L775W). We were able to demonstrate partial DPD deficiency, as measured by the UH₂/U ratio in a patient carrying the variant p.L775W for the first time.

CONCLUSION

Whole exon sequencing of DPYD in patients with suspicion of partial DPD deficiency can help to identify rare or new variants that lead to enzyme inactivation. Combining different techniques can yield abundant information without increasing workload and cost burden, thus making it a useful approach for implementation in patient care.

Estimating the Effectiveness of DPYD Genotyping in Italian Individuals Suffering from Cancer Based on the Cost of Chemotherapy-Induced Toxicity

Fluoropyrimidines (FLs) have been widely used for more than 60 years against a range of solid tumors and still remains the cornerstone for the treatment of colorectal, gastric, and breast cancer. Here, we performed an economic analysis to estimate the cost of DPYD-guided toxicity management and the clinical benefit expressed as quality adjusted life years (QALYs) in a large group of 571 individuals of Italian origin suffering from cancer and treated with a fluoropyrimidines-based chemotherapy. Individuals suffering from cancer with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of cancer, who received a fluoropyrimidines-based treatment, were retrospectively genotyped in the DPYD gene. Effectiveness was measured as survival of individuals from chemotherapy, while study data on safety and efficacy as well as on resource utilization associated with each adverse drug reaction were used to measure costs to treat these adverse drug reactions. A generalized linear regression model was used to estimate cost differences for both study groups. DPYD extensive metabolizers (528 individuals) had greater effectiveness and lesser cost, representing a cost-saving option over DPYD intermediate and poor metabolizers (43 individuals) with mean QALYs of 4.18 (95%CI: 3.16-5.55) versus 3.02 (95%CI: 1.94-4.25), respectively. Our economic analysis showed that there are some indications for differences in survival between the two groups (p > 0.05), while the cost of DPYD extensive metabolizers was significantly lower (p < 0.01) compared with those belonging to the group of intermediate/poor metabolizers. These findings suggest that DPYD-guided fluoropyrimidines treatment represent a cost-saving choice for individuals suffering from cancer in the Italian healthcare setting.

Chemotherapy-Induced Neutropenia as a Prognostic and Predictive Marker of Outcomes in Solid-Tumor Patients

Chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) is one of the most common side effects seen in cancer patients. As an adverse event, it is deemed undesirable since it often constitutes a dose-limiting toxicity for cytotoxic agents leading to treatment delays and/or dose reductions. It is also associated with a financial cost component from diagnostic work-up and treatment of patients with chemotherapy-induced febrile neutropenia (CIFN). Neutropenia is commonly accompanied by a decrease in other hematopoietic lineages (anemia and/or thrombocytopenia). Dosing of chemotherapeutic agents is based on the severity of adverse effects seen. Depending on the degree of neutropenia, chemotherapeutic agents may be put on hold until count recovery and growth factor support might be added to allow for dosing as scheduled. However, neutropenia appears to be more than just an adverse event. While CIFN by itself constitutes an adverse event, the appearance of just CIN is not necessarily a marker of poor outcome. In fact, it rather appears to be a surrogate marker of response and/or survival in patients treated with cytotoxic regimens. Here we present evidence in different tumor types treated with different regimens on the role CIN plays as a marker for improved outcomes. If CIN is a surrogate prognostic and/or potentially predictive marker of response, chemotherapy doses may need to be escalated to achieve neutropenia. In addition, instead of reducing treatment doses for safety concerns, the addition of growth factor support and alternative dosing schemes may be strategies to consider.

Cytomegalovirus enterocolitis in a patient with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency after capecitabine treatment: A case report

INTRODUCTION

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) is widely used for cancer treatment. The reduced activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), the key enzyme in 5-FU inactivation, increases a patient's risk of developing severe 5-FU related toxicity. However, screening for DPD deficiency is rarely performed before 5-FU administration.

PRESENTATION OF CASE

Our patient was a 69-year-old man with rectal cancer (T2N1bM0 stage IIIA) who underwent laparoscopic low anterior resection. He developed severe neutropenia and diarrhea 15 days after the administration of capecitabine for adjuvant chemotherapy, and was admitted to our hospital. Four days after admission, he was transferred to the intensive care unit for sepsis. DPD protein screening revealed DPD deficiency. On day 27, massive melena suddenly appeared. He died of continual bleeding 41 days after admission. Pathological autopsy revealed cytomegalovirus enterocolitis.

DISCUSSION

The administration of 5-FU to patients with DPD deficiency is lethal. Genotypic and phenotypic assessments are reliable tests for DPD deficiency. A genetic study can effectively screen for DPD deficiency; however, its use has not been established in the national insurance system. Patients with DPD deficiency tend to develop severe neutropenia, so clinicians should pay attention to opportunistic infections such as cytomegalovirus enterocolitis.

CONCLUSION

Screening for DPD deficiency is necessary prior to 5-FU administration.

A cost analysis of upfront DPYD genotype-guided dose individualisation in fluoropyrimidine-based anticancer therapy

BACKGROUND

Fluoropyrimidine therapy including capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil can result in severe treatment-related toxicity in up to 30% of patients. Toxicity is often related to reduced activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, the main metabolic fluoropyrimidine enzyme, primarily caused by genetic DPYD polymorphisms. In a large prospective study, it was concluded that upfront DPYD-guided dose individualisation is able to improve safety of fluoropyrimidine-based therapy. In our current analysis, we evaluated whether this strategy is cost saving.

METHODS

A cost-minimisation analysis from a health-care payer perspective was performed as part of the prospective clinical trial (NCT02324452) in which patients prior to start of fluoropyrimidine-based therapy were screened for the DPYD variants DPYD*2A, c.2846A>T, c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A and received an initial dose reduction of 25% (c.2846A>T, c.1236G>A) or 50% (DPYD*2A, c.1679T>G). Data on treatment, toxicity, hospitalisation and other toxicity-related interventions were collected. The model compared prospective screening for these DPYD variants with no DPYD screening. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed.

RESULTS

Expected total costs of the screening strategy were €2599 per patient compared with €2650 for non-screening, resulting in a net cost saving of €51 per patient. Results of the probabilistic sensitivity and one-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the screening strategy was very likely to be cost saving or worst case cost-neutral.

CONCLUSIONS

Upfront DPYD-guided dose individualisation, improving patient safety, is cost saving or cost-neutral but is not expected to yield additional costs. These results endorse implementing DPYD screening before start of fluoropyrimidine treatment as standard of care.

Severe toxicity to capecitabine due to a new variant at a donor splicing site in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) gene

Severe, life-threatening adverse reactions to capecitabine sometimes occur in the treatment of solid tumors. Screening for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) deficiency is encouraged before start of treatment, but the genetic variants that are commonly analyzed often fail to explain toxicities seen in clinical practice. Here we describe the case of a 79-year-old Caucasian female with breast cancer who presented with life-threatening, rapidly increasing toxicity after 1 week of treatment with capecitabine and for whom routine genetic DPYD test resulted negative. DPYD exon sequencing found variant c.2242+1G>T at the donor splicing site of exon 19. This variant is responsible for skipping of exon 19 and subsequent generation of a non-functional DPYD enzyme. This variant has not been described previously but was found in three other members of the patient's family. With this case, we show that exon sequencing of DPYD in patients who experience marked toxicity to fluoropyrimidines and test negative for commonly evaluated variants can prove extremely useful for identifying new genetic variants and better explain adverse reactions causality.

[Dihydropyrimidine déhydrogenase (DPD) deficiency screening and securing of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapies: Update and recommendations of the French GPCO-Unicancer and RNPGx networks]

Fluoropyrimidines (FU) are still the most prescribed anticancer drugs for the treatment of solid cancers. However, fluoropyrimidines cause severe toxicities in 10 to 40% of patients and toxic deaths in 0.2 to 0.8% of patients, resulting in a real public health problem. The main origin of FU-related toxicities is a deficiency of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), the rate-limiting enzyme of 5-FU catabolism. DPD deficiency may be identified through pharmacogenetics testing including phenotyping (direct or indirect measurement of enzyme activity) or genotyping (detection of inactivating polymorphisms on the DPYD gene). Approximately 3 to 15% of patients exhibit a partial deficiency and 0.1 to 0.5% a complete DPD deficiency. Currently, there is no regulatory obligation for DPD deficiency screening in patients scheduled to receive a fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. Based on the levels of evidence from the literature data and considering current French practices, the Group of Clinical Pharmacology in Oncology (GPCO)-UNICANCER and the French Network of Pharmacogenetics (RNPGx) recommend the following: (1) to screen DPD deficiency before initiating any chemotherapy containing 5-FU or capecitabine; (2) to perform DPD phenotyping by measuring plasma uracil (U) concentrations (possibly associated with dihydrouracil/U ratio), and DPYD genotyping (variants *2A, *13, p.D949V, HapB3); (3) to reduce the initial FU dose (first cycle) according to DPD status, if needed, and further, to consider increasing the dose at subsequent cycles according to treatment tolerance. In France, 17 public laboratories currently undertake routine screening of DPD deficiency.

Implementation of Pharmacogenomics in Everyday Clinical Settings

Currently, germline pharmacogenomics (PGx) is successfully implemented within certain specialties in clinical care. With the integration of PGx in pharmacotherapy multiple stakeholders are involved, which are identified in this chapter. Clinically relevant pharmacogenes with their related PGx test are discussed, along with diagnostic test criteria to guide clinicians and policy makers in PGx test selection. The chapter further reviews the similarities and the differences between the guidelines of the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group and the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium which both support healthcare professionals in understanding PGx test results and help guiding pharmacotherapy by providing evidence-based dosing recommendations. Finally, clinical studies which provide scientific evidence and information on cost-effectiveness supporting clinical implementation of PGx in clinical care are discussed along with the remaining barriers for adoption of PGx testing by healthcare professionals.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase pharmacogenetics for predicting fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity in the randomised, phase III adjuvant TOSCA trial in high-risk colon cancer patients

Background:

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) catabolises ∼85% of the administered dose of fluoropyrimidines. Functional DPYD gene variants cause reduced/abrogated DPD activity. DPYD variants analysis may help for defining individual patients’ risk of fluoropyrimidine-related severe toxicity.

Methods:

The TOSCA Italian randomised trial enrolled colon cancer patients for 3 or 6 months of either FOLFOX-4 or XELOX adjuvant chemotherapy. In an ancillary pharmacogenetic study, 10 DPYD variants (*2A rs3918290 G>A, *13 rs55886062 T>G, rs67376798 A>T, *4 rs1801158 G>A, *5 rs1801159 A>G, *6 rs1801160 G>A, *9A rs1801265 T>C, rs2297595 A>G, rs17376848 T>C, and rs75017182 C>G), were retrospectively tested for associations with ⩾grade 3 fluoropyrimidine-related adverse events (FAEs). An association analysis and a time-to-toxicity (TTT) analysis were planned. To adjust for multiple testing, the Benjamini and Hochberg’s False Discovery Rate (FDR) procedure was used.

Results:

FAEs occurred in 194 out of 508 assessable patients (38.2%). In the association analysis, FAEs occurred more frequently in *6 rs1801160 A allele carriers (FDR=0.0083). At multivariate TTT analysis, significant associations were found for *6 rs1801160 A allele carriers (FDR<0.0001), *2A rs3918290 A allele carriers (FDR<0.0001), and rs2297595 GG genotype carriers (FDR=0.0014). Neutropenia was the most common FAEs (28.5%). *6 rs1801160 (FDR<0.0001), and *2A rs3918290 (FDR=0.0004) variant alleles were significantly associated with time to neutropenia.

Conclusions:

This study adds evidence on the role of DPYD pharmacogenetics for safety of patients undergoing fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy.

Use of exome sequencing to determine the full profile of genetic variants in the fluoropyrimidine pathway in colorectal cancer patients affected by severe toxicity

Aim: To identify genetic variants associated with capecitabine toxicity in fluoropyrimidine pathway genes using exome sequencing. Patients & methods: Exomes from eight capecitabine-treated patients with severe adverse reactions (grade >2), among a population of 319, were sequenced (Ion Proton). SNPs in genes classified as potentially damaging (Sorting Intolerant from Tolerant and Polymorphism Phenotyping v2) were tested for association with toxicity in a validation cohort of 319 capecitabine-treated patients. Results: A total of 17 nonsynonymous genetic variants were identified. Of these, five putative damaging SNPs in DPYD, ABCC4 and MTHFR were genotyped in the validation cohort. DPYD rs1801160 was associated with the risk of toxicity (p = 0.029) and MTHFR rs1801133 with delayed administration of chemotherapy due to toxicity (p = 0.047). Conclusion: Exome sequencing revealed two specific biomarkers of the risk of toxicity to capecitabine.

Improving safety of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy by individualizing treatment based on dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity - Ready for clinical practice?

Fluoropyrimidines remain the cornerstone of treatment for different types of cancer, and are used by an estimated two million patients annually. The toxicity associated with fluoropyrimidine therapy is substantial, however, and affects around 30% of the patients, with 0.5-1% suffering fatal toxicity. Activity of the main 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) metabolic enzyme, dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), is the key determinant of 5-FU pharmacology, and accounts for around 80% of 5-FU catabolism. There is a consistent relationship between DPD activity and 5-FU exposure on the one hand, and risk of severe and potentially lethal fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity on the other hand. Therefore, there is a sound rationale for individualizing treatment with fluoropyrimidines based on DPD status in order to improve patient safety. The field of individualized treatment with fluoropyrimidines is now rapidly developing. The main strategies that are available, are based on genotyping of the gene encoding DPD (DPYD) and measuring of pretreatment DPD phenotype. Clinical validity of additional approaches, including genotyping of MIR27A has also recently been demonstrated. Here, we critically review the evidence on clinical validity and utility of strategies available to clinicians to identify patients at risk of developing severe and potentially fatal toxicity as a result of DPD deficiency. We evaluate the advantages and limitations of these methods when used in clinical practice, and discuss for which strategies clinical implementation is currently justified based on the available evidence and, in addition, which additional data will be required before implementing other, as yet less developed strategies.