The Genotype for DPYD Risk Variants in Patients With Colorectal Cancer and the Related Toxicity Management Costs in Clinical Practice

Evaluation of early fluoropyrimidine toxicity in solid organ cancer patients: a retrospective observational study in Australia

BACKGROUND

Despite common global usage, fluoropyrimidine (FP; 5-flurouracil and capecitabine)-related chemotherapy toxicity is poorly reported in the literature, with serious toxicity ranging from 10% to 40% and early toxicity (within 60 days of exposure) quoted at 14%. Data reflecting the incidence of Grades 3-5 FP-related toxicity in Australian cancer patients is scant, despite the significant impact of toxicity on patients (hospitalisations, intensive care unit (ICU) admissions and even death).

AIMS

This retrospective audit evaluated Grades 3-5 toxicities in a contemporaneous cohort of 500 patients receiving FP chemotherapies within the Hunter-New England Local Health District from June 2020 to June 2022. Data were extracted from public hospital records and oncology-specific e-records to determine rates of toxicity and associated hospitalisations, intensive care admissions and deaths that occurred within 60 days of first exposure to FP chemotherapy-containing regimens.

RESULTS

One hundred and fifty incidents of Grades 3-4 toxicity in the first 60 days led to 87 patients presenting to hospital (87/500, 17.4%). The most common serious toxicities were diarrhoea (39.3%), nausea and vomiting (22.7%) and febrile neutropaenia (10%). Four patients were admitted to the ICU, and four patients died of toxicity. Within the first 60 days, 22.2% of patients required treatment delays, 21.4% required dose reductions, and 7.8% of patients ceased treatment because of toxicities.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Our experience reflects international reports and is likely generalisable to the Australian population. These data are a basis to understand the potential benefits of precision medicine strategies such as pharmacogenomic screening to improve patient tolerability and the cost-effectiveness of FP chemotherapy prescribing.

Genomic Profiling for Predictive Treatment Strategies in Fibrotic Interstitial Lung Disease

Idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis (IPF) has traditionally been considered the archetype of progressive fibrotic interstitial lung diseases (f-ILDs), but several other f-ILDs can also manifest a progressive phenotype. Integrating genomic signatures into clinical practice for f-ILD patients may help to identify patients predisposed to a progressive phenotype. In addition to the risk of progressive pulmonary fibrosis, there is a growing body of literature examining how pharmacogenomics influences treatment response, particularly regarding the efficacy and safety profiles of antifibrotic and immunomodulatory agents. In this narrative review, we discuss current studies in IPF and other forms of pulmonary fibrosis, including systemic autoimmune disorders associated ILDs, sarcoidosis and hypersensitivity pneumonitis. We also provide insights into the future direction of research in this complex field.

Implementation of pre-emptive testing of a pharmacogenomic panel in clinical practice: Where do we stand?

Adverse drug reactions (ADRs) account for a large proportion of hospitalizations among adults and are more common in multimorbid patients, worsening clinical outcomes and burdening healthcare resources. Over the past decade, pharmacogenomics has been developed as a practical tool for optimizing treatment outcomes by mitigating the risk of ADRs. Some single-gene reactive tests are already used in clinical practice, including the DPYD test for fluoropyrimidines, which demonstrates how integrating pharmacogenomic data into routine care can improve patient safety in a cost-effective manner. The evolution from reactive single-gene testing to comprehensive pre-emptive genotyping panels holds great potential for refining drug prescribing practices. Several implementation projects have been conducted to test the feasibility of applying different genetic panels in clinical practice. Recently, the results of a large prospective randomized trial in Europe (the PREPARE study by Ubiquitous Pharmacogenomics consortium) have provided the first evidence that prospective application of a pre-emptive pharmacogenomic test panel in clinical practice, in seven European healthcare systems, is feasible and yielded a 30% reduction in the risk of developing clinically relevant toxicities. Nevertheless, some important questions remain unanswered and will hopefully be addressed by future dedicated studies. These issues include the cost-effectiveness of applying a pre-emptive genotyping panel, the role of multiple co-medications, the transferability of currently tested pharmacogenetic guidelines among patients of non-European origin and the impact of rare pharmacogenetic variants that are not detected by currently used genotyping approaches.

Cost-utility analysis and cross-country comparison of pharmacogenomics-guided treatment in colorectal cancer patients participating in the U-PGx PREPARE study

OBJECTIVES

A cost-utility analysis was conducted to evaluate pharmacogenomic (PGx)-guided treatment compared to the standard-of-care intervention among patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer (CRC) in Italy.

METHODS

Data derived from a prospective, open-label, block randomized clinical trial, as a part of the largest PGx study worldwide (355 patients in both arms) were used. Mortality was used as the primary health outcome to estimate life years (LYs) gained in treatment arms within a survival analysis context. PGx-guided treatment was based on established drug-gene interactions between capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil and irinotecan with DPYD and/or UGT1A1 genomic variants. Utility values for the calculation of Quality Adjusted Life Year (QALY) was based on Visual Analog Scale (VAS) score. Missing data were imputed via the Multiple Imputation method and linear interpolation, when possible, while censored cost data were corrected via the Replace-From-The-Right algorithm. The Incremental Cost-Effectiveness Ratio (ICER) was calculated for QALYs. Raw data were bootstrapped 5000 times in order to produce 95% Confidence Intervals based on non-parametric percentile method and to construct a cost-effectiveness acceptability curve. Cost differences for study groups were investigated via a generalized linear regression model analysis. Total therapy cost per patient reflected all resources expended in the management of any adverse events, including medications, diagnostics tests, devices, surgeries, the utilization of intensive care units, and wards.

RESULTS

The total cost of the study arm was estimated at €380 (∼ US$416; 95%CI: 195-596) compared to €565 (∼ US$655; 95%CI: 340-724) of control arm while the mean survival in study arm was estimated at 1.58 (+0.25) LYs vs 1.50 (+0.26) (Log Rank test, X2 = 4.219, df=1, p-value=0.04). No statistically significant difference was found in QALYs. ICER was estimated at €13418 (∼ US$14695) per QALY, while the acceptability curve indicated that when the willingness-to-pay was under €5000 (∼ US$5476), the probability of PGx being cost-effective overcame 70%. The most frequent adverse drug event in both groups was neutropenia of severity grade 3 and 4, accounting for 82.6% of total events in the study arm and 65.0% in the control arm. Apart from study arm, smoking status, Body-Mass-Index and Cumulative Actionability were also significant predictors of total cost. Subgroup analysis conducted in actionable patients (7.9% of total patients) indicated that PGx-guided treatment was a dominant option over its comparator with a probability greater than 92%. In addition, a critical literature review was conducted, and these findings are in line with those reported in other European countries.

CONCLUSION

PGx-guided treatment strategy may represent a cost-saving option compared to the existing conventional therapeutic approach for colorectal cancer patient management in the National Health Service of Italy.

Response to the FDA Decision Regarding DPYD Testing Prior to Fluoropyrimidine Chemotherapy

Fluoropyrimidine (FP) chemotherapy is associated with severe, life-threatening toxicities, particularly among patients who carry deleterious germline variants in the DPYD gene. Pretreatment DPYD testing is standard of care throughout most of Europe; however, it has not been recommended in clinical practice guidelines in the United States. Due to increased risk of severe toxicity, a Citizen's Petition asked the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to update language in FP drug labels to recommend DPYD testing as part of a boxed warning and recommend FP dose reduction in patients carrying deleterious germline variants. In response, the FDA updated the capecitabine package insert to inform patients about the toxicity risk and test availability and consider DPYD testing. However, the FDA did not include a testing recommendation or requirement, or a boxed warning. Additionally, the FDA did not recommend FP dose adjustment in DPYD variant carriers. This review provides a critical assessment of the DPYD-FP pharmacogenetic association using the FDA's previously published Pharmacogenetic Pyramid, demonstrating that the evidence is compelling for recommending DPYD testing prior to FP treatment. Additionally, the FDA's stated concerns about recommending DPYD testing and DPYD-guided FP dose adjustment are addressed and discussed in the context of the FDA's other genetic testing and dose adjustment recommendations. We call on the FDA to follow our European counterparts in recommending DPYD testing and genotype-based dose adjustment to ensure patients with cancer receive safe and effective FP chemotherapy.

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.

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.

Ten-year experience with pharmacogenetic testing for DPYD in a national cancer center in Italy: Lessons learned on the path to implementation

Background: Awareness about the importance of implementing DPYD pharmacogenetics in clinical practice to prevent severe side effects related to the use of fluoropyrimidines has been raised over the years. Since 2012 at the National Cancer Institute, CRO-Aviano (Italy), a diagnostic DPYD genotyping service was set up. Purpose: This study aims to describe the evolution of DPYD diagnostic activity at our center over the last 10 years as a case example of a successful introduction of pharmacogenetic testing in clinical practice. Methods: Data related to the diagnostic activity of in-and out-patients referred to our service between January 2012 and December 2022 were retrieved from the hospital database. Results: DPYD diagnostic activity at our center has greatly evolved over the years, shifting gradually from a post-toxicity to a pre-treatment approach. Development of pharmacogenetic guidelines by national and international consortia, genotyping, and IT technology evolution have impacted DPYD testing uptake in the clinics. Our participation in a large prospective implementation study (Ubiquitous Pharmacogenomics) increased health practitioners' and patients' awareness of pharmacogenetic matters and provided additional standardized infrastructures for genotyping and reporting. Nationwide test reimbursement together with recommendations by regulatory agencies in Europe and Italy in 2020 definitely changed the clinical practice guidelines of fluoropyrimidines prescription. A dramatic increase in the number of pre-treatment DPYD genotyping and in the coverage of new fluoropyrimidine prescriptions was noticed by the last year of observation (2022). Conclusion: The long path to a successful DPYD testing implementation in the clinical practice of a National Cancer Center in Italy demonstrated that the development of pharmacogenetic guidelines and genotyping infrastructure standardization as well as capillary training and education activity for all the potential stakeholders are fundamental. However, only national health politics of test reimbursement and clear recommendations by drug regulatory agencies will definitely move the field forward.

DPYD genotyping and predicting fluoropyrimidine toxicity: where do we stand?

Fluoropyrimidines (FPs) are antineoplastic drugs widely used in the treatment of various solid tumors. Nearly 30% of patients treated with FP chemotherapy experience severe FP-related toxicity, and in some cases, toxicity can be fatal. Patients with reduced activity of DPD, the main enzyme responsible for the breakdown of FP, are at an increased risk of experiencing severe FP-related toxicity. While European regulatory agencies and clinical societies recommend pre-treatment DPD deficiency screening for patients starting treatment with FPs, this is not the case with American ones. Pharmacogenomic guidelines issued by several pharmacogenetic organizations worldwide recommend testing four DPD gene (DPYD) risk variants, but these can predict only a proportion of toxicity cases. New evidence on additional common DPYD polymorphisms, as well as identification and functional characterization of rare DPYD variants, could partially address the missing heritability of DPD deficiency and FP-related toxicity.

Assessment of the Clinical Utility of Pretreatment DPYD Testing for Patients Receiving Fluoropyrimidine Chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Patients who carry pathogenic variants in DPYD have higher systemic fluoropyrimidine (FP) concentrations and greater risk of severe and fatal FP toxicity. Pretreatment DPYD testing and DPYD-guided FP dosing to reduce toxicity and health care costs is recommended by European clinical oncology guidelines and has been adopted across Europe, but has not been recommended or adopted in the United States. The cochairs of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines for colon cancer treatment explained their concerns with recommending pretreatment DPYD testing, particularly the risk that reduced FP doses in DPYD carriers may reduce treatment efficacy.

METHODS

This special article uses previously published frameworks for assessing the clinical utility of cancer biomarker tests, including for germline indicators of toxicity risk, to assess the clinical utility of pretreatment DPYD testing, with a particular focus on the risk of reducing treatment efficacy.

RESULTS

There is no direct evidence of efficacy reduction, and the available indirect evidence demonstrates that DPYD-guided FP dosing results in similar systemic FP exposure and toxicity compared with standard dosing in noncarriers, and is well calibrated to the maximum tolerated dose, strongly suggesting there is minimal risk of efficacy reduction.

CONCLUSION

This article should serve as a call to action for clinicians and clinical guidelines committees in the United States to re-evaluate the clinical utility of pretreatment DPYD testing. If clinical utility has not been demonstrated, further dialogue is needed to clarify what additional evidence is needed and which of the available study designs, also described within this article, would be appropriate. Clinical guideline recommendations for pretreatment DPYD testing would increase clinical adoption and ensure that all patients receive maximally safe and effective FP treatment.

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.

Predicting drug response and toxicity in metastatic colorectal cancer: the role of germline markers

INTRODUCTION

Despite the introduction of targeted agents leading to therapeutic advances, clinical management of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) is still challenged by significant interindividual variability in treatment outcomes, both in terms of toxicity and therapy efficacy. The study of germline genetic variants could help to personalize and optimize therapeutic approaches in mCRC.

AREAS COVERED

A systematic review of pharmacogenetic studies in mCRC patients published on PubMed between 2011 and 2021, evaluating the role of germline variants as predictive markers of toxicity and efficacy of drugs currently approved for treatment of mCRC, was perfomed.

EXPERT OPINION

Despite the large amount of pharmacogenetic data published to date, only a few genetic markers (i.e., DPYD and UGT1A1 variants) reached the clinical practice, mainly to prevent the toxic effects of chemotherapy. The large heterogeneity of available studies represents the major limitation in comparing results and identifying potential markers for clinical use, the role of which remains exploratory in most cases. However, the available published findings are an important starting point for future investigations. They highlighted new promising pharmacogenetic markers within the network of inflammatory and immune response signaling. In addition, the emerging role of previously overlooked rare variants has been pointed out.

Testing for Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Deficiency to Individualize 5-Fluorouracil Therapy

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.

Cost-Effectiveness of Pharmacogenomics-Guided Prescribing to Prevent Gene-Drug-Related Deaths: A Decision-Analytic Model

Aim: Prospective studies support the clinical impact of pharmacogenomics (PGx)-guided prescribing to reduce severe and potentially fatal adverse effects. Drug-gene interactions (DGIs) preventing potential drug-related deaths have been categorized as “essential” by the Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG). The collective clinical impact and cost-effectiveness of this sub-set is yet undetermined. Therefore, we aim to assess impact and cost-effectiveness of “essential” PGx tests for prevention of gene-drug-related deaths, when adopted nation-wide.

Methods: We used a decision-analytic model to quantify the number and cost per gene-drug-related death prevented, from a 1-year Dutch healthcare perspective. The modelled intervention is a single gene PGx-test for CYP2C19, DPYD, TPMT or UGT1A1 to guide prescribing based on the DPWG recommendations among patients in the Netherlands initiating interacting drugs (clopidogrel, capecitabine, systemic fluorouracil, azathioprine, mercaptopurine, tioguanine or irinotecan).

Results: For 148,128 patients initiating one of seven drugs in a given year, costs for PGx-testing, interpretation, and drugs would increase by €21.4 million. Of these drug initiators, 35,762 (24.1%) would require an alternative dose or drug. PGx-guided prescribing would relatively reduce gene-drug related mortality by 10.6% (range per DGI: 8.1–14.5%) and prevent 419 (0.3% of initiators) deaths a year. Cost-effectiveness is estimated at €51,000 per prevented gene-drug-related death (range per DGI: €-752,000–€633,000).

Conclusion: Adoption of PGx-guided prescribing for “essential” DGIs potentially saves the lives of 0.3% of drug initiators, at reasonable costs.

Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Deficiency and Implementation of Upfront DPYD Genotyping

Fluoropyrimidines (FP; 5-fluorouracil, capecitabine, and tegafur) are a commonly prescribed class of antimetabolite chemotherapies, used for various solid organ malignancies in over 2 million patients globally per annum. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), encoded by the DPYD gene, is the critical enzyme implicated in FP metabolism. DPYD variant genotypes can result in decreased DPD production, leading to the development of severe toxicities resulting in hospitalization, intensive care admission, and even death. Management of toxicity incurs financial burden on both patients and healthcare systems alike. Upfront DPYD genotyping to identify variant carriers allows an opportunity to identify patients who are at high risk to suffer from serious toxicities and allow prospective dose adjustment of FP treatment. This approach has been shown to reduce patient morbidity, as well as improve the cost-effectiveness of managing FP treatment. Upfront DPYD genotyping has been recently endorsed by several countries in Europe and the United Kingdom. This review summarizes current knowledge about DPD deficiency and upfront DPYD genotyping, including clinical and cost-effectiveness outcomes, with the intent of supporting implementation of an upfront DPYD genotyping service with individualized dose-personalization.

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.

Survey of US Medical Oncologists' Practices and Beliefs Regarding DPYD Testing Before Fluoropyrimidine Chemotherapy

PURPOSE

Patients who carry reduced-activity DPYD polymorphisms have increased fluoropyrimidine (FP) toxicity risk. Although pretreatment DPYD testing is recommended throughout most of Europe, it is not recommended in the United States, and adoption has been limited. The objective of this survey was to describe the current practice in the United States regarding pretreatment DPYD testing and understand the factors deterring oncologists from ordering testing.

METHODS

Survey invitations were e-mailed to 325 medical oncologists practicing in the United States who are members of the SWOG Cancer Research Network Gastrointestinal Cancer, Breast Cancer, or Early Therapeutics Committees. Descriptive statistics were used to evaluate survey responses.

RESULTS

Responses were collected from 59 (18.2%) US medical oncologists, of whom 98% strongly or somewhat agree that patients with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency have increased toxicity risk and 96% would modify FP dosing for a patient with known DPD deficiency. However, only 32% strongly or somewhat agree that pretreatment DPYD testing is useful to inform FP treatment, 20% have ever ordered pretreatment testing, and 3% order testing for at least 10% of their FP-treated patients. The most important factors that deter oncologists from ordering testing were low prevalence of DPD deficiency (54%) and lack of clinical practice guideline recommendations (48%).

CONCLUSION

Clinical adoption of pretreatment DPYD testing is extremely limited in the United States. Utilization may be substantially increased by inclusion in the oncology clinical practice guideline recommendations, coverage through health insurance, and potentially education of medical oncologists regarding available treatment modification guidelines.

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.

Pathogenic DPYD Variants and Treatment-Related Mortality in Patients Receiving Fluoropyrimidine Chemotherapy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

Pathogenic variants of the DPYD gene are strongly associated with grade ≥3 toxicity during fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate the risk of treatment-related death associated with DPYD gene variants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We searched for reports published prior to September 17, 2020, that described patients receiving standard-dose fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy (5-fluorouracil or capecitabine) who had baseline testing for at least one of four pathogenic DPYD variants (c.1129-5923C>G [HapB3], c.1679T>G [*13], c.1905+1G>A [*2A], and c.2846A>T) and were assessed for toxicity. Two reviewers assessed studies for inclusion and extracted study-level data. The primary outcome was the relative risk of treatment-related mortality for DPYD variant carriers versus noncarriers; we performed data synthesis using a Mantel-Haenszel fixed effects model.

RESULTS

Of the 2,923 references screened, 35 studies involving 13,929 patients were included. DPYD variants (heterozygous or homozygous) were identified in 566 patients (4.1%). There were 14 treatment-related deaths in 13,363 patients without identified DPYD variants (treatment-related mortality, 0.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.1-0.2) and 13 treatment-related deaths in 566 patients with any of the four DPYD variants (treatment-related mortality, 2.3%; 95% CI, 1.3%-3.9%). Carriers of pathogenic DPYD gene variants had a 25.6 times increased risk of treatment-related death (95% CI, 12.1-53.9; p < .001). After excluding carriers of the more common but less deleterious c.1129-5923C>G variant, carriers of c.1679T>G, c.1905+1G>A, and/or c.2846A>T had treatment-related mortality of 3.7%.

CONCLUSION

Patients with pathogenic DPYD gene variants who receive standard-dose fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy have greatly increased risk for treatment-related death.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The syndrome of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency is an uncommon but well-described cause of severe toxicity related to fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy agents (5-fluorouracil and capecitabine). Patients with latent DPD deficiency can be identified preemptively with genotyping of the DPYD gene, or with measurement of the plasma uracil concentration. In this systematic review and meta-analysis, the authors study the rare outcome of treatment-related death after fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. DPYD gene variants associated with DPD deficiency were linked to a 25.6 times increased risk of fluoropyrimidine-related mortality. These findings support the clinical utility of DPYD genotyping as a screening test for DPD deficiency.

PriME-PGx: La Princesa University Hospital Multidisciplinary Initiative for the Implementation of Pharmacogenetics

The implementation of clinical pharmacogenetics in daily practice is limited for various reasons. Today, however, it is a discipline in full expansion. Accordingly, in the recent times, several initiatives promoted its implementation, mainly in the United States but also in Europe. In this document, the genotyping results since the establishment of our Pharmacogenetics Unit in 2006 are described, as well as the historical implementation process that was carried out since then. Finally, this progress justified the constitution of La Princesa University Hospital Multidisciplinary Initiative for the Implementation of Pharmacogenetics (PriME-PGx), promoted by the Clinical Pharmacology Department of Hospital Universitario de La Princesa (Madrid, Spain). Here, we present the initiative along with the two first ongoing projects: the PROFILE project, which promotes modernization of pharmacogenetic reporting (i.e., from classic gene-drug pair reporting to complete pharmacogenetic reporting or the creation of pharmacogenetic profiles specific to the Hospital’s departments) and the GENOTRIAL project, which promotes the communication of relevant pharmacogenetic findings to any healthy volunteer participating in any bioequivalence clinical trial at the Clinical Trials Unit of Hospital Universitario de La Princesa (UECHUP).

Patients carrying DPYD variant alleles have increased risk of severe toxicity and related treatment modifications during fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy

Aim: To evaluate toxicity risk in carriers of four DPYD variants using an institutional genetic repository. Materials & methods: Of over 65,000 patients in the repository, 582 were evaluated for the primary composite end point of grade 3 or higher toxicity or treatment modification due to toxicity. Results: The primary end point was more common in DPYD variant carriers (36.5 vs 18.1%, adjusted odds ratio 2.42, 95% CI: 1.05-5.55, p = 0.04), and in patients with decreased DPD activity (≤1 vs 2) (75.6 vs 17.0%, adjusted odds ratio 16.31, 95% CI: 2.64-100.68, p = 0.003). Conclusion: Patients carrying any of the four DPYD variants are at increased risk of severe toxicity or subsequent treatment modifications, suggesting such patients may benefit from genotype-informed treatment.

[How to manage polypharmacia?]

Pharmacogenomics (PGx) is a key component of personalized medicine to improve clinical outcome of drug therapy and/or to avoid adverse drug reactions. Major efforts are currently spent internationally to implement PGx diagnostics into clinical practice. Evidence-based recommendations for dose-adjusted treatment which are established by international expert groups covering clinical and pharmacological expertise are publicly available. Clinical relevant examples for PGx diagnostics such as genetic testing for dihydropyrimidin-dehydrogenase and thiopurin-S-methyltransferase, as well as for various cytochrome P450 enzymes are summarized to promote the clinical implementation process of PGx in Germany.

Pharmacogenomic Assessment of Patients with Colorectal Cancer and Potential Treatments

Evolving intensiveness of colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment, including chemotherapeutics and targeted agents associations, in adjuvant and metastatic CRC (MCRC) settings, increased overall survival (OS) with individual variability of toxicity. Pharmacogenomic guidelines recommended pre-treatment identification of at-risk patients suggesting dose adjustment of fluoropyrimidines based on dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD), and irinotecan on UDP glucuronosyl-transferase 1 family polypeptide A1 (UGT1A1) genetic variants, but they are poorly applied in clinical practice. This review highlighted clinically validated pharmacogenetic markers, to underline the need of their implementation in the multidisciplinary molecular board for individual CRC patients in clinical practice. Five clinically relevant DPYD variants with different prevalence impair enzymatic effectiveness and significantly increase toxicity: c.1236 G>A (c.1129–5923 C>G, HapB3), 4.1–4.8%; c.1679 T>G (DPYD*13), c.1905+1G>A (DPYD*2A), c.2846 A>T, c.2194 A>T (DPYD*6) 1% each. c.1679T>G and c.1905+1G>A are most deleterious on DPD effectiveness, moderately reduced in c.1236/HapB3 and c.2846A>T. Cumulatively, these variants explain approximately half of the estimated 10–15% fluoropyrimidine-related gastrointestinal and hematological toxicities due to DPD. Prevalent UGT1A1 gene [TA]₇TAA promoter allelic variant UGT1A1*28, characterized by an extra TA repeat, is associated with low transcriptional and reduced enzymatic effectiveness, decreased SN38 active irinotecan metabolite glucuronidation, vs wild-type UGT1A1*1 [A(TA)6TAA]. Homozygote UGT1A1*28 alleles patients are exposed to higher hematological and gastrointestinal toxicities, even more than heterozygote, at >150 mg/m² dose. Dose reduction is recommended for homozygote variant. Wild-type UGT1A1*28 alleles patients could tolerate increased doses, potentially affecting favorable outcomes. Implementation of up-front evaluation of the five validated DPYD variants and UGT1A1*28 in the multidisciplinary molecular tumor board, also including CRC genetic characterization, addresses potential treatments with fluoropyrimidines and irinotecan associations at proper doses and schedules, particularly for early CRC, MCRC patients fit for intensive regimens or unfit for conventional regimens, requiring treatment modulations, and also for patients who experience severe, unexpected toxicities. Integration of individual evaluation of toxicity syndromes (TS), specifically limiting TS (LTS), an innovative indicator of toxicity burden in individual patients, may be useful to better evaluate relationships between pharmacogenomic analyses with safety profiles and clinical outcomes.

Germline and Somatic Pharmacogenomics to Refine Rectal Cancer Patients Selection for Neo-Adjuvant Chemoradiotherapy

Neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) followed by radical surgery is the standard of care for patients with Locally Advanced Rectal Cancer (LARC). Current selection for nCRT is based on clinical criteria regardless of any molecular marker. Pharmacogenomics may be a useful strategy to personalize and optimize nCRT in LARC. This review aims to summarize the most recent and relevant findings about the role of germline and somatic pharmacogenomics in the prediction of nCRT outcome in patients with LARC, discussing the state of the art of their application in the clinical practice. A systematic literature search of the PubMed database was completed to identify relevant English-language papers published up to January 2020. The chemotherapeutic backbone of nCRT is represented by fluoropyrimidines, mainly metabolized by DPD (Dihydro-Pyrimidine Dehydrogenase, DPYD). The clinical impact of testing DPYD*2A, DPYD*13, c.2846A > T and c.1236G > A-HapB3 before a fluoropyrimidines administration to increase treatment safety is widely acknowledged. Other relevant target genes are TYMS (Thymidylate Synthase) and MTHFR (Methylene-Tetrahydro-Folate Reductase), whose polymorphisms were mainly studied as potential markers of treatment efficacy in LARC. A pivotal role of a TYMS polymorphism in the gene promoter region (rs34743033) was reported and was pioneeringly used to guide nCRT treatment in a phase II study. The pharmacogenomic analysis of other pathways mostly involved in the cellular response to radiation damage, as the DNA repair and the activation of the inflammatory cascade, provided less consistent results. A high rate of somatic mutation in genes belonging to PI3K (Phosphatidyl-Inositol 3-Kinase) and MAPK (Mitogen-Activated Protein Kinase) pathways, as BRAF (V-raf murine sarcoma viral oncogene homolog B1), KRAS (Kirsten Rat Sarcoma viral oncogene homolog), NRAS (Neuroblastoma RAS viral (v-ras) oncogene homolog), PIK3CA (Phosphatidyl-Inositol-4,5-bisphosphate 3-Kinase, Catalytic Subunit Alpha), as well as TP53 (Tumor Protein 53) was reported in LARC. Their pharmacogenomic role, already defined in colorectal cancer, is under investigation in LARC with promising results concerning specific somatic mutations in KRAS and TP53, as predictors of tumor response and prognosis. The availability of circulating tumor DNA in plasma may also represent an opportunity to monitor somatic mutations in course of therapy.

TAS-102 in gastric cancer: Development and perspectives of a new biochemically modulated fluroropyrimidine drug combination

TAS-102 is a preconstituted drug combination comprising an oral fluoropyrimidine (trifluridine, TFT) and a potent inhibitor of thymidine phosphorylase (tipiracil hydrochloride, TPI). TFT/TPI has recently received Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval also for the treatment of gastric cancer after at least two lines of chemotherapy. The approval was based on a large phase 3 trial (TAGS), in which TAS-102 showed a 31 % decrease in the risk of death compared with placebo. Here, we review the pharmacological properties, clinical development and potential future directions of TAS-102 in gastric cancer.

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.

FARMAPRICE: A Pharmacogenetic Clinical Decision Support System for Precise and Cost-Effective Therapy

Pharmacogenetic (PGx) guidelines for the precise dosing and selection of drugs remain poorly implemented in current clinical practice. Among the barriers to the implementation process is the lack of clinical decision support system (CDSS) tools to aid health providers in managing PGx information in the clinical context. The present study aimed to describe the first Italian endeavor to develop a PGx CDSS, called FARMAPRICE. FARMAPRICE prototype was conceived for integration of patient molecular data into the clinical prescription process in the Italian Centro di Riferimento Oncologico (CRO)-Aviano Hospital. It was developed through a coordinated partnership between two high-tech companies active in the computerization of the Italian healthcare system. Introducing FARMAPRICE into the clinical setting can aid physicians in prescribing the most efficacious and cost-effective pharmacological therapy available.

The use of pharmacogenetics to increase the safety of colorectal cancer patients treated with fluoropyrimidines

Fluoropyrimidines (FP) are given in the combination treatment of the advanced disease or as monotherapy in the neo-adjuvant and adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancerand other solid tumors including breast, head and neck and gastric cancer. FP present a narrow therapeutic index with 10 to 26% of patients experiencing acute severe or life-threatening toxicity. With the high number of patients receiving FP-based therapies, and the significant effects of toxicities on their quality of life, the prevention of FP-related adverse events is of major clinical interest. Host genetic variants in the rate limiting enzyme dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) gene are related to the occurrence of extremely severe, early onset toxicity in FP treated patients. The pre-treatment diagnostic test of 4 DPYD genetic polymorphisms is suggested by the currently available pharmacogenetic guidelines. Several prospective implementation projects are ongoing to support the introduction of up-front genotyping of the patients in clinical practice. Multiple pharmacogenetic studies tried to assess the predictive role of other polymorphisms in genes involved in the FP pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamic pathways, TYMS and MTHFR, but no additional clinically validated genetic markers of toxicity are available to date. The development of next-generation sequencing platforms opens new possibilities to highlight previously unreported genetic markers. Moreover, the investigation of the genetic variation in the patients immunological system, a pivotal target in cancer treatment, could bring notable advances in the field. This review will describe the most recent literature on the use of pharmacogenetics to increase the safety of a treatment based on FP administration in colorectal cancer patients.