Aprepitant inhibits cyclophosphamide bioactivation and thiotepa metabolism

Naringin prevents cyclophosphamide-induced hepatotoxicity in rats by attenuating oxidative stress, fibrosis, and inflammation

Cyclophosphamide (CYCP), a synthetic alkylating antineoplastic, disrupts both cancerous and non-cancerous cells to cause cancer regression and multi organotoxicity respectively. CYCP-induced hepatotoxicity is rare but possible. Evidence has shown that naringin has several beneficial potentials against oxidative stress, inflammation, and fibrosis. This study examined the chemoprotective potentials of naringin on exited radical scavenging, hepatic integrity, oxidative stress, fibrosis, and inflammation in CYCP-mediated hepatotoxicity. Rats were pre-treated orally by gavage for fourteen consecutive days with three doses (50, 100, and 200 mg/kg) of naringin before single CYCP (200 mg/kg, i.p.) administration. Subsequently, the rats were euthanized; blood and liver were removed, and assessed for serum and hepatic enzymes, oxidative stress, inflammation, and gene expression dynamics. Naringin concentrations required for 50% scavenging hydroxyl radical and 2,2'-azinobis-(3-ethylbenzothiazoline-6-sulphonic acid) radical cation were 0.32 mg/mL and 0.39 mg/mL, respectively. Pretreatment with naringin significantly (p < 0.05) abolish CYCP-induced changes in the activities of serum and hepatic ALT, AST, GGT, ALP, and LDH. Pretreatment with naringin remarkably (p < 0.05) reversed CYCP-mediated increases in hepatic levels of malondialdehyde, hydroperoxide, and nitric oxide; reverse CYCP-induced decreases in the hepatic glutathione levels, activities of catalase, glutathione peroxidase, and glutathione reductase; and also attenuated CYCP-induced upregulation of expression of hepatic chemokine (C-C motif) ligand 2 (CCL2), interferon alpha1 (IFN-α1), interleukine-1β, interleukine-1 receptor, and transforming growth factor beta 1 (TGF-β1). Taken together, different doses of naringin can prevent CYCP-induced oxidants generation, hepatocytes dysfunctions, oxidative stress as well as inflammatory perturbations in rats when pre-administered for as few as 14 days.

Cyclophosphamide modulated the foreign body inflammatory reaction in tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus)

In order to understand events and mechanisms present in the pathophysiology of tilapia's chronic inflammation and based on the immunomodulatory activity attributed to cyclophosphamide which is widely used to suppress immune responses in human medicine, the present study investigated the effects of cyclophosphamide (CYP) treatment on the modulation of foreign body inflammatory reaction in Nile tilapia (Oreochromis niloticus) with round glass coverslip implanted in the subcutaneous tissue (9 mm of diameter). Forty tilapia (151 ± 10,2 g) were randomly distributed in 5 aquariums (n = 8) with a capacity of 250 L of water each, to compose two treatments (sampled 3 and 6 days post-implantation): implanted/untreated (control) and implanted/treated with 200 mg of CYP kg^-1 of b.w., through i.p. route. A fifth group (n = 8) was sampled without any stimulus (naive) to obtain reference values. CYP-treated tilapia showed decrease in macrophage accumulation, giant cell formation and Langhans cells on the glass coverslip when compared to control fish. The treatment with CYP resulted in decrease of leukocyte and thrombocyte counts. Decrease in alpha-2-macroglobulin, ceruloplasmin, albumin and transferrin levels, as well as increase in haptoglobin, complement C3 and apolipoprotein A1 were observed in tilapias during foreign body inflammation. Blood levels of complement C3, alpha-2-macroglobulin, ceruloplasmin and transferrin were modulated by treatment with CYP. Therefore, the treatment with 200 mg of CYP kg^-1 of b.w. in tilapia resulted in an anti-inflammatory effect by suppressing the dynamics between leukocytes in the bloodstream and macrophage accumulation with giant cell formation in the inflamed focus, as well as by modulating APPs during foreign body reaction.

Clinical Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamic Considerations in Treating Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma

Non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) includes a variety of closely related malignancies that originate from lymphoid precursors. The majority of NHLs are of B-cell lineage, for which traditional therapy involves chemotherapy in combination with the anti-CD20 monoclonal antibody rituximab. Ongoing research into the pathogenesis of NHL subtypes has given rise to the use of novel agents that target specific molecular pathways. While the incidence of NHL extends over a range of ages from pediatric to elderly settings, the majority of diagnoses occur over age 60 years. Increasing the use of concomitant medication coupled with declining organ function among this group of patients creates pharmacokinetic (PK) challenges in administering a number of agents involved in the treatment of NHL. In addition, since many of the new agents are administered orally, there are a number of added PK factors that must be taken into consideration with their prescribing and administration. This article will review the available literature on the PK and pharmacodynamic properties of agents commonly used in the treatment of NHL, and intends to provide information that can assist with properly using these drugs in this setting.

[Clinical Pharmacology Research for Promoting Individualized Cancer Chemotherapy]

Cancer chemotherapy has progressed remarkably with conventional and molecular-targeted anticancer drugs as well as immune checkpoint inhibitors. However, adverse drug reaction (ADR) management remains a challenge in cancer chemotherapy. Therefore, improving the quality of medical care through clinical pharmacology research is warranted. Intravenous injection of bendamustine in patients with follicular or mantle cell lymphoma frequently causes venous irritation. Because the underlying mechanisms are not clear, we investigated the factors responsible for bendamustine-induced venous irritation. Based on the results of our analysis, we altered the administration regimen and observed that the incidence of venous irritation, which manifested in a concentration-dependent manner following conventional approaches, significantly decreased when following the modified regimen. Guidelines on the management of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting recommend aprepitant, a selective neurokinin-1 (NK-1) receptor antagonist, 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT₃) receptor antagonists, and dexamethasone as prophylactic antiemetics. Pretreatment with high-dose chemotherapy before hematopoietic stem cell transplantation has extremely high emetogenic potential. This can be countered by using aprepitant in combination with conventional antiemetics. However, the safety and efficacy of such combinations are unexplored. Upon evaluation, we observed improved antiemetic effects without an increase in ADRs. At this symposium, I highlight the significance of clinical pharmacology research for promoting individualized cancer chemotherapy.

High-dose thiotepa-related neurotoxicity and the role of tramadol in children

Background

Serious neurological adverse events (NAE) have occurred during treatment with high-dose thiotepa regimens of children with high-risk solid tumours. The objective was to assess the incidence of NAE related to high-dose thiotepa and to identify potential contributing factors that could exacerbate the occurrence of this neurotoxicity.

Methods

From May 1987 to March 2011, children with solid tumours treated with high-dose thiotepa were retrospectively identified. Each NAE detected led to an independent case analysis. Potential contributing factors were pre-specified and univariate/multivariable analyses were performed.

Results

Three hundred seven courses of thiotepa (251 patients) were identified. The total dose per treatment ranged from 600 to 900 mg/m². 81 NAE (26%) were identified. 46 NAE were related to high-dose thiotepa during the first course (18.3%) and 11 during the second course (19.6%). The symptoms appeared in a median time of 2 days after the introduction of thiotepa. Central and peripheral symptoms were headaches, tremors, confusion, seizures, cerebellar syndrome, and coma. High-dose thiotepa was reintroduced in 18 cases and symptoms reappeared in 5 children. For 3 patients who had seizures during the first course, premedication with clonazepam for the second course has prevented recurrence of NAE. As contributing factors, brain tumour and tramadol treatment increased the risk of thiotepa-related neurotoxicity by 2 to 6 times respectively.

Conclusions

The incidence of neurotoxicity was 18.3%. Brain tumours and tramadol treatment are risk factors to consider when using high-dose thiotepa. The outcome of patients was favourable without sequelae in all cases and rechallenge with thiotepa was possible.

Aprepitant and fosaprepitant drug interactions: a systematic review

AIMS

Aprepitant and fosaprepitant, commonly used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, alter cytochrome P450 activity. This systematic review evaluates clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug interactions with aprepitant and fosaprepitant and describes adverse events ascribed to drug interactions with aprepitant or fosaprepitant.

METHODS

We systematically reviewed the literature to September 11, 2016, to identify articles evaluating drug interactions involving aprepitant/fosaprepitant. The clinical significance of each reported pharmacokinetic drug interaction was evaluated based on the United States Food and Drug Administration guidance document on conducting drug interaction studies. The probability of an adverse event reported in case reports being due to a drug interaction with aprepitant/fosaprepitant was determined using the Drug Interaction Probability Scale.

RESULTS

A total of 4377 publications were identified. Of these, 64 met inclusion eligibility criteria: 34 described pharmacokinetic drug interactions and 30 described adverse events ascribed to a drug interaction. Clinically significant pharmacokinetic interactions between aprepitant/fosaprepitant and bosutinib PO, cabazitaxel IV, cyclophosphamide IV, dexamethasone PO, methylprednisolone IV, midazolam PO/IV, oxycodone PO and tolbutamide PO were identified, as were adverse events resulting from an interaction between aprepitant/fosaprepitant and alcohol, anthracyclines, ifosfamide, oxycodone, quetiapine, selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors/serotonin-norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors and warfarin.

CONCLUSIONS

The potential for a drug interaction with aprepitant and fosaprepitant should be considered when selecting antiemetic therapy.

Ifosfamide-induced Encephalopathy Precipitated by Aprepitant: A Rarely Manifested Side Effect of Drug Interaction

Central nervous system (CNS) toxicity has been reported in approximately 10%-30% of patients receiving intravenous infusions of ifosfamide. Encephalopathy is a rare but serious CNS adverse reaction in these patients, and although usually transient and reversible, may cause persistent neurological dysfunction or death. Clinical features range from fatigue and confusion to coma and death. Ifosfamide forms backbone of various treatment regimens including curative treatment and palliative chemotherapy regimen. Precipitation of ifosfamide-induced encephalopathy (IIE) by aprepitant has been reported in the literature rarely. Ifosfamide is moderately emetogenic; hence, aprepitant is used to prevent emesis induced by ifosfamide. We here report a case where a patient of recurrent B-cell Philadelphia-negative acute lymphoblastic lymphoma was given aprepitant to prevent ifosfamide-induced emesis. After 24 h of ifosfamide infusion, the patient developed symptoms of encephalopathy, i.e., headache, vomiting, and one episode of seizure which was followed by disoriented behavior. After doing all routine investigations and neuroimaging, the diagnosis of IIE was kept on clinical grounds, and after looking for the various factors, we came across injection fosaprepitant as the precipitating factor. On the clinical grounds, the patient was treated with hydration and injection methylene blue for above complaints, and the patient recovered without any residual deficit within 48-72 h. Hence, in the presence of causative agent, i.e., ifosfamide and precipitating agent injection fosaprepitant with negative imaging and normal laboratory parameters as well as the early and good response to methylene blue, the diagnosis of IIE precipitated by aprepitant was confirmed.

Drug interactions with aprepitant or fosaprepitant: Review of literature and implications for clinical practice

Purpose Aprepitant and its parenteral formulation fosaprepitant are widely used for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting. Aprepitant exerts modest inhibitory effect on CYP3A4 and modest inductive effect on CYP2C9 substrates such as some antineoplastics and multiple other medications. This article is aimed to provide pharmacists and other healthcare professionals with an updated summary of drug-drug interactions of aprepitant/fosaprepitant and implications for clinical practice. Method We reviewed publications reporting drug-drug interactions between aprepitant/fosaprepitant and other medications. Results Coadministration of aprepitant with antineoplastics or opiods may result in significant elevations in the serum levels of the agents metabolized via CYP3A4, with the best documentation for cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, erlotinib and oxycodone. These alterations did not translate into adverse outcomes and/or necessitate dosing adjustments. The levels of warfarin were significantly decreased by aprepitant requiring prolonged monitoring after discontinuation of aprepitant. Among direct oral anticoagulants, a theoretical interaction between aprepitant and rivaroxaban or apixaban exists. Interactions between aprepitant and quetiapine or diltiazem or sirolimus required dose reductions to avoid adverse outcomes. The intravenous route had a weaker inhibitory effect on CYP3A4 than the oral pathway. Conclusion The evidence on drug interactions of aprepitant with other medications is limited, and the impact on therapeutic outcomes remains to be determined. The intravenous regimen may be a preferred option. As utilization of aprepitant is expanding, practitioners and patients need to be educated about the potential for drug interactions and a need for careful monitoring of patients concurrently receiving aprepitant and CYP2C9 or CYP3A4 substrates, especially those with a narrow therapeutic window.

Ameliorative Effect of Gallic Acid on Cyclophosphamide-Induced Oxidative Injury and Hepatic Dysfunction in Rats

Cyclophosphamide (CP), a bifunctional alkylating agent used in chemotherapy has been reported to induce organ toxicity mediated by generation of reactive oxygen species and oxidative stress. Gallic acid (GA), a phenolic substance, is a natural antioxidant with proven free radical scavenging activity and offers protection against oxidative damage. This research study was designed to investigate the ameliorative effect of GA against CP-induced toxicity in rats. Twenty-five male Wistar rats (180-200 g) were randomized into five treatment groups: (A) control, (B) CP, 2 mg/kg body weight (b.w.), (C) pre-treatment with GA (20 mg/kg b.w.) for seven days followed by CP (2 mg/kg b.w.) for seven days, (D) co-treatment with GA (20 mg/kg b.w) and CP (2 mg/kg b.w.) for seven days, and (E) GA (20 mg/kg b.w.) for seven days. CP induced marked renal and hepatic damages as plasma levels of urea, creatinine, bilirubin and activities of AST, ALT, ALP and GGT were significantly elevated (p < 0.05) in the CP-treated group relative to control. In addition, hepatic levels of GSH, vitamin C and activities of SOD, catalase and GST significantly reduced in the CP-treated group when compared with control. This was accompanied with a significant increase in hepatic lipid peroxidation. The restoration of the markers of renal and hepatic damages as well as antioxidant indices and lipid peroxidation by pre- and co-treatment with GA clearly shows that GA offers ameliorative effect by scavenging the reactive oxygen species generated by CP. This protective effect may be attributed to the antioxidant property of gllic acid.

Protective effects of Origanum vulgare ethanol extract against cyclophosphamide-induced liver toxicity in mice

Abstract Context: Despite its wide clinical use, cyclophosphamide (CP), an alkylating chemotherapeutic agent, possesses many adverse effects, including hepatotoxicity. Because Origanum vulgare L. (Lamiaceae) has antioxidative properties, it might protect against above-mentioned damage.

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated the protective effects of O. vulgare extract on CP-induced liver toxicity.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Mice were pretreated with aerial parts of O. vulgare ethanolic extract (intraperitoneally) at doses of 50, 100, 200, and 400 mg/kg for 7 consecutive days before the administration of a single 200 mg/kg intraperitoneal dose of CP 1 h after the last injection of O. vulgare. After 24 h, animals were anesthetized, blood samples and hepatic tissues were collected and used for biochemical and histological examination.

RESULTS

Serum levels of hepatic markers were increased after CP treatment but restored in the O. vulgare-pretreated groups. The serum ALT, AST, and ALP of the CP group were 196.49 ± 3.82, 143.78 ± 4.79, and 203.18 ± 3.81 IU/l, respectively. However, pretreatment with 400 mg/kg O. vulgare significantly decreased the serum ALT, AST, and ALP to 52.49 ± 2.18, 44.78 ± 2.06, and 65.62 ± 1.73 IU/l, respectively (p < 0.001). Histological examinations also confirmed the protective effects of O. vulgare against CP-induced liver toxicity.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSION

Our results reveal that O. vulgare with high amount of flavonoids and phenolic compounds induces potent hepatoprotective mechanisms against CP. Therefore, O. vulgare might help defend the body against the side effects, particularly hepatic damages induced by chemotherapeutic agents.

International antiemetic guidelines on chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV): content and implementation in daily routine practice

Over the past decades major improvements in the management of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) were obtained. With the correct use of antiemetic drugs, CINV can be prevented in almost 70%, and even up to, 80% of patients. Treatment guidelines enable physicians to integrate the latest clinical research into their daily practice. The large volume of rapidly evolving clinical data has been summarised and incorporated into treatment recommendations by well-known and reliable institutions. These organisations include the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer (MASCC), the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO), the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO), and National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN). However, despite the availability of these guidelines, there is an emerging evidence that adherence to, and implementation of, treatment recommendations is less than optimal. This review will especially focus on the content of the current antiemetic guidelines and will address the important question of how these guidelines are implemented in routine practice.

Efficacy and safety of aprepitant in allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Study Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of aprepitant added to standard antiemetic regimens used in high-dose chemotherapy for allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (allo-HSCT).

Design

Retrospective medical record review.

Setting

Hematology ward of a university hospital in Japan.

Patients

Of 88 patients treated with high-dose chemotherapy followed by allo-HSCT, 46 received aprepitant and granisetron as antiemetic therapy (between April 1, 2010, and December 31, 2011), and 42 received granisetron alone (between April 1, 2008, and March 31, 2010).

Interventions

Patients in both groups received 3 mg of granisetron intravenously 30 minutes before the administration of anticancer drugs. In the aprepitant group, 125 mg of aprepitant was administered orally 60–90 minutes before the administration of the first moderately to highly emetogenic anticancer drug. On the following days, 80 mg of aprepitant was administered orally every morning. The mean administration duration of aprepitant was 3.3 days (range 3–6 days).

Measurements and Main Results

The primary objective was to evaluate the percentage of patients who achieved complete response (CR; no vomiting and none to mild nausea). The CR rate in the aprepitant group was significantly higher than that in the control group (48% vs 24%, p=0.02). Multivariate analysis showed that nonprophylactic use of aprepitant was associated with failure to achieve CR (odds ratio [OR] 2.92; 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13–7.99, p=0.03). The frequency of abdominal pain was lower in the aprepitant group (9% vs 25%, p=0.03). Rates of other frequently observed adverse drug events were similar between groups. There was no significant difference in neutrophil engraftment (median 18 vs 17 days), platelet engraftment (median 32 vs 32 days), the incidence of acute graft-versus-host-disease (63% vs 55%, p=0.52), viral infection (74% vs 67%, p=0.49), or 1-year overall survival (63% vs 62%, p=0.90) between the two groups.

Conclusions

The addition of aprepitant to granisetron increases the antiemetic effect without influencing transplantation-related toxicities in allo-HSCT.

Safety of neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists

INTRODUCTION

The substance P (SP)/neurokinin (NK)-1 receptor system is involved in many pathological processes. NK-1 receptor antagonists have many promising therapeutic indications. However, the only NK-1 receptor antagonist used in clinical practice is the drug aprepitant and its intravenously administered prodrug, fosaprepitant. In general, NK-1 receptor antagonists are safe and well tolerated.

AREAS COVERED

A search was carried out in Medline using the following terms: adverse events, aprepitant, casopitant, clinical trials, CP-122,721, ezlopitant, fosaprepitant, NK-1 receptor antagonists, randomized, safety, side effects, tolerability and vofopitant.

EXPERT OPINION

Most clinical trials have focused on the antiemetic action of aprepitant in cancer patients treated with chemotherapy. However, the efficacy and safety of aprepitant have not been fully tested in other diseases in which the SP/NK-1 receptor system is involved (e.g., cancer, HIV, alcoholism); thus, clinical trials are required. The use of NK-1 receptor antagonists in oncology therapy is quite promising, but to date pharmacological therapy has not exploited the many possible therapies offered by such antagonists.

Aprepitant for prevention of nausea and vomiting secondary to high-dose cyclophosphamide administered to patients undergoing autologous peripheral blood stem cells mobilization: a phase II trial

This is a phase II trial evaluating efficacy and safety of aprepitant (AP) in combination with 5-HT3 antagonist and adjusted dose dexamethasone in patients receiving high-dose cyclophosphamide (CY) and filgrastim for stem cell mobilization. We used Simon's optimal two-stage design constrained to fewer than 40 patients with 10% type I error and 85% statistical power. The first stage of the study required accrual of 18 response-evaluable patients. The primary endpoint was the control of vomiting without the use of any rescue anti-emetics at 24 h after the administration of high dose CY (4 g/m(2)). If emesis was controlled in ≥9 patients, an additional cohort of 17 patients would be enrolled. The null hypothesis would be rejected if there were ≥20 responses among 35 patients. Forty patients were enrolled, five of whom were not evaluable for response. Eighteen evaluable patients were enrolled in the first stage. Acute emesis was controlled in 10 patients; therefore, enrollment proceeded to stage 2. An additional 17 patients were enrolled; 20/35 response-evaluable patients (57%) did not develop acute vomiting or require rescue anti-emetics, thus achieving the goal of the study. A total of 22/35 response-evaluable patients (63%) met the secondary endpoint of delayed emesis control (days 2-5). Thirty-three out of 35 patients underwent successful stem cell mobilization. No ≥ grade 3 AP-related adverse events were noted. The AP regimen can effectively control acute and delayed emesis in the majority patients receiving high-dose CY.

Cardiovascular events in cancer patients treated with highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy: results from a population-based study

Studies on cardiovascular safety in cancer patients treated with highly or moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC or MEC), who may have taken the antiemetic, aprepitant, have been limited to clinical trials and postmarketing spontaneous reports. Our study explored background rates of cardiovascular disease (CVD) events among HEC- or MEC-treated cancer patients in a population-based setting to contextualize events seen in a new drug development program and to determine at a high level whether rates differed by aprepitant usage. Medical and pharmacy claims data from the 2005–2007 IMPACT National Benchmark Database were classified into emetogenic chemotherapy categories and CVD outcomes. Among 5827 HEC/MEC-treated patients, frequencies were highest for hypertension (16–21%) and composites of venous (7–12%) and arterial thromboembolic events (4–7%). Aprepitant users generally did not experience higher frequencies of events compared to nonusers. Our study serves as a useful benchmark of background CVD event rates in a population-based setting of cancer patients.

Oral agents in cancer treatment: the context for adherence

OBJECTIVES

To review oral agents approved for cancer, discuss their mechanism of action and/or molecular targets, and outline side effects and challenges that impact adherence.

DATA SOURCES

Peer reviewed literature and on-line drug information.

CONCLUSION

Oral agents to treat cancer, although not new, are common and increasing dramatically. The context of adherence to oral agents is complicated by increased knowledge of food-drug interactions and combinations of agents with overlapping or synergistic toxicity profiles.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

The role of nursing in the administration and education of oral cancer treatments is critical to optimal treatment outcomes.

Prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: focus on fosaprepitant

Fosaprepitant is a prodrug of aprepitant, a neurokinin₁ (NK₁) receptor antagonist used in prophylactic antiemetic regimens used prior to cytotoxic chemotherapy. Fosaprepitant is being developed to provide a parenterally administered alternative to the orally administered aprepitant. Fosaprepitant is rapidly converted to aprepitant and an intravenous dose of 115 mg is bioequivalent to 125 mg orally, with similar plasma concentrations at 24 hours. In phase I and II trials fosaprepitant shows efficacy, but the large randomized efficacy studies have utilized aprepitant. When it is added to dexamethasone and a 5HT₃ receptor antagonist on day 1 prior to chemotherapy aprepitant improves the control of acute post chemotherapy emesis and when continued on days 2 and 3 with dexamethasone it demonstrated even greater improvement in the control of delayed emesis. This has been shown with both cisplatin-containing regimens and those based upon cyclophosphamide and an anthracycline. Fosaprepitant is well tolerated with mild to moderate venous irritation being the only additional toxicity to those seen with oral aprepitant, and that is a function of dose, concentration, and infusion rate. Headaches are the other toxicity most commonly reported. Fosaprepitant can be used as a parenteral alternative to aprepitant in regimens to control chemotherapy-induced emesis.

The NK₁ receptor antagonist aprepitant does not alter the pharmacokinetics of high-dose melphalan chemotherapy in patients with multiple myeloma

AIMS

The objective of this investigation was to assess the effect of aprepitant on the pharmacokinetics of high-dose melphalan used as conditioning therapy before blood stem cell transplantation in multiple myeloma.

METHODS

Aprepitant (125 mg) or placebo was administered 1 h before melphalan therapy (1 h infusion of 100 mg m⁻²). Eleven plasma samples were obtained over 8 h and melphalan was quantified using an LC/MS/MS method. Standard pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated and nonparametric testing was applied to assess the differences between aprepitant and placebo treatment.

RESULTS

Twenty patients received placebo and 10 patients aprepitant treatment. There were no differences observed for C(max) at the end of melphalan infusion (placebo 3431 ± 608 ng ml⁻¹ vs. aprepitant 3269 ± 660 ng ml⁻¹). In addition, AUC and terminal elimination half-life were not changed by aprepitant. Total clearance of melphalan was 304 ± 58 ml min⁻¹ m⁻² (placebo) which was not influenced by aprepitant (288 ± 78 ml min⁻¹ m⁻²).

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of the NK₁ receptor antagonist aprepitant 1 h before a high-dose chemotherapy does not influence the exposure and the elimination of melphalan. Therefore, oral administration of 125 mg aprepitant 1 h before melphalan infusion does not alter the disposition of intravenously administered melphalan.

Safety evaluation of aprepitant for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting

INTRODUCTION

Aprepitant is the only neurokinin (NK(1)) receptor antagonist (RA) approved for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Aprepitant is co-administered with a 5-HT(3) RA and a corticosteroid. Although aprepitant is safe, in most clinical settings potential drug-drug interactions need to be considered before prescription.

AREAS COVERED

This article thoroughly reviews aprepitant and, in particular, clinically relevant safety aspects of the drug. The literature review was performed using Medline with the following search terms: adverse events, aprepitant, chemotherapy, CYP3A4, MK-0869, neurokinin(1) receptor antagonist, safety and tolerability.

EXPERT OPINION

The recommended antiemetic regimen of aprepitant, a 5-HT(3) RA and a corticosteroid is safe. The combination of aprepitant, a 5-HT(3) RA and dexamethasone is now the gold standard of antiemetic treatment in prevention of CINV induced by HEC, or by the combination of an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide. The intravenous formulation of aprepitant used as a single dose is expected to be of benefit to cancer patients.

Aprepitant use in children, adolescents, and young adults for the control of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV)

BACKGROUND

One of the most common and distressing side effects for cancer patients is chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). New antiemetics, such as the NK-1 receptor inhibitor aprepitant, have been reported to improve control of this side effect in adults. However, little is known about its effect in the pediatric oncology population, with only a few reported cases in the literature.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review on the use of aprepitant in the pediatric oncology population in our institution.

RESULTS

Thirty-two charts and a total of 146 cycles of chemotherapy were reviewed. Mean age was 10 years. Highly emetogenic chemotherapy was used in 23/32 patients and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy in 9/32. Antiemetic regimens consisted of aprepitant+5-HT3 RA+dexamethasone (Regimen 1, 20/32 patients) or aprepitant +5-HT3 RA (Regimen 2, in 12/32). Eight out of thirty-two patients were chemotherapy-naïve and received aprepitant on their first cycle. In 24/32 patients, aprepitant was added later in their treatment, with 12/24 reporting resolution of CINV after its addition.

CONCLUSIONS

Aprepitant when combined with standard antiemetics, was well tolerated in the pediatric oncology population studied. However, there is still a need to conduct prospective studies to determine the optimal efficacy of aprepitant in the pediatric oncology population.

Drug interactions in childhood cancer

Children with cancer are increasingly benefiting from new treatment strategies and advances in supportive care, as shown by improvements in both survival and quality-of-life. However, the continuous emergence of new cancer drugs and supportive-care drugs has increased the possibility of harmful drug interactions; health-care providers need to be very cautious when combining drugs. We discuss the most common interactions between chemotherapeutic drugs and supportive-care drugs-such as anticonvulsants, antiemetics, uric-acid-lowering compounds, acid suppressants, antimicrobials, and pain-management medications in paediatric patients. We also review the interactions between chemotherapy drugs and food and herbal supplements, and provide recommendations to avoid unwanted and potentially fatal interactions in children with cancer. Because of the constant release of new drugs, health-care providers need to check the most recent references before making recommendations about drug interactions.

Aprepitant: drug-drug interactions in perspective

The implications of chemotherapeutic drug-drug interactions can be serious and thus need to be addressed. This review concerns the potential interactions of the antiemetic aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 receptor antagonist indicated for use (in Europe) in highly emetogenic chemotherapy and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy (MEC) in combination with a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist and corticosteroids and (in the United States) in combination with other antiemetic agents, for the prevention of acute and delayed nausea and vomiting associated with initial and repeat courses of highly emetogenic cancer chemotherapy including high-dose cisplatin. When considering use of aprepitant for prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting, its potential drug-drug interaction profile as a moderate inhibitor of cytochrome P-450 isoenzyme 3A4 (CYP3A4) has been a source of concern for some physicians and other health care professionals. We explore in this paper how real those concerns are. Our conclusion is that either no interaction or no clinically relevant interaction exists with chemotherapeutic agents (intravenous cyclophosphamide, docetaxel, intravenous vinorelbine) or 5-HT3 antagonists (granisetron, ondansetron, palonosetron). For relevant interactions, appropriate measures, such as corticosteroid dose modifications and extended International Normalized Ratio monitoring of patients on warfarin therapy, can be taken to effectively manage them. Therefore, the concern of negative interactions remains largely theoretical but needs to be verified with new agents extensively metabolized through the 3A4 pathway.

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting: antiemetic trials that impacted clinical practice

Objective. To review the scientific evidence related to serotonin and substance P and the clinical impact targeting these two neurotransmitters have had managing chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV).

Data Source. A PubMed search (January 1968 to December 2008), restricted to English-language publications, was conducted using the key words antiemetics, cancer chemotherapy, cisplatin, serotonin, substance P, NK1, and 5-HT3. Abstracts emanating from the meetings of the American Society of Clinical Oncology and Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer during the period May 2000 to June 2008 were also reviewed.

Data Synthesis. Two important outcomes emanated from well-conducted antiemetic clinical trials (Table 1): first, evidence that serotonin and substance P are major mediators of acute and delayed symptoms and second, improved, though not complete, control of CINV.

Conclusion. Serotonin-type 3 and neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists are the most effective agents currently available. In most cases, these agents are used in conjunction with glucocorticoids. The use of these three types of agents is incorporated into current clinical practice guidelines. Further understanding of the biological and biochemical basis of nausea and vomiting may enhance management of this potentially debilitating adverse effect.

Fosaprepitant dimeglumine (MK-0517 or L-785,298), an intravenous neurokinin-1 antagonist for the prevention of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND

This paper reviews the existing literature on fosaprepitant, an intravenous neurokinin-1 anatgonist for the prevention of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting.

OBJECTIVES

To describe the development of fosaprepitant and to situate the intravenous form of aprepitant in the current market of available antiemetics.

METHODS

Literature was screened and selected in order to compare the intravenous form of the already commonly used NK-1 receptor antagonist aprepitant.

RESULTS

Aprepitant is the first and still the only marketed neurokinin-1 (NK-1) antagonist. Interestingly, the first studies were performed with fosaprepitant dimeglumine (MK-0517 or L-785,298), the water-soluble prodrug of aprepitant. Fosaprepitant is converted into aprepitant within 30 min after intravenous administration. Based on equivalence studies, 115 mg fosaprepitant seems to be the substitute for 125 mg orally administrated aprepitant. Tolerability of the prodrug is no different from the active drug. The number of efficacy studies with fosaprepitant is very limited and most data are derived from existing aprepitant results. Fosaprepitant has recently been approved by FDA and EMEA as an intravenous substitute for oral aprepitant on day 1 of the standard 3-day CINV prevention regimen, which also includes dexamethasone and a 5-HT3 antagonist.

Influence of polymorphisms of drug metabolizing enzymes (CYP2B6, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP3A4, CYP3A5, GSTA1, GSTP1, ALDH1A1 and ALDH3A1) on the pharmacokinetics of cyclophosphamide and 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide

PURPOSE

The anticancer agent, cyclophosphamide, is metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP), glutathione S-transferase (GST) and aldehyde dehydrogenase (ALDH) enzymes. Polymorphisms of these enzymes may affect the pharmacokinetics of cyclophosphamide and thereby its toxicity and efficacy. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of known allelic variants in the CYP2B6, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP3A4, CYP3A5, GSTA1, GSTP1, ALDH1A1 and ALDH3A1 genes on the pharmacokinetics of the anticancer agent, cyclophosphamide, and its active metabolite 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

A cohort of 124 Caucasian patients received a high-dose chemotherapy combination consisting of cyclophosphamide (4-6 g/m2), thiotepa (320-480 mg/m2) and carboplatin (area under the curve 13-20 mg x min/ml) as intravenous infusions over 4 consecutive days. Genomic DNA was analysed using PCR and sequencing. Liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry was used to measure plasma concentrations of cyclophosphamide and 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide. The relationship between allelic variants and the elimination pharmacokinetic parameters noninducible cyclophosphamide clearance (CL(nonind)), inducible cyclophosphamide clearance (CL(ind)) and elimination rate constant of 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide (k(4OHCP)) were evaluated using nonlinear mixed effects modelling.

RESULTS

The interindividual variability in the noninducible cyclophosphamide clearance, inducible cyclophosphamide clearance and 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide clearance was 23, 27 and 31%, respectively. No effect of the allelic variants investigated on the clearance of cyclophosphamide or 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide could be demonstrated.

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that the presently evaluated variant alleles in the CYP2B6, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP3A4, CYP3A5, GSTA1, GSTP1, ALDH1A1 and ALDH3A1 genes do not explain the interindividual variability in cyclophosphamide and 4-hydroxycyclophosphamide pharmacokinetics and are, probably, not the cause of the observed variability in toxicity.

Characterization of the occurrence of ifosfamide-induced neurotoxicity with concomitant aprepitant

Purpose. Ifosfamide is metabolized by the cytochrome P450 system to its active form, ifosforamide mustard. A potential side effect is neurotoxicity, often manifesting as confusion, hallucination, or seizure. Aprepitant, a neurokinin-1 inhibitor, is recommended for highly and moderately emetogenic chemotherapy regimens and may interfere with the metabolism of ifosfamide as it inhibits CYP3A4. The objective of the study is to identify if an increase in the incidence of neurotoxicity may be associated with the use of aprepitant with concomitant ifosfamide.

Methods. A retrospective study of inpatients with sarcoma who received a two or four-day regimen of MAI (mesna, doxorubicin, and ifosfamide) between January 1, 2004 and December 31, 2006 was conducted. Data collection focused on characterizing neurotoxicity of patients receiving ifosfamide with or without aprepitant. Correlation between serum creatinine, albumin, liver function tests, age, gender, and total doses of ifosfamide was examined.

Results. A total of 45 patients received ifosfamide of which 23 (51%) were male and 24 (53%) received aprepitant. All baseline characteristics were similar for those who received aprepitant versus those who did not. No significant differences were noted between patients with or without neurotoxicity for age, gender, or liver enzymes. Eight patients (18%) of 45 developed neurotoxicity of which six (75%) of those patients also received aprepitant. A trend of increased occurrence of neurotoxicity was noted with aprepitant administration (6 vs. 2 patients respectively, p = 0.176), although a statistical difference was not observed. A relative risk of 2.6 (95% CI, 0.47—26.6) was associated with the addition of aprepitant.

Conclusions. An increased risk was identified for ifosfamide-induced neurotoxicity associated with aprepitant use; however, the observed difference was not statistically significant. The necessity of aprepitant given in association with ifosfamide may need to be reconsidered due to this risk. J Oncol Pharm Practice (2008) 14: 157—162.

Effect of aprepitant on intravenous tacrolimus disposition in reduced intensity hematopoietic stem cell transplantation

Aprepitant (AP) is a known inhibitor of cytochrome P450 3A4 which may affect tacrolimus metabolism. We retrospectively examined the effect of oral AP on intravenous tacrolimus concentrations in 26 patients undergoing reduced intensity transplantation from 09/2005 to 09/2006. Oral AP 125 mg daily was administered on transplant day +1 and 80 mg on days +2 and +3. Intravenous tacrolimus was administered as a 0.03 mg/kg/day continuous infusion on day -6 through day +1 (pre-AP), during-AP (days +2 to +7), and post-AP starting on day +8. Tacrolimus doses were adjusted to achieve concentrations of 5—20 ng/mL. Dose-corrected tacrolimus concentrations (ng/mL/mg per dose) in the pre-AP, during-AP, and post-AP time periods were: 8.12 (95% CI: 7.3—9.1), 11.63 (95% CI: 9.63—13.63), and 11.42 (95% CI: 8.12—14.7), respectively (P<0.01 between pre-AP and during-AP, P<0.01 between during-AP and post-AP, P = 0.01 between pre-AP and post-AP time periods). Although statistically significant, the observed rise was not clinically significant between during-AP and post-AP time periods. Previous work has shown that AP is not expected to exert an inhibitory effect within 48 h of AP discontinuation. Collectively, these data suggest that AP effect on tacrolimus metabolism is of minor clinical significance. A controlled trial is needed to confirm these findings. J Oncol Pharm Practice (2008) 14: 113—121.

Antiemetic care for patients with breast cancer: focus on drug interactions and safety concerns

PURPOSE

The drug interactions and adverse events that should be considered when individualizing antiemetic therapy for patients undergoing treatment for breast cancer are reviewed.

SUMMARY

A variety of antiemetic agents are available, including antihistamines, dopamine-receptor antagonists, serotonin-receptor antagonists, and neurokinin-receptor antagonists. To ensure optimal symptom control for each patient without unnecessarily prolonging treatment, patient- and treatment-specific risk factors must be considered. Neurokinin-receptor antagonists, the newest class of antiemetics, are effective in preventing acute and delayed chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting but must be used in combination with a serotonin-receptor antagonist and a corticosteroid. The serotonin-receptor antagonists have become the mainstay of antiemetic therapy, but current guidelines do not distinguish among the different agents in this class. However, there are distinct pharmacologic differences that may affect the potential for drug interactions and, ultimately, patient outcomes and the occurrence of adverse events. Therefore, the potential for drug interactions must be considered when selecting an antiemetic, particularly for patients who are taking multiple concomitant medications. Further, because a number of breast cancer therapies and some antiemetic agents carry cardiovascular warnings or precautions and since breast cancer patients may already be suffering from cardiovascular complications, the possible cardiotoxic effects of the antiemetic or chemotherapy agents or the combinations of these agents should be considered.

CONCLUSION

Antiemetic treatment is essential for patients with breast cancer who are undergoing moderately to highly emetogenic cytotoxic treatment. When selecting an antiemetic, clinicians must select an agent that provides optimal protection against nausea and vomiting while avoiding drug-drug interactions and additional adverse events.

Nanomedicines in the treatment of emesis during chemotherapy: focus on aprepitant

Aprepitant, a selective high-affinity antagonist of human substance P/neurokinin 1 (NK₁) receptors, is the active ingredient of EMEND^® which has recently been approved by the FDA for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). Aprepitant undergoes extensive metabolism, primarily via CYP3A4 mediated oxidation. It is eliminated primarily by metabolism and is not renally excreted. The apparent terminal half-life in humans ranged from 9 to 13 hours. Early development studies led to the development of a nanoparticle formulation to enhance exposure and minimize food effects. Two large randomized trials accruing 1099 patients studied the effect in patients receiving cisplatin of adding aprepitant to ondansetron and dexamethasone on day 1 then to dexamethasone on days 2 and 3 to control delayed emesis. The complete response of no vomiting and no rescue medication overall from days 1 to 5 improved from 48% to 68% (p < 0.001), a 13% improvement in acute emesis but a 21% improvement in delayed emesis with the improvement from 51% to 72% (p < 0.001). Similarly, 866 patients treated with cyclophosphamide plus either doxorubicin or epirubicin, received either ondansetron, dexamethasone, and aprepitant on day 1 followed by aprepitant on days 2 and 3 or ondansetron and dexamethasone on day 1 and dexamethasone on days 2 and 3. The overall complete response rate over 5 days was better for the aprepitant group 50.8% vs 42.5% (p=0.015). Complete responses were reported in more patients taking aprepitant in both the acute (76% vs 69%, p=0.034) and delayed (55% vs 49%, p=0.064) phases of vomiting. There were no clinically relevant differences in toxicity by adding aprepitant and improvements in the quality of life of patients on chemotherapy were recorded.

Drug-induced changes in P450 enzyme expression at the gene expression level: a new dimension to the analysis of drug-drug interactions

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) caused by direct chemical inhibition of key drug-metabolizing cytochrome P450 enzymes by a co-administered drug have been well documented and well understood. However, many other well-documented DDIs cannot be so readily explained. Recent investigations into drug and other xenobiotic-mediated expression changes of P450 genes have broadened our understanding of drug metabolism and DDI. In order to gain additional information on DDI, we have integrated existing information on drugs that are substrates, inhibitors, or inducers of important drug-metabolizing P450s with new data on drug-mediated expression changes of the same set of cytochrome P450s from a large-scale microarray gene expression database of drug-treated rat tissues. Existing information on substrates and inhibitors has been updated and reorganized into drug-cytochrome P450 matrices in order to facilitate comparative analysis of new information on inducers and suppressors. When examined at the gene expression level, a total of 119 currently marketed drugs from 265 examined were found to be cytochrome P450 inducers, and 83 were found to be suppressors. The value of this new information is illustrated with a more detailed examination of the DDI between PPARalpha agonists and HMG-CoA reductase inhibitors. This paper proposes that the well-documented, but poorly understood, increase in incidence of rhabdomyolysis when a PPARalpha agonist is co-administered with a HMG-CoA reductase inhibitor is at least in part the result of PPARalpha-induced general suppression of drug metabolism enzymes in liver. The authors believe this type of information will provide insights to other poorly understood DDI questions and stimulate further laboratory and clinical investigations on xenobiotic-mediated induction and suppression of drug metabolism.

The neurokinin1 receptor antagonist aprepitant as an antiemetic for moderately emetogenic chemotherapy

The neurokinin-1 (NK1) receptor antagonist aprepitant has become part of standard antiemetic therapy for high-dose cisplatin. Recent results indicate that chemotherapy for breast cancer that contains an anthracycline plus cyclophosphamide is more emetogenic than has been previously realised. One large randomised trial demonstrated that aprepitant substantially reduces the risk of vomiting or retching when added to a corticosteroid and a 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (HT3) receptor antagonist. The adverse effects of standard antiemetics and chemotherapy do not appear to be increased by the addition of this novel antiemetic agent. Aprepitant should now also be considered to be part of prophylactic antiemetic therapy for women who receive chemotherapy that contains an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide. The role of NK1 receptor antagonists in preventing emesis due to other cytotoxic agents that are deemed to be moderately emetogenic is still unclear.

American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline for antiemetics in oncology: update 2006

PURPOSE

To update the 1999 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline for antiemetics in oncology.

UPDATE METHODOLOGY

The Update Committee completed a review and analysis of data published from 1998 thru February 2006. The literature review focused on published randomized controlled trials, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses of published phase II and phase III randomized controlled trials.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The three-drug combination of a 5-hydroxytryptamine-3 (5-HT(3)) serotonin receptor antagonist, dexamethasone, and aprepitant is recommended before chemotherapy of high emetic risk. For persons receiving chemotherapy of high emetic risk, there is no group of patients for whom agents of lower therapeutic index are appropriate first-choice antiemetics. These agents should be reserved for patients intolerant of or refractory to 5-HT3 serotonin receptor antagonists, neurokinin-1 receptor antagonists, and dexamethasone. The three-drug combination of a 5-HT3 receptor serotonin antagonist, dexamethasone, and aprepitant is recommended for patients receiving an anthracycline and cyclophosphamide. For patients receiving other chemotherapy of moderate emetic risk, the Update Committee continues to recommend the two-drug combination of a 5-HT3 receptor serotonin antagonist and dexamethasone. In all patients receiving cisplatin and all other agents of high emetic risk, the two-drug combination of dexamethasone and aprepitant is recommended for the prevention of delayed emesis. The Update Committee no longer recommends the combination of a 5-HT3 serotonin receptor antagonist and dexamethasone for the prevention of delayed emesis after chemotherapeutic agents of high emetic risk. CONCLUSION The Update Committee recommends that clinicians administer antiemetics while considering patients' emetic risk categories and other characteristics.

Metabolism and transport of oxazaphosphorines and the clinical implications

The oxazaphosphorines including cyclophosphamide (CPA), ifosfamide (IFO), and trofosfamide represent an important group of therapeutic agents due to their substantial antitumor and immuno-modulating activity. CPA is widely used as an anticancer drug, an immunosuppressant, and for the mobilization of hematopoetic progenitor cells from the bone marrow into peripheral blood prior to bone marrow transplantation for aplastic anemia, leukemia, and other malignancies. New oxazaphosphorines derivatives have been developed in an attempt to improve selectivity and response with reduced toxicity. These derivatives include mafosfamide (NSC 345842), glufosfamide (D19575, beta-D-glucosylisophosphoramide mustard), NSC 612567 (aldophosphamide perhydrothiazine), and NSC 613060 (aldophosphamide thiazolidine). This review highlights the metabolism and transport of these oxazaphosphorines (mainly CPA and IFO, as these two oxazaphosphorine drugs are the most widely used alkylating agents) and the clinical implications. Both CPA and IFO are prodrugs that require activation by hepatic cytochrome P450 (CYP)-catalyzed 4-hydroxylation, yielding cytotoxic nitrogen mustards capable of reacting with DNA molecules to form crosslinks and lead to cell apoptosis and/or necrosis. Such prodrug activation can be enhanced within tumor cells by the CYP-based gene directed-enzyme prodrug therapy (GDEPT) approach. However, those newly synthesized oxazaphosphorine derivatives such as glufosfamide, NSC 612567 and NSC 613060, do not need hepatic activation. They are activated through other enzymatic and/or non-enzymatic pathways. For example, both NSC 612567 and NSC 613060 can be activated by plain phosphodiesterase (PDEs) in plasma and other tissues or by the high-affinity nuclear 3'-5' exonucleases associated with DNA polymerases, such as DNA polymerases and epsilon. The alternative CYP-catalyzed inactivation pathway by N-dechloroethylation generates the neurotoxic and nephrotoxic byproduct chloroacetaldehyde (CAA). Various aldehyde dehydrogenases (ALDHs) and glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) are involved in the detoxification of oxazaphosphorine metabolites. The metabolism of oxazaphosphorines is auto-inducible, with the activation of the orphan nuclear receptor pregnane X receptor (PXR) being the major mechanism. Oxazaphosphorine metabolism is affected by a number of factors associated with the drugs (e.g., dosage, route of administration, chirality, and drug combination) and patients (e.g., age, gender, renal and hepatic function). Several drug transporters, such as breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP), multidrug resistance associated proteins (MRP1, MRP2, and MRP4) are involved in the active uptake and efflux of parental oxazaphosphorines, their cytotoxic mustards and conjugates in hepatocytes and tumor cells. Oxazaphosphorine metabolism and transport have a major impact on pharmacokinetic variability, pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationship, toxicity, resistance, and drug interactions since the drug-metabolizing enzymes and drug transporters involved are key determinants of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oxazaphosphorines. A better understanding of the factors that affect the metabolism and transport of oxazaphosphorines is important for their optional use in cancer chemotherapy.