Complexity and clinical significance of drug-drug interactions (DDIs) in oncology: challenging issues in the care of patients regarding cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT)

Enzalutamide: Understanding and Managing Drug Interactions to Improve Patient Safety and Drug Efficacy

Enzalutamide is an oral androgen receptor signaling inhibitor utilized in the treatment of men with prostate cancer. It is a moderate inducer of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes CYP2C9 and CYP2C19, and a strong inducer of CYP3A4. It was also shown to be a mild inhibitor of the efflux transporter P-glycoprotein in patients with prostate cancer. Enzalutamide is primarily metabolized by CYP3A4 and CYP2C8. The risk of enzalutamide drug interactions arises primarily when it is coadministered with other drugs that interact with these CYPs, including CYP3A4. In this review, we begin by providing an overview of enzalutamide including its dosing, use in special populations, pharmacokinetics, changes to its prescribing information, and potential for interaction with coadministered drugs. Enzalutamide interactions with drugs from a wide range of medication classes commonly prescribed to patients with prostate cancer are described, including oral androgen deprivation therapy, agents used to treat a range of cardiovascular diseases, antidiabetic drugs, antidepressants, anti-seizure medications, common urology medications, analgesics, proton pump inhibitors, immunosuppressants, and antigout drugs. Enzalutamide interactions with common vitamins and supplements are also briefly discussed. This review provides a resource for healthcare practitioners and patients that will help provide a basis for the understanding and management of enzalutamide drug-drug interactions to inform decision making, improve patient safety, and optimize drug efficacy.

Oral Anticoagulants Beyond Warfarin

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) have largely replaced vitamin K antagonists, mostly warfarin, for the main indications for oral anticoagulation, prevention and treatment of venous thromboembolism, and prevention of embolic stroke in atrial fibrillation. While DOACs offer practical, fixed-dose anticoagulation in many patients, specific restrictions or contraindications may apply. DOACs are not sufficiently effective in high-thrombotic risk conditions such as antiphospholipid syndrome and mechanical heart valves. Patients with cancer-associated thrombosis may benefit from DOACs, but the bleeding risk, particularly in those with gastrointestinal or urogenital tumors, must be carefully weighed. In patients with frailty, excess body weight, and/or moderate-to-severe chronic kidney disease, DOACs must be cautiously administered and may require laboratory monitoring. Reversal agents have been developed and approved for life-threatening bleeding. In addition, the clinical testing of potentially safer anticoagulants such as factor XI(a) inhibitors is important to further optimize anticoagulant therapy in an increasingly elderly and frail population worldwide.

Lung Cancer Related Thrombosis (LCART): Focus on Immune Checkpoint Blockade

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a common complication in lung cancer patients. Lung cancer confers an increased risk of thrombosis compared to other solid malignancies across all stages of the disease. Newer treatment agents, including checkpoint immunotherapy and targeted agents, may further increase the risk of CAT. Different risk-assessment models, such as the Khorana Risk Score, and newer approaches that incorporate genetic risk factors have been used in lung cancer patients to evaluate the risk of thrombosis. The management of CAT is based on the results of large prospective trials, which show similar benefits to low-molecular-weight heparins (LMWHs) and direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) in ambulatory patients. The anticoagulation agent and duration of therapy should be personalized according to lung cancer stage and histology, the presence of driver mutations and use of antineoplastic therapy, including recent curative lung surgery, chemotherapy or immunotherapy. Treatment options should be evaluated in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has been shown to impact the thrombotic risk in cancer patients. This review focuses on the epidemiology, pathophysiology, risk factors, novel predictive scores and management of CAT in patients with active lung cancer, with a focus on immune checkpoint inhibitors.

The roles of CYP2C19 and CYP3A4 in the in vitro metabolism of β-eudesmol in human liver: Reaction phenotyping and enzyme kinetics

β-eudesmol is a major bioactive component of Atractylodes lancea (AL). AL has been developed as the capsule formulation of standardized AL extract for treating cholangiocarcinoma (CCA). However, the complex constituents of herbal products increase the risk of adverse drug interactions. β-eudesmol has demonstrated inhibitory effects on rCYP2C19 and rCYP3A4 in the previous research. This study aimed to identify the cytochrome P450 (CYP) isoforms responsible for the metabolism of β-eudesmol and determine the enzyme kinetic parameters and the metabolic stability of β-eudesmol metabolism in the microsomal system. Reaction phenotyping using human recombinant CYPs (rCYPs) and selective chemical inhibitors of CYP1A2, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6, and CYP3A4 was performed, and enzyme kinetics and metabolic stability were investigated using human liver microsome (HLM). The results suggest that CYP2C19 and CYP3A4 play significant roles in β-eudesmol metabolism. The disappearance half-life (t1/2 ) and intrinsic clearance (CLint ) of β-eudesmol were 17.09 min and 0.20 mL/min·mg protein, respectively. Enzyme kinetic analysis revealed the Michaelis-Menten constant (Km ) and maximum velocity (Vmax ) of 16.76 μM and 3.35 nmol/min·mg protein, respectively. As a component of AL, β-eudesmol, as a substrate and inhibitor of CYP2C19 and CYP3A4, has a high potential for drug-drug interactions when AL is co-administered with other herbs or conventional medicines.

A new method to quantify the effect of co-medication on the efficacy of abiraterone in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients

Background and Objective: Patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) treated with abiraterone acetate (AA) have co-morbidities treated with different drugs. The aim was to quantify the potential effect of co-medications on AA treatment duration (TD) and overall survival (OS). Methods: A new parameter, called "individual drug score" (IDS) was calculated by summing the "drug score"-s (DS) of all co-medications for each patient. The DS was determined by quantifying the effect of a given co-drug on enzymes involved in steroidogenesis and metabolism of AA. The correlation between log (IDS) and TD was tested by non-linear curve fit. Kaplan-Meier method and multivariate Cox regression was used for analysis of TD and OS. Results: The IDS and TD of AA+prednisolone showed a dose-response correlation (n = 166). Patients with high IDS had significantly longer TD and OS (p <0.001). In multivariate analysis IDS proved to be an independent marker of TD and OS. The same analysis was performed in a separate group of 81 patients receiving AA+dexamethasone treatment. The previously observed relationships were observed again between IDS and TD or OS. After combining the AA+prednisolone and AA+dexamethasone groups, analysis of the IDS composition showed that patients in the high IDS group not only used more drugs (p <0.001), but their drugs also had a higher mean DS (p = 0.001). Conclusion: The more co-drugs with high DS, the longer the duration of AA treatment and OS, emphasizing the need for careful co-medication planning in patients with mCRPC treated with AA. It is recommended that, where possible, co-medication should be modified to minimize the number of drugs with negative DS and increase the number of drugs with high DS. Our new model can presumably be adapted to other drugs and other cancer types (or other diseases).

The Role of Injectables in the Treatment and Prevention of Cancer-Associated Thrombosis

Cancer-associated thrombosis (CAT) is a leading cause of death among patients with cancer. CAT can manifest itself as venous thromboembolism (VTE), in the form of deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism, or arterial thromboembolism. The pathophysiology of CAT is complex and depends on cancer-, patient-, treatment- and biomarkers-related factors. Treatment of VTE in patients with cancer is complex and includes three major classes of anticoagulant agents: heparin and its derivatives, e.g., low molecular weight heparins, direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), and vitamin K inhibitors. Given the tremendous heterogeneity of clinical situations in patients with cancer and the challenges of CAT, there is no single universal treatment option for patients suffering from or at risk of CAT. Initial studies suggested that patients seemed to prefer an anticoagulant that would not interfere with their cancer treatment, suggesting the primacy of cancer over VTE, and favoring efficacy and safety over convenience of route of administration. Recent studies show that when the efficacy and safety aspects are similar, patients prefer the oral route of administration. Despite this, injectables are a valid option for many patients with cancer.

MecDDI: Clarified Drug-Drug Interaction Mechanism Facilitating Rational Drug Use and Potential Drug-Drug Interaction Prediction

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) are a major concern in clinical practice and have been recognized as one of the key threats to public health. To address such a critical threat, many studies have been conducted to clarify the mechanism underlying each DDI, based on which alternative therapeutic strategies are successfully proposed. Moreover, artificial intelligence-based models for predicting DDIs, especially multilabel classification models, are highly dependent on a reliable DDI data set with clear mechanistic information. These successes highlight the imminent necessity to have a platform providing mechanistic clarifications for a large number of existing DDIs. However, no such platform is available yet. In this study, a platform entitled "MecDDI" was therefore introduced to systematically clarify the mechanisms underlying the existing DDIs. This platform is unique in (a) clarifying the mechanisms underlying over 1,78,000 DDIs by explicit descriptions and graphic illustrations and (b) providing a systematic classification for all collected DDIs based on the clarified mechanisms. Due to the long-lasting threats of DDIs to public health, MecDDI could offer medical scientists a clear clarification of DDI mechanisms, support healthcare professionals to identify alternative therapeutics, and prepare data for algorithm scientists to predict new DDIs. MecDDI is now expected as an indispensable complement to the available pharmaceutical platforms and is freely accessible at: https://idrblab.org/mecddi/.

Mitigating the Risk of Drug Interactions in Cancer Patients Taking Oral Anticancer Agents: The Role of a Multidisciplinary Team-Based Medication Reconciliation

PURPOSE

Polypharmacy in cancer patients is a recognized issue and should be an integral part of comprehensive patient assessment and management. Despite this, a systematic review of concomitant drugs or a search for potential drug-drug interactions (DDIs) is not always performed. Here, we present the results of a medication reconciliation model performed by a multidisciplinary team to identify clinically meaningful potential DDIs (defined by the presence of DDI of major severity or contraindication) in cancer patients undergoing oral antineoplastic drugs.

METHODS

From June to December 2022, we performed a non-interventional, prospective, cross-sectional, single-center study of adult cancer patients, initiating or undergoing treatment with oral antineoplastic drugs, referred by their oncologists for therapeutic review regarding potential DDIs. DDIs were assessed by a multidisciplinary team of hospital pharmacists and medical oncologists, through research in three different drug databases as well as in the summary of product characteristics. A report detailing all potential DDIs was created for each request and provided to the patient's medical oncologist for further examination.

RESULTS

Overall, 142 patients' medications were reviewed. Regardless of the severity or clinical importance, 70.4% of patients had at least one potential DDI. We found 184 combinations of oral anticancer and regular therapy agents with potential DDIs, 55 of whom were considered of major severity by at least one DDI database. As expected, the number of potential DDIs increased with the number of active substances in regular therapy (p < 0.001), but we did not find an increased relation between age and the total number of potential DDIs (p = 0.109). Thirty-nine (27.5%) patients had at least one clinically meaningful DDI identified. After adjustment through multivariable logistic regression, only the female sex (odds ratio (OR) 3.01, p = 0.029), the number of active comorbidities (OR 0.60, p = 0.029), and the presence of proton pump inhibitors in chronic medication (OR 2.99, p = 0.033) remained as predictors of potential meaningful DDI.

CONCLUSION

Although drug interactions are a concern in oncology, a systematic DDI review is rarely conducted in medical oncology consultations. The availability of a medication reconciliation service, carried out by a multidisciplinary team with dedicated time for this task, is an added value for safety enhancement in cancer patients.

Dilemmas in the Choice of Adequate Therapeutic Treatment in Patients with Acute Pulmonary Embolism—From Modern Recommendations to Clinical Application

Pulmonary thromboembolism is a very common cardiovascular disease, with a high mortality rate. Despite the clear guidelines, this disease still represents a great challenge both in diagnosis and treatment. The heterogeneous clinical picture, often without pathognomonic signs and symptoms, represents a huge differential diagnostic problem even for experienced doctors. The decisions surrounding this therapeutic regimen also represent a major dilemma in the group of patients who are hemodynamically stable at initial presentation and have signs of right ventricular (RV) dysfunction proven by echocardiography and positive biomarker values (pulmonary embolism of intermediate–high risk). Studies have shown conflicting results about the benefit of using fibrinolytic therapy in this group of patients until hemodynamic decompensation, due to the risk of major bleeding. The latest recommendations give preference to new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) compared to vitamin K antagonists (VKA), except for certain categories of patients (patients with antiphospholipid syndrome, mechanical valves, pregnancy). When using oral anticoagulant therapy, special attention should be paid to drug–drug interactions, which can lead to many complications, even to the death of the patient. Special population groups such as pregnant women, obese patients, patients with antiphospholipid syndrome and the incidence of cancer represent a great therapeutic challenge in the application of anticoagulant therapy. In these patients, not only must the effectiveness of the drugs be taken into account, but great attention must be paid to their safety and possible side effects, which is why a multidisciplinary approach is emphasized in order to provide the best therapeutic option.