Fluoropyrimidine toxicity in patients with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase splice site variant: the need for further revision of dose and schedule

Genetic variants and enzyme activity in citidin deaminase: Relationship with capecitabine toxicity and recommendation for dose adjustment

OBJECTIVE

Capecitabine, an antineoplastic drug used in the treatment of breast and colon cancer, can cause severe, even fatal toxicity in some patients. The interindividual variability of this toxicity is largely due to genetic variations in target genes and enzymes of metabolism of this drug, such as thymidylate synthase and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase. The enzyme cytidine deaminase (CDA), involved in the activation of capecitabine, also has several variants associated with an increased risk of toxicity to treatment, although its role as a biomarker is not yet clearly defined. Therefore, our main objective is to study the association between the presence of genetic variants in CDA gen, CDA enzymatic activity and the development of severe toxicity in patients treated with capecitabine whose initial dose was adjusted based on the genetic profile of the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gen (DPYD).

METHOD

Prospective multicenter observational cohort study, focused on the analysis of the genotype-phenotype association of the CDA enzyme. After the experimental phase, an algorithm will be developed to determine the dose adjustment needed to reduce the risk of treatment toxicity according to CDA genotype, developing a clinical guide for capecitabine dosing according to genetic variants in DPYD and CDA. Based on this guide, a Bioinformatics Tool will be created to generate the pharmacotherapeutic report automatically, facilitating the implementation of pharmacogenetic advice in clinical practice. This tool will be a great support in making pharmacotherapeutic decisions based on the patient's genetic profile, incorporating precision medicine into clinical routine. Once the usefulness of this tool has been validated, it will be offered free of charge to facilitate the implementation of pharmacogenetics in hospital centers and equitably benefit all patients on capecitabine treatment.

[Translated article] Genetic variants and enzyme activity in citidin deaminase: Relationship with capecitabine toxicity and recommendation for dose adjustment

OBJECTIVE

Capecitabine, an antineoplastic drug used in the treatment of breast and colon cancer, can cause severe, even fatal toxicity in some patients. The interindividual variability of this toxicity is largely due to genetic variations in target genes and enzymes of metabolism of this drug, such as Thymidylate Synthase (TS) and Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase (DPD). The enzyme Cytidine Deaminase (CDA), involved in the activation of capecitabine, also has several variants associated with an increased risk of toxicity to treatment, although its role as a biomarker is not yet clearly defined. Therefore, our main objective is to study the association between the presence of genetic variants in CDA gen, CDA enzymatic activity and the development of severe toxicity in patients treated with capecitabine whose initial dose was adjusted based on the genetic profile of the DPD gen (DPYD).

METHOD

Prospective multicenter observational cohort study, focused on the analysis of the genotype-phenotype association of the CDA enzyme. After the experimental phase, an algorithm will be developed to determine the dose adjustment needed to reduce the risk of treatment toxicity according to CDA genotype, developing a Clinical Guide for capecitabine dosing according to genetic variants in DPYD and CDA. Based on this guide, a Bioinformatics Tool will be created to generate the pharmacotherapeutic report automatically, facilitating the implementation of pharmacogenetic advice in clinical practice. This tool will be a great support in making pharmacotherapeutic decisions based on the patient's genetic profile, incorporating precision medicine into clinical routine. Once the usefulness of this tool has been validated, it will be offered free of charge to facilitate the implementation of pharmacogenetics in hospital centers and equitably benefit all patients on capecitabine treatment.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of toxicity and treatment outcomes with pharmacogenetic-guided dosing compared to standard of care BSA-based fluoropyrimidine dosing

BACKGROUND

Serious and potentially life-threatening toxicities can occur following 5-fluorouracil/capecitabine exposure. Patients carrying Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase (DPYD) variant alleles associated with decreased enzymatic function are at a greater risk of early/severe 5-fluorouracil/capecitabine toxicity. The objective of this systematic review/meta-analysis was to evaluate treatment outcomes between Pharmacogenetics Guided Dosing (PGD) versus non-PGD and within PGD (DPYD variant allele carriers versus wild type).

METHODS

A systematic review/meta-analysis of original publications indexed in Ovid Medline, Ovid Embase, and the Cochrane CENTRAL (Wiley) library from inception to 7-Dec-2020. Eligible studies evaluated at least one pre-defined treatment outcome measures (toxicity/hospitalisations/survival/overall response/quality of life).

RESULTS

Of 1090 identified publications, 17 met predefined eligibility criteria. The meta-analysis observed reduced incidence of grade 3/4 overall toxicity (Risk Ratio [RR] 0.32 [95% Cl 0.27-0.39], p < 0.00001) and grade 3/4 diarrhoea (RR 0.38 [95% Cl 0.24-0.61], p < 0.0001) among PGD versus non-PGD cohorts. Within PGD cohorts, there was no statistical differences for overall response rates (complete/partial) (RR 1.31 [95% Cl 0.93-1.85], p = 0.12). Similar results were found with stable disease (RR 1.27 [95% Cl 0.66-2.44], p = 0.47).

CONCLUSION

PGD improves patient outcomes in terms of grade 3/4 toxicity, in particular overall toxicity and diarrhoea, without impacting on treatment response.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study is registered with PROSPERO, registration number CRD42020223768.

DPYD genotype-guided dose individualization to improve patient safety of fluoropyrimidine therapy: call for a drug label update

The fluoropyrimidine anticancer drugs, especially 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and capecitabine, are frequently prescribed for several types of cancer, including breast, colorectal, head and neck and gastric cancer. In the current drug labels of 5-FU and capecitabine in the European Union and the United States, no adaptive dosing strategies are incorporated for polymorphic metabolism of 5-FU. Although treatment with fluoropyrimidines is generally well tolerated, a major clinical limitation is that a proportion of the treated population experiences severe, sometimes life-threatening, fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity. This toxicity is strongly affected by interindividual variability in activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), the main metabolic enzyme for inactivation of fluoropyrimidines, with an estimated 3%-8% of the population being partially DPD deficient. A reduced functional or abrogated DPD enzyme is often caused by genetic polymorphisms in DPYD, the gene encoding for DPD, and heterozygous carriers of such DPYD polymorphisms have a partial DPD deficiency. When these partially DPD deficient patients are treated with a full dose of fluoropyrimidines, they are generally exposed to toxic levels of 5-FU and its metabolites, and the risk of developing severe treatment-related toxicity is therefore significantly increased.Currently, functional and clinical validity is well established for four DPYD variants (DPYD*2A, c.2846A>T, c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A), as those variants have retrospectively and in a large population study prospectively been shown to be associated with increased risk of fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. Patient safety of fluoropyrimidine treatment can be significantly improved by pre-emptive screening for DPYD genotype variants and dose reductions in heterozygous DPYD variant allele carriers, thereby normalizing 5-FU exposure. Based on the critical appraisal of currently available data, adjusting the labels of capecitabine and 5-FU by including recommendations on pre-emptive screening for DPYD variants and DPYD genotype-guided dose adjustments should be the new standard of care.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase mutation in neoadjuvant chemotherapy in head and neck cancers: Myth or reality?

PURPOSE

The docetaxel, 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), and cisplatin (TPF) regimen in India is associated with high percentages of Grade 3-4 toxicity. This analysis was planned to evaluate the incidence of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) mutation in patients with severe gastrointestinal toxicity, to assess whether the mutation could be predicted by a set of clinical criteria and whether it has any impact on postneoadjuvant chemotherapy response.

METHODS

All consecutive patients who received TPF regimen in head and neck cancers between January 2015 and April 2015 were selected. Patients who had predefined set of toxicities in Cycle 1 were selected for DPD mutation testing. Depending on the results, C2 doses were modified. Postcompletion of two cycles, patients underwent radiological response assessment. Descriptive statistics has been performed. The normally distributed continuous variables were compared by unpaired Student's t-test, whereas variables which were not normally distributed by Wilcoxon sum rank test. For noncontinuous variables, comparison was performed by Fisher's exact test.

RESULTS

Out of 34 patients, who received TPF, 12 were selected for DPD testing, and 11 (32.4%, 95% confidence interval [95% CI]: 19.1-49.3%) had DPD mutation. The predictive accuracy of the criteria for the tested DPD mutations was 81.3% (95% CI: 62.1-100%). Of the 11 DPD mutation positive patients, except for one patient, all others received the second cycle of TPF. The dose adjustments done in 5-FU were 50% dose reduction in 9 patients and no dose reduction in one patient. The response rate in DPD mutated patients was 27.3% (3/11) and that in DPD nonmutated/nontested was 39.1% (9/23) (P = 0.70).

CONCLUSION

In this small study, it seems that the incidence of DPD mutation is more common in Indian then it's in the Caucasian population. Clinical toxicity criteria can accurately predict for DPD mutation. Postdose adjustments of 5-FU from C2 onward, TPF can safely be delivered in the majority of patients with DPD heterozygous mutations without decrement in efficacy.

Upfront Genotyping of DPYD*2A to Individualize Fluoropyrimidine Therapy: A Safety and Cost Analysis

PURPOSE

Fluoropyrimidines are frequently prescribed anticancer drugs. A polymorphism in the fluoropyrimidine metabolizing enzyme dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD; ie, DPYD*2A) is strongly associated with fluoropyrimidine-induced severe and life-threatening toxicity. This study determined the feasibility, safety, and cost of DPYD*2A genotype-guided dosing.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients intended to be treated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy were prospectively genotyped for DPYD*2A before start of therapy. Variant allele carriers received an initial dose reduction of ≥ 50% followed by dose titration based on tolerance. Toxicity was the primary end point and was compared with historical controls (ie, DPYD*2A variant allele carriers receiving standard dose described in literature) and with DPYD*2A wild-type patients treated with the standard dose in this study. Secondary end points included a model-based cost analysis, as well as pharmacokinetic and DPD enzyme activity analyses.

RESULTS

A total of 2,038 patients were prospectively screened for DPYD*2A, of whom 22 (1.1%) were heterozygous polymorphic. DPYD*2A variant allele carriers were treated with a median dose-intensity of 48% (range, 17% to 91%). The risk of grade ≥ 3 toxicity was thereby significantly reduced from 73% (95% CI, 58% to 85%) in historical controls (n = 48) to 28% (95% CI, 10% to 53%) by genotype-guided dosing (P < .001); drug-induced death was reduced from 10% to 0%. Adequate treatment of genotype-guided dosing was further demonstrated by a similar incidence of grade ≥ 3 toxicity compared with wild-type patients receiving the standard dose (23%; P = .64) and by similar systemic fluorouracil (active drug) exposure. Furthermore, average total treatment cost per patient was lower for screening (€2,772 [$3,767]) than for nonscreening (€2,817 [$3,828]), outweighing screening costs.

CONCLUSION

DPYD*2A is strongly associated with fluoropyrimidine-induced severe and life-threatening toxicity. DPYD*2A genotype-guided dosing results in adequate systemic drug exposure and significantly improves safety of fluoropyrimidine therapy for the individual patient. On a population level, upfront genotyping seemed cost saving.

Translating DPYD genotype into DPD phenotype: using the DPYD gene activity score

The dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase enzyme (DPD, encoded by the gene DPYD) plays a key role in the metabolism of fluoropyrimidines. DPD deficiency occurs in 4-5% of the population and is associated with severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity. Several SNPs in DPYD have been described that lead to absent or reduced enzyme activity, including DPYD*2A, DPYD*13, c.2846A>T and c.1236G>A/haplotype B3. Since these SNPs differ in their effect on DPD enzyme activity, a differentiated dose adaption is recommended. We propose the gene activity score for translating DPYD genotype into phenotype, accounting for differences in functionality of SNPs. This method can be used to standardize individualized fluoropyrimidine dose adjustments, resulting in optimal safety and effectiveness.

Pharmacogenetics of cancer drugs

The variability in treatment outcomes among patients receiving the same therapy for seemingly similar tumors can be attributed in part to genetics. The tumor's (somatic) genome largely dictates the effectiveness of the therapy, and the patient's (germline) genome influences drug exposure and the patient's sensitivity to toxicity. Many potentially clinically useful associations have been discovered between common germline genetic polymorphisms and outcomes of cancer treatment. This review highlights the germline pharmacogenetic associations that are currently being used to guide cancer treatment decisions, those that are most likely to someday be clinically useful, and associations that are well known but their roles in clinical management are not yet certain. In the future, germline genetic information will likely be available from tumor genetic analyses, creating an efficient opportunity to integrate the two genomes to optimize treatment outcomes for each individual cancer patient.