UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan: A prospective safety and cost analysis in poor metaboliser patients

First-line palliative systemic therapy alternated with oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy for unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: A single-arm phase II trial (CRC-PIPAC-II)

BACKGROUND

Palliative systemic therapy alternated with electrostatic precipitation oxaliplatin-based pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy (ePIPAC) has never been prospectively investigated in patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM). The CRC-PIPAC-II study aimed to assess safety, feasibility and efficacy of such bidirectional therapy.

METHODS

This two-center, single-arm, phase II trial enrolled chemotherapy-naïve patients to undergo three treatment cycles, consisting of systemic therapy (CAPOX, FOLFOX, FOLFIRI, or FOLFOXIRI, all with bevacizumab) and oxaliplatin-based ePIPAC (92 mg/m2) with intravenous leucovorin (20 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (400 mg/m2). Primary outcome were major treatment-related adverse events. Secondary outcomes included minor events, tumor response, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Twenty patients completed 52 treatment cycles. Fifteen major events occurred in 7 patients (35 %): 5 events (33 %) related to systemic therapy; 5 (33 %) related to ePIPAC; and 5 (33 %) were biochemical events. No treatment-related deaths occurred. All patients experienced minor events, mostly abdominal pain, nausea and peripheral sensory neuropathy. After treatment, radiological, pathological, cytological, and biochemical response was observed in 0 %, 88 %, 38 %, and 31 % of patients respectively. Curative surgery was achieved in one patient. Median PFS was 10.0 months (95 % confidence interval [CI] 8.0-13.0) and median OS was 17.5 months (95 % CI 13.0-not reached).

CONCLUSIONS

Combining palliative systemic therapy with oxaliplatin-based ePIPAC in patients with unresectable CPM was feasible and showed an acceptable safety profile. Treatment-induced response and survival are promising, yet further research is required to determine the additional value of ePIPAC to systemic therapy.

Real Life Data and Outcome of FOLFIRINOX Use in Metastatic Pancreatic Cancer Patients in General Hospitals in the Netherlands

INTRODUCTION

Pancreatic cancer is one of the five most common causes of cancer mortality in developed countries. In patients with metastatic disease, the most frequent treatment used is FOLFIRINOX, which is associated with moderate toxicity which could influence quality of life. The efficacy of FOLFIRINOX in a general population in the Netherlands has not been subject of research before, and therefore, this research has been set up in order to investigate what the real-life benefits of FOLFIRINOX are in a population with metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) treated in three general hospitals in the Netherlands.

METHODS

The data used in this study was collected by patient records leading to a noninterventional retrospective cohort study. Eighty-six patients, over 18 years of age, diagnosed with mPC between the years 2015 and 2022 and treated with FOLFIRINOX at Maasstad Hospital in Rotterdam, Amphia Hospital in Breda, or Catharina Hospital in Eindhoven, were included in the study. Kaplan-Meier models were used in order to represent survival outcomes.

RESULTS

The results showed a median overall survival of 228 days (IQR 118-355). Only 14.0% (n = 12) completed the first-line treatment, and 51.2% (n = 44) of patients stopped treatment before or during cycle 6. Toxicity is highest, grade 3, after the first cycle but remains high for grade 1 and 2 during all treatment cycles.

CONCLUSION

Survival rates for patient with metastatic pancreatic cancer treated with FOLFIRINOX were worse in our study population than in comparative studies.

Irinotecan dosing and pharmacogenomics: a comprehensive exploration based on UGT1A1 variants and emerging insights

Irinotecan is a critical anticancer drug used to treat metastatic colorectal cancer and advanced pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma by obstructing topoisomerase 1; however, it can cause minor-to-severe and life-threatening adverse effects. UDP glucuronosyltransferase family 1 member A1 (UGT1A1) polymorphisms increase the risk of irinotecan-induced neutropenia and diarrhea. Hence, screening for UGT1A1 polymorphisms before irinotecan-based chemotherapy is recommended to minimize toxicity, whereas liposomes offer the potential to deliver irinotecan with fewer side effects in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma. This review presents a comprehensive overview of the effects of genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan on UGT1A1*28 and UGT1A1*6 variants, incorporating pharmacogenomic research, optimal regimens for metastatic colorectal and pancreatic cancer treatment using irinotecan, guidelines for toxicity reduction, and an evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of UGT1A1 genotype testing.

Model-Based Prediction of Irinotecan-Induced Grade 4 Neutropenia in Cancer Patients: Influence of Incorporating Germline Genetic Factors in the Model

Neutropenia is the major dose-limiting toxicity of irinotecan-based therapy. The objective of this study was to assess whether inclusion of germline genetic variants into a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model can improve prediction of irinotecan-induced grade 4 neutropenia and identify novel variants of clinical value. A semimechanistic population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model was used to predict neutrophil response over time in 197 patients receiving irinotecan. Covariate analysis was performed for demographic/clinical factors and 4,781 genetic variants in 84 drug response- and toxicity-related genes to identify covariates associated with neutrophil response. We evaluated the predictive value of the model for grade 4 neutropenia reflecting different clinical scenarios of available data on identified demographic/clinical covariates, baseline and post-treatment absolute neutrophil counts (ANCs), individual pharmacokinetics, and germline genetic variation. Adding 8 genetic identified covariates (rs10929302 (UGT1A1), rs1042482 (DPYD), rs2859101 (HLA-DQB3), rs61754806 (NR3C1), rs9266271 (HLA-B), rs7294 (VKORC1), rs1051713 (ALOX5), and ABCB1 rare variant burden) to a model using only baseline ANCs improved prediction of irinotecan-induced grade 4 neutropenia from area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC-ROC) of 50-64% (95% confidence interval (CI), 54-74%). Individual pharmacokinetics further improved the prediction to 74% (95% CI, 64-84%). When weekly ANC was available, the identified covariates and individual pharmacokinetics yielded no additional contribution to the prediction. The model including only ANCs at baseline and at week 1 achieved an AUC-ROC of 78% (95% CI, 69-88%). Germline DNA genetic variants may contribute to the prediction of irinotecan-induced grade 4 neutropenia when incorporated into a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model. This approach is generalizable to drugs that induce neutropenia and ultimately allows for personalized intervention to enhance patient safety.

UGT1A1 genotype-guided irinotecan dosing during neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy for locally advanced rectal cancer: A prospective analysis of SN-38 concentration

Irinotecan plays a crucial role in the neoadjuvant chemoradiotherapy (nCRT) of rectal cancer, but its optimal dosing is still unclear. In this study, we included 101 eligible patients with the UGT1A1*28 genotype of UGT1A1*1*1 (74.3%) and UGT1A1*1*28 (25.7%) and UGT1A1*6 genotypes of GG (63.4%), GA (32.7%), and AA (3.9%). All patients received preoperative radiotherapy (50 Gy/25 fractions) with concurrent irinotecan (UGT1A1*1*1: 80 mg/m2 ; UGT1A1*1*28: 65 mg/m2 ) and capecitabine (CapIri). SN-38 concentrations were measured at 1.5, 24, and 49 h post-administration. Patients were divided into four groups (Q1-Q4) based on the SN-38 concentration. The complete-response (CR) rate was the primary endpoint. The analysis demonstrated that the 49 h SN-38 concentration was relatively optimal for predicting efficacy and toxicity. The Q4 group had a significantly higher CR rate than the Q1 group (p = .019), but also higher rates of adverse events (p = .009). We screened the recommended 49 h SN-38, with a 0.5-1.0 ng/mL concentration range. We also validated the correlation between UGT1A1*6 polymorphism and SN-38 concentration, along with the clinical efficacy of irinotecan. In conclusion, our study identified the relatively optimal timepoint and concentration range for monitoring SN38 concentrations and revealed the clinical significance of UGT1A1*6 and UGT1A1*28 polymorphisms in guiding irinotecan administration, offering meaningful insights for personalised irinotecan dosing.

A phase-II study based on dose adjustment according to UGT1A1 polymorphism: is irinotecan underdosed in first-line FOLFIRI regimen for mCRC?

PURPOSE

Irinotecan has considerable importance in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). UDP-glucoronyltransferase (UGT) 1A1 is responsible for the inactivation of SN-38, a metabolite of irinotecan. Depending on UGT1A1 polymorphism, the activity of the UGT enzyme can be reduced leading to more frequent occurrence of adverse events related to irinotecan. The present study aimed to assess the safety and efficacy of different doses of irinotecan adjusted according to UGT1A1 polymorphism.

METHODS

Thirty-four patients treated with FOLFIRI as first-line treatment for mCRC were included in this study. The irinotecan dosage was adapted on the basis of UGT1A1 polymorphisms: *1/*1 (370 mg/m2); *1/*28 (310 mg/m2), and *28/*28 (180 mg/m2). The incidence of grades 3 and 4 toxicities (neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and diarrhoea) was recorded. Response was assessed according to the RECIST 1.1 criteria.

RESULTS

On the basis of UGT1A1 genotyping, 20 patients were *1/*1 (58.8%), 12 were *1/*28 (35.3%) and 2 were *28/*28 (5.9%). Seven patients experienced at least one severe toxicity, i.e., 21% of the population, amounting to eleven adverse events. Concerning the response rate, 15 patients (44%) had partial or complete response.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrates that mCRC patients treated with FOLFIRI can tolerate a higher dose of irinotecan than the standard dose, i.e., > 180 mg/m2, on the basis of their UGT1A1 genotype, without increased toxicities.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT01963182 (registered on 16/10/2013, Clermont-Ferrand, France).

Intraperitoneal irinotecan with concomitant FOLFOX and bevacizumab for patients with unresectable colorectal peritoneal metastases: protocol of the multicentre, open-label, phase II, INTERACT-II trial

INTRODUCTION

The peritoneum is the second most affected organ for the dissemination of colorectal cancer (CRC). Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases (CPM) face a poor prognosis, despite the majority of patients being treated with palliative systemic therapy. The efficacy of palliative systemic therapy is limited due to the plasma-peritoneum barrier. The poor prognosis of unresectable CPM patients has resulted in the development of new treatment strategies where systemic therapy is combined with local, intraperitoneal chemotherapy. In the recently published phase I study, the maximum tolerated dose and thus the recommended phase II dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan was investigated and determined to be 75 mg. In the present study, the overall survival after treatment with 75 mg irinotecan with concomitant mFOLFOX4 and bevacizumab will be investigated.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this single-arm phase II study in two Dutch tertiary referral centres, 85 patients are enrolled. Eligibility criteria are an adequate performance status and organ function, histologically confirmed microsatellite stable and unresectable CPM, no previous palliative therapy for CRC, no systemic therapy<6 months for CRC prior to enrolment and no previous cytoreductive surgery and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (CRS and HIPEC). Patients will undergo a diagnostic laparoscopy as standard work-up for CPM and if the peritoneal disease is considered unresectable (eg, Peritoneal Cancer Index (PCI)>20, too extensive small bowel involvement), a peritoneal access port and a port-a-cath are placed for administration of intraperitoneal and intravenous chemotherapy, respectively. Patients may undergo up to 12 cycles of study treatment. Each cycle consists of intravenous mFOLFOX4 with bevacizumab and concomitant intraperitoneal irinotecan (75 mg), which is repeated every 2 weeks, with a maximum of 12 cycles. Modified FOLFOX-4 regimen consists of 85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin plus 200 mg/m2 LV and 5-FU 400 mg/m2 bolus on day 1 followed by 1600 mg/m2 5-FU as a 46 hours infusion. Study treatment ends after the 12th cycle, or earlier in case of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary outcome is overall survival and key secondary outcomes are progression-free survival, safety (measured by the amount of grade ≥3 adverse events (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events V.5.0)), patient-reported outcomes and pharmacokinetics of irinotecan. It is hypothesised that the trial treatment will lead to a 4 month increase in overall survival; from a median of 12.2 to 16.2 months.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is approved by the Dutch Authority (CCMO, the Hague, the Netherlands), by a central medical ethics committee (MEC-U, Nieuwegein, the Netherlands) and by the institutional research boards of both research centres. Results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed medical journals and presented to patients and healthcare professionals.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT06003998.

Pharmacogenetics testing (DPYD and UGT1A1) for fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan in routine clinical care: Perspectives of medical oncologists and oncology pharmacists

BACKGROUND

Despite robust evidence and international guidelines, to support routine pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing, integration in practice has been limited. This study explored clinicians' views and experiences of pre-treatment DPYD and UGT1A1 gene testing and barriers to and enablers of routine clinical implementation.

METHODS

A study-specific 17-question survey was emailed (01 February-12 April 2022) to clinicians from the Medical Oncology Group of Australia (MOGA), the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia (COSA) and International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners (ISOPP). Data were analysed and reported using descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

Responses were collected from 156 clinicians (78% medical oncologists, 22% pharmacists). Median response rate of 8% (ranged from 6% to 24%) across all organisations. Only 21% routinely test for DPYD and 1% for UGT1A1. For patients undergoing curative/palliative intent treatments, clinicians reported intent to implement genotype-guided dosing by reducing FP dose for DPYD intermediate metabolisers (79%/94%), avoiding FP for DPYD poor metabolisers (68%/90%), and reducing irinotecan dose for UGT1A1 poor metabolisers (84%, palliative setting only). Barriers to implementation included: lack of financial reimbursements (82%) and perceived lengthy test turnaround time (76%). Most Clinicians identified a dedicated program coordinator, i.e., PGx pharmacist (74%) and availability of resources for education/training (74%) as enablers to implementation.

CONCLUSION

PGx testing is not routinely practised despite robust evidence for its impact on clinical decision making in curative and palliative settings. Research data, education and implementation studies may overcome clinicians' hesitancy to follow guidelines, especially for curative intent treatments, and may overcome other identified barriers to routine clinical implementation.

Role of MRPs transporters in pharmacokinetics and intestinal toxicity of irinotecan

To identify additional genetic markers contributing to variability in CPT-11 disposition and toxicity, we assessed impact of the multiple drug-resistant transporters 1, 2, and 3 (MRP1, MRP2, and MRP3) on the intestinal toxicity, pharmacokinetics, tissue distribution and biliary excretion of CPT-11 using a knockout mouse model. Mrp1/3 knockout had minor impact on intestinal toxicity of CPT-11, tissue distribution, biliary excretion, and PK parameter of its active metabolites SN38. Conversely, Mrp2-/- mice, with low carboxylesterase activity, displayed insensitivity to CPT-11 toxicity due to reduced intestinal exposure to SN38. In PK studies, Mrp1/2 knockout significantly increased the AUC of CPT-11 compared to their AUC in FVB mice. However, the AUC of SN38 in Mrp2 -/- mice was decreased by 3.25-fold. Mrp3 knockout only slightly increased SN38 plasma exposure. Lastly, Mrp2/3 knockout increased biliary excretion amount of CPT-11 by 67.2% and 48.5% compared to wild-type mice, respectively. Consequently, Mrp1/3 deficiency didn't change SN38 tissue distribution. Finally, correlation analysis demonstrated that tissue exposure to SN38 was better correlated with toxicity than plasma AUC of SN38. Mrp1/2/3 deficiency showed a minor impact on PK, biliary excretion, distribution and intestinal exposure of SN38, and as a result, did not affect the intestinal toxicity of CPT-11.

Impact of Pharmacogenomics in Clinical Practice

Polymorphisms of genes encoding drug metabolizing enzymes and transporters can significantly modify pharmacokinetics, and this can be associated with significant differences in drug efficacy, safety, and tolerability. Moreover, genetic variants of some components of the immune system can explain clinically relevant drug-related adverse events. However, the implementation of drug dose individualization based on pharmacogenomics remains scarce. In this narrative review, the impact of genetic variations on the disposition, safety, and tolerability of the most commonly prescribed drugs is reported. Moreover, reasons for poor implementation of pharmacogenomics in everyday clinical settings are discussed. The literature analysis showed that knowledge of how genetic variations can modify the effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of a drug can lead to the adjustment of usually recommended drug dosages, improve effectiveness, and reduce drug-related adverse events. Despite some efforts to introduce pharmacogenomics in clinical practice, presently very few centers routinely use genetic tests as a guide for drug prescription. The education of health care professionals seems critical to keep pace with the rapidly evolving field of pharmacogenomics. Moreover, multimodal algorithms that incorporate both clinical and genetic factors in drug prescribing could significantly help in this regard. Obviously, further studies which definitively establish which genetic variations play a role in conditioning drug effectiveness and safety are needed. Many problems must be solved, but the advantages for human health fully justify all the efforts.

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.

Irinotecan-Induced Toxicity: A Pharmacogenetic Study Beyond UGT1A1

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Side effects of irinotecan treatment can be dose limiting and may impair quality of life. In this study, we investigated the correlation between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes encoding enzymes involved in the irinotecan metabolism and transport, outside UGT1A1, and irinotecan-related toxicity. We focused on carboxylesterases, which are involved in formation of the active metabolite SN-38 and on drug transporters.

METHODS

Patients who provided written informed consent at the Erasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute to the Code Geno study (local protocol: MEC02-1002) or the IRI28-study (NTR-6612) were enrolled in the study and were genotyped for 15 SNPs in the genes CES1, CES2, SLCO1B1, ABCB1, ABCC2, and ABCG2.

RESULTS

From 299 evaluable patients, 86 patients (28.8%) developed severe irinotecan-related toxicity. A significantly higher risk of toxicity was seen in ABCG2 c.421C>A variant allele carriers (P = 0.030, OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.06-3.34). Higher age was associated with all grade diarrhea (P = 0.041, OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00-1.06). In addition, CES1 c.1165-41C>T and CES1 n.95346T>C variant allele carriers had a lower risk of all-grade thrombocytopenia (P = 0.024, OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20-0.90 and P = 0.018, OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08-0.79, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Our study indicates that ABCG2 and CES1 SNPs might be used as predictive markers for irinotecan-induced toxicity.

Phase I study of intraperitoneal irinotecan combined with palliative systemic chemotherapy in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases

BACKGROUND

Patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases who are not eligible for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) and hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) owing to extensive peritoneal disease have a poor prognosis. It was hypothesized that these patients may benefit from the addition of intraperitoneal irinotecan to standard palliative systemic chemotherapy.

METHODS

This was a classical 3 + 3 phase I dose-escalation trial in patients with colorectal peritoneal metastases who were not eligible for CRS-HIPEC. Intraperitoneal irinotecan was administered every 2 weeks, concomitantly with systemic FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, folinic acid, oxaliplatin)-bevacizumab. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicities. Secondary objectives were to elucidate the systemic and intraperitoneal pharmacokinetics, safety profile, and efficacy.

RESULTS

Eighteen patients were treated. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed with 50 mg (4 patients) and 75 mg (9 patients) intraperitoneal irinotecan. Two dose-limiting toxicities occurred with 100 mg irinotecan among five patients. The maximum tolerated dose of intraperitoneal irinotecan was established to be 75 mg, and it was well tolerated. Intraperitoneal exposure to SN-38 (active metabolite of irinotecan) was high compared with systemic exposure (median intraperitoneal area under the curve (AUC) to systemic AUC ratio 4.6). Thirteen patients had a partial radiological response and five had stable disease. Four patients showed a complete response during post-treatment diagnostic laparoscopy. Five patients underwent salvage resection or CRS-HIPEC. Median overall survival was 23.9 months.

CONCLUSION

Administration of 75 mg intraperitoneal irinotecan concomitantly with systemic FOLFOX-bevacizumab was safe and well tolerated. Intraperitoneal SN-38 exposure was high and prolonged. As oncological outcomes were promising, intraperitoneal administration of irinotecan may be a good alternative to other, more invasive and costly treatment options. A phase II study is currently accruing.

Dutch pharmacogenetics working group (DPWG) guideline for the gene-drug interaction between UGT1A1 and irinotecan

The Dutch Pharmacogenetics Working Group (DPWG) aims to facilitate PGx implementation by developing evidence-based pharmacogenetics guidelines to optimize pharmacotherapy. This guideline describes the starting dose optimization of the anti-cancer drug irinotecan to decrease the risk of severe toxicity, such as (febrile) neutropenia or diarrhoea. Uridine diphosphate glucuronosyl transferase 1A1 (UGT1A1 encoded by the UGT1A1 gene) enzyme deficiency increases risk of irinotecan-induced toxicity. Gene variants leading to UGT1A1 enzyme deficiency (e.g. UGT1A1*6, *28 and *37) can be used to optimize an individual's starting dose thereby preventing carriers from toxicity. Homozygous or compound heterozygous carriers of these allele variants are defined as UGT1A1 poor metabolisers (PM). DPWG recommends a 70% starting dose in PM patients and no dose reduction in IM patients who start treatment with irinotecan. Based on the DPWG clinical implication score, UGT1A1 genotyping is considered "essential", indicating that UGT1A1 testing must be performed prior to initiating irinotecan treatment.

UGT1A1 genotype-guided dosing of irinotecan: time to prioritize patient safety

Tweetable abstract Pretreatment UGT1A1 genotyping and a 70% irinotecan dose intensity in poor metabolizers is safe, feasible, cost-effective and essential for safe irinotecan treatment in cancer patients. It is time to update guidelines to swiftly enable the implementation of UGT1A1 genotype-guided irinotecan dosing in routine oncology care.

Bicyclol attenuates high fat diet-induced non-alcoholic fatty liver disease/non-alcoholic steatohepatitis through modulating multiple pathways in mice

Introduction: The pathological progression of non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is driven by multiple factors, and non-alcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH) represents its progressive form. In our previous studies, we found that bicyclol had beneficial effects on NAFLD/ NASH. Here we aim to investigate the underlying molecular mechanisms of the bicyclol effect on NAFLD/NASH induced by high-fat diet (HFD) feeding.

Methods: A mice model of NAFLD/NASH induced by HFD-feeding for 8 weeks was used. As a pretreatment, bicyclol (200 mg/kg) was given to mice by oral gavage twice daily. Hematoxylin and eosin (H&amp;E) stains were processed to evaluate hepatic steatosis, and hepatic fibrous hyperplasia was assessed by Masson staining. Biochemistry analyses were used to measure serum aminotransferase, serum lipids, and lipids in liver tissues. Proteomics and bioinformatics analyses were performed to identify the signaling pathways and target proteins. Data are available via Proteome X change with identifier PXD040233. The real-time RT-PCR and Western blot analyses were performed to verify the proteomics data.

Results: Bicyclol had a markedly protective effect against NAFLD/NASH by suppressing the increase of serum aminotransferase, hepatic lipid accumulation and alleviating histopathological changes in liver tissues. Proteomics analyses showed that bicyclol remarkably restored major pathways related to immunological responses and metabolic processes altered by HFD feeding. Consistent with our previous results, bicyclol significantly inhibited inflammation and oxidative stress pathway related indexes (SAA1, GSTM1 and GSTA1). Furthermore, the beneficial effects of bicyclol were closely associated with the signaling pathways of bile acid metabolism (NPC1, SLCOLA4 and UGT1A1), cytochrome P450-mediated metabolism (CYP2C54, CYP3A11 and CYP3A25), biological processes such as metal ion metabolism (Ceruloplasmin and Metallothionein-1), angiogenesis (ALDH1A1) and immunological responses (IFI204 and IFIT3).

Discussion: These findings suggested that bicyclol is a potential preventive agent for NAFLD/NASH by targeting multiple mechanisms in future clinical investigations.

Importance of pharmacologic considerations in the development of targeted anticancer agents for children

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to describe key pharmacologic considerations to inform strategies in drug development for pediatric cancer.

RECENT FINDINGS

Main themes that will be discussed include considering patient specific factors, epigenetic/genetic tumor context, and drug schedule when optimizing protocols to treat pediatric cancers.

SUMMARY

Considering these factors will allow us to more effectively translate novel targeted therapies to benefit pediatric patients.

Pharmacogenomics: current status and future perspectives

Inter-individual variability in drug response, be it efficacy or safety, is common and likely to become an increasing problem globally given the growing elderly population requiring treatment. Reasons for this inter-individual variability include genomic factors, an area of study called pharmacogenomics. With genotyping technologies now widely available and decreasing in cost, implementing pharmacogenomics into clinical practice - widely regarded as one of the initial steps in mainstreaming genomic medicine - is currently a focus in many countries worldwide. However, major challenges of implementation lie at the point of delivery into health-care systems, including the modification of current clinical pathways coupled with a massive knowledge gap in pharmacogenomics in the health-care workforce. Pharmacogenomics can also be used in a broader sense for drug discovery and development, with increasing evidence suggesting that genomically defined targets have an increased success rate during clinical development.

Temporal offset association between the number of irinotecan-related adverse reactions and pharmacogenomic studies: A cross-correlation analysis

Objectives

Studies have proved that UGT1A1 (*6, *28 and *93) gene polymorphism was closely related to the side effects of irinotecan. This study intends to perform a correlation analysis on the relationship between pharmacogenomic studies and ADRs based on time series.

Methods

The ADRs related to irinotecan were derived through the FAERS; searched all pharmacogenomic studies in PubMed and Web of Science; then analyzed the sequence of correlation coefficients between total ADRs, fatal ADRs and pharmacogenomic studies under different time offset.

Results

There is a positive correlation between the number of total ADRs and pharmacogenomic studies, of which the maximum correlation coefficient was 0.78 (95 % CI: 0.58-0.90), with a lag of 1 year. There is also a positive correlation between the number of fatal ADRs and pharmacogenomic studies, with the maximum correlation coefficient of 0.87 (95 % CI: 0.73-0.94) and a offset of - 4 years.

Conclusion

It was found that both the total ADRs and fatal ADRs were significantly positively correlated with change trend of published pharmacogenomic literatures, which confirmed the role of pharmacogenomic research in promoting the safe use of irinotecan, and have a faster response time in reducing fatal ADRs during clinical application.

Genotyping of UGT1A1*80 as an Alternative to UGT1A1*28 Genotyping in Spain

Background: The variant rs34983651 (UGT1A1*28) and its genotyping are used to prevent irinotecan-induced toxicity. Several variants are in close linkage disequilibrium. Our objective was to evaluate the potential correlation of genotyping UGT1A1*80 instead of UGT1A1*28 in different populations. Methods: We studied SNPs in linkage disequilibrium with UGT1A1*28 in several populations and selected rs887829 to develop an inexpensive and rapid genotyping method and compare it with the one we currently use for UGT1A1*28 genotyping. Samples from cancer patients (n = 701) already tested using PCR and electrophoresis prior to treatment with irinotecan for rs34983651 (UGT1A1*28) in a Spanish hospital were genotyped for rs887829 (UGT1A1*80) using real-time PCR with a TaqMan probe. Results: We observed a complete match for both genotypes, except in one sample. This method was 100% efficient in correctly genotyping *28/*28 patients, 99.68% efficient for *1/*28, and 100% efficient for *1/*1. Linkage disequilibrium between populations showed the Iberian population to be the most suitable for the clinical use of UGT1A1*80. This method is less expensive and the time to decision is shorter. Conclusion: Genotyping of rs887829 using the proposed method may be used to substitute genotyping of rs34983651 as a pharmacogenetics test in cancer patients prior to starting irinotecan-based treatments, mainly in the Iberian population. In addition, it is less expensive than other conventional methods and easy to implement, with a shorter time to decision than UGT1A1*28.

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.

Irinotecan dose reduction in metastatic colorectal cancer patients with homozygous UGT1A1*28 polymorphism: a single-center case series

OBJECTIVE

The UGT1A1*28 polymorphism reduces UGT1A1 enzymatic activity, which may increase the risk of severe toxicity in patients who receive standard-dose irinotecan, such as severe neutropenia and diarrhea. This real-world study assessed the optimal irinotecan dose in terms of efficacy and toxicity in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients homozygous for the UGT1A1*28 polymorphism and receiving FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab or cetuximab as first-line therapy.

METHODS

We analyzed toxicity and treatment outcomes in seven mCRC patients who were homozygous for UGT1A1*28 and received FOLFIRI plus bevacizumab or cetuximab, with an initial irinotecan dose of 120 mg/m².

RESULTS

Six of the seven patients tolerated 120 mg/m² irinotecan without requiring dose reductions in subsequent cycles. The overall response and disease control rates were 43.0% (3/7) and 71.4% (5/7), respectively. The median progression-free survival and overall survival were 11.0 and 33.0 months, respectively. Only one severe adverse event, grade III neutropenia (2.5%), was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

mCRC patients homozygous for the UGT1A1*28 allele can tolerate irinotecan at an initial dose of 120 mg/m² with favorable oncological outcomes and toxicity profiles. Further prospective studies are warranted to optimize irinotecan-based chemotherapy in these patients.

Implementing Pre-Therapeutic UGT1A1 Genotyping in Clinical Practice: A Real-Life Study

Current guidelines recommend pre-therapeutic UGT1A1 genotyping to guide irinotecan dosing, but the usefulness of this approach remains to be clarified. In 247 patients with advanced gastrointestinal cancers undergoing irinotecan-based chemotherapy, we prospectively performed UGT1A1*28 genotyping and we analyzed the incidence of severe neutropenia according to genotype-guided dose reductions. Overall, 28 (11.3%) and 92 (37.2%) patients were homozygous or heterozygous UGT1A1*28 carriers, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 neutropenia was reported in 39% of homozygous patients receiving an upfront dose reduction of irinotecan (median 40%, range 22–58%), in 20% of heterozygous or wild-type patients receiving full dose (OR_{vs*28/*28 genotype} = 0.38; 95% CI: 0.14–1.03; p = 0.058), and in 15.3% of those receiving a reduced dose for clinical reasons (OR _{vs*28/*28 genotype} = 0.28, 95% IC: 0.12–0.67; p = 0.004). Occurrence of severe neutropenia was inversely associated with dose reduction in UGT1A1*28 homozygous carriers (OR_{x10 unit} = 0.62, 95% CI: 0.27–1.40, p = 0.249) and UGT1A1 heterozygous or wild-type patients (OR_{x10 unit} = 0.87, 95% CI: 0.59–1.28, p = 0.478). Incidence of severe neutropenia was related to irinotecan doses and UGT1A1 polymorphisms. Upfront irinotecan dose reductions do not reduce the burden of grade ≥ 3 neutropenia in UGT1A1*28 homozygous carriers.