2
|
Bergan S, Brunet M, Hesselink DA, Johnson-Davis KL, Kunicki PK, Lemaitre F, Marquet P, Molinaro M, Noceti O, Pattanaik S, Pawinski T, Seger C, Shipkova M, Swen JJ, van Gelder T, Venkataramanan R, Wieland E, Woillard JB, Zwart TC, Barten MJ, Budde K, Dieterlen MT, Elens L, Haufroid V, Masuda S, Millan O, Mizuno T, Moes DJAR, Oellerich M, Picard N, Salzmann L, Tönshoff B, van Schaik RHN, Vethe NT, Vinks AA, Wallemacq P, Åsberg A, Langman LJ. Personalized Therapy for Mycophenolate: Consensus Report by the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology. Ther Drug Monit 2021; 43:150-200. [PMID: 33711005 DOI: 10.1097/ftd.0000000000000871] [Citation(s) in RCA: 85] [Impact Index Per Article: 28.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/03/2020] [Accepted: 01/29/2021] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
ABSTRACT When mycophenolic acid (MPA) was originally marketed for immunosuppressive therapy, fixed doses were recommended by the manufacturer. Awareness of the potential for a more personalized dosing has led to development of methods to estimate MPA area under the curve based on the measurement of drug concentrations in only a few samples. This approach is feasible in the clinical routine and has proven successful in terms of correlation with outcome. However, the search for superior correlates has continued, and numerous studies in search of biomarkers that could better predict the perfect dosage for the individual patient have been published. As it was considered timely for an updated and comprehensive presentation of consensus on the status for personalized treatment with MPA, this report was prepared following an initiative from members of the International Association of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring and Clinical Toxicology (IATDMCT). Topics included are the criteria for analytics, methods to estimate exposure including pharmacometrics, the potential influence of pharmacogenetics, development of biomarkers, and the practical aspects of implementation of target concentration intervention. For selected topics with sufficient evidence, such as the application of limited sampling strategies for MPA area under the curve, graded recommendations on target ranges are presented. To provide a comprehensive review, this report also includes updates on the status of potential biomarkers including those which may be promising but with a low level of evidence. In view of the fact that there are very few new immunosuppressive drugs under development for the transplant field, it is likely that MPA will continue to be prescribed on a large scale in the upcoming years. Discontinuation of therapy due to adverse effects is relatively common, increasing the risk for late rejections, which may contribute to graft loss. Therefore, the continued search for innovative methods to better personalize MPA dosage is warranted.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stein Bergan
- Department of Pharmacology, Oslo University Hospital and Department of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Mercè Brunet
- Pharmacology and Toxicology Laboratory, Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics Department, Biomedical Diagnostic Center, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBERehd, Spain
| | - Dennis A Hesselink
- Department of Internal Medicine, Division of Nephrology and Transplantation, Erasmus MC, University Medical Center Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Kamisha L Johnson-Davis
- Department of Pathology, University of Utah Health Sciences Center and ARUP Laboratories, Salt Lake City, Utah
| | - Paweł K Kunicki
- Department of Drug Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Medical University of Warsaw, Warszawa, Poland
| | - Florian Lemaitre
- Univ Rennes, CHU Rennes, Inserm, EHESP, Irset (Institut de recherche en santé, environnement et travail)-UMR_S 1085, Rennes, France
| | - Pierre Marquet
- INSERM, Université de Limoges, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, CHU de Limoges, U1248 IPPRITT, Limoges, France
| | - Mariadelfina Molinaro
- Clinical and Experimental Pharmacokinetics Lab, Fondazione IRCCS Policlinico San Matteo, Pavia, Italy
| | - Ofelia Noceti
- National Center for Liver Tansplantation and Liver Diseases, Army Forces Hospital, Montevideo, Uruguay
| | | | - Tomasz Pawinski
- Department of Drug Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmacy, Medical University of Warsaw, Warszawa, Poland
| | | | - Maria Shipkova
- Synlab TDM Competence Center, Synlab MVZ Leinfelden-Echterdingen GmbH, Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany
| | - Jesse J Swen
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy & Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Teun van Gelder
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy & Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Raman Venkataramanan
- Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, School of Pharmacy and Department of Pathology, Starzl Transplantation Institute, School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania
| | - Eberhard Wieland
- Synlab TDM Competence Center, Synlab MVZ Leinfelden-Echterdingen GmbH, Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany
| | - Jean-Baptiste Woillard
- INSERM, Université de Limoges, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, CHU de Limoges, U1248 IPPRITT, Limoges, France
| | - Tom C Zwart
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy & Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Markus J Barten
- Department of Cardiac- and Vascular Surgery, University Heart and Vascular Center Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
| | - Klemens Budde
- Department of Nephrology, Charité Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany
| | - Maja-Theresa Dieterlen
- Department of Cardiac Surgery, Heart Center, HELIOS Clinic, University Hospital Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany
| | - Laure Elens
- Integrated PharmacoMetrics, PharmacoGenomics and PharmacoKinetics (PMGK) Research Group, Louvain Drug Research Institute (LDRI), Université Catholique de Louvain (UCLouvain), Brussels, Belgium
| | - Vincent Haufroid
- Louvain Centre for Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology (LTAP), Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, UCLouvain and Department of Clinical Chemistry, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Satohiro Masuda
- Department of Pharmacy, International University of Health and Welfare Narita Hospital, Chiba, Japan
| | - Olga Millan
- Pharmacology and Toxicology Laboratory, Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics Department, Biomedical Diagnostic Center, Hospital Clinic of Barcelona, University of Barcelona, IDIBAPS, CIBERehd, Spain
| | - Tomoyuki Mizuno
- Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Cincinnati Children's Hospital Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio
- Department of Pediatrics, University of Cincinnati College of Medicine, Cincinnati, Ohio
| | - Dirk J A R Moes
- Department of Clinical Pharmacy & Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
| | - Michael Oellerich
- Department of Clinical Pharmacology, University Medical Center Göttingen, Georg-August-University Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany
| | - Nicolas Picard
- INSERM, Université de Limoges, Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, CHU de Limoges, U1248 IPPRITT, Limoges, France
| | | | - Burkhard Tönshoff
- Department of Pediatrics I, University Children's Hospital, Heidelberg, Germany
| | - Ron H N van Schaik
- Department of Clinical Chemistry, Erasmus MC University Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
| | - Nils Tore Vethe
- Department of Pharmacology, Oslo University Hospital and Department of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
| | - Alexander A Vinks
- Department of Pharmacy, International University of Health and Welfare Narita Hospital, Chiba, Japan
| | - Pierre Wallemacq
- Clinical Chemistry Department, Cliniques Universitaires St Luc, Université Catholique de Louvain, LTAP, Brussels, Belgium
| | - Anders Åsberg
- Department of Transplantation Medicine, Oslo University Hospital-Rikshospitalet and Department of Pharmacy, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway; and
| | - Loralie J Langman
- Department of Laboratory Medicine and Pathology, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Bernard PS, Wooderchak-Donahue W, Wei M, Bray SM, Wood KC, Parikh B, McMillin GA. Potential Utility of Pre-Emptive Germline Pharmacogenetics in Breast Cancer. Cancers (Basel) 2021; 13:cancers13061219. [PMID: 33799547 PMCID: PMC7998388 DOI: 10.3390/cancers13061219] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/16/2021] [Revised: 03/05/2021] [Accepted: 03/06/2021] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
Patients with breast cancer often receive many drugs to manage the cancer, side effects associated with cancer treatment, and co-morbidities (i.e., polypharmacy). Drug-drug and drug-gene interactions contribute to the risk of adverse events (AEs), which could lead to non-adherence and reduced efficacy. Here we investigated several well-characterized inherited (germline) pharmacogenetic (PGx) targets in 225 patients with breast cancer. All relevant clinical, pharmaceutical, and PGx diplotype data were aggregated into a single unifying informatics platform to enable an exploratory analysis of the cohort and to evaluate pharmacy ordering patterns. Of the drugs recorded, there were 38 for which high levels of evidence for clinical actionability with PGx was available from the US FDA and/or the Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC). These data were associated with 10 pharmacogenes: DPYD, CYP2C9, CYP2C19, CYP2D6, CYP3A5, CYP4F2, G6PD, MT-RNR1, SLCO1B1, and VKORC1. All patients were taking at least one of the 38 drugs and had inherited at least one actionable PGx variant that would have informed prescribing decisions if this information had been available pre-emptively. The non-cancer drugs with PGx implications that were common (prescribed to at least one-third of patients) included anti-depressants, anti-infectives, non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, opioids, and proton pump inhibitors. Based on these results, we conclude that pre-emptive PGx testing may benefit patients with breast cancer by informing drug and dose selection to maximize efficacy and minimize AEs.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Philip S. Bernard
- ARUP Institute for Clinical and Experimental Pathology, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA; (P.S.B.); (W.W.-D.)
- Department of Pathology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA;
| | - Whitney Wooderchak-Donahue
- ARUP Institute for Clinical and Experimental Pathology, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA; (P.S.B.); (W.W.-D.)
- Department of Pathology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
| | - Mei Wei
- Huntsman Cancer Institute, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA;
- Division of Oncology, Department of Internal Medicine, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
| | - Steven M. Bray
- LifeOmic Inc., Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA; (S.M.B.); (K.C.W.); (B.P.)
| | - Kevin C. Wood
- LifeOmic Inc., Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA; (S.M.B.); (K.C.W.); (B.P.)
| | - Baiju Parikh
- LifeOmic Inc., Indianapolis, IN 46202, USA; (S.M.B.); (K.C.W.); (B.P.)
| | - Gwendolyn A. McMillin
- ARUP Institute for Clinical and Experimental Pathology, Salt Lake City, UT 84108, USA; (P.S.B.); (W.W.-D.)
- Department of Pathology, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USA
- Correspondence: ; Tel.: +1-801-583-2787 (ext. 2671)
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Shipkova M, Christians U. Improving Therapeutic Decisions: Pharmacodynamic Monitoring as an Integral Part of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring. Ther Drug Monit 2019; 41:111-114. [PMID: 30883504 PMCID: PMC6481676 DOI: 10.1097/ftd.0000000000000627] [Citation(s) in RCA: 8] [Impact Index Per Article: 1.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Grants] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/25/2022]
Abstract
Although the monitoring of drug therapies based on the determination of drug concentrations in biological materials is certainly an important instrument for individualized dosing and dose adjustment with a broad variety of pharmaceuticals, its role is limited by the fact that it does not reflect pharmacodynamic (PD) and toxicodynamic interactions such as those caused by individual and environment-related factors. However, these interactions are important for both the efficacy and the safety of the drug therapy. Therefore, during recent years, there is an increased interest in personalized drug therapy as reflected by the development and clinical implementation of molecular "biomarkers" that are direct or surrogate markers of pharmacological effects [PD therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)]. Moreover, this process is driven by new developments in instrumentation, such as mass spectrometry and array technologies, and in computational biology/pharmacology, databases, and bioinformatics. This Focus Issue of the journal focuses on current achievements in and status of PD TDM with different classes of drugs. The contributions to the present issue of Therapeutic Drug Monitoring provide a critical analysis of current practices of TDM with their limitations, introduce newer promising biomarkers in the field of PD TDM, discuss the challenges faced to date in translating preclinical tools into clinical settings, and point out recent advances in the establishment of modeling approaches that apply to pharmacokinetics (PK)/PD as well as pharmacogenetic information.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Maria Shipkova
- Competence Center for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring, SYNLAB Holding Germany GmbH, SYNLAB MVZ Leinfelden-Echterdingen GmbH, Leinfelden-Echterdingen, Germany
| | - Uwe Christians
- iC42 Clinical Research and Development, Department of Anesthesiology, University of Colorado, Anschutz Medical Campus, Aurora, Colorado
| |
Collapse
|