Automation in Busulfan Therapeutic Drug Monitoring: Evaluation of an Immunoassay on two Routine Chemistry Analyzers

Evaluation of Busulfan as a Third-Party Immunoassay on a Clinical Chemistry Analyzer

BACKGROUND

Busulfan is widely used in conditioning regimens to prepare patients for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is critical due to large inter- and intra-individual variability in busulfan pharmacokinetics, and the risk of adverse consequences of toxicity including hepatic veno-occlusive disease. Busulfan is most commonly measured by liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS), which is not as widely available in clinical laboratories as automated routine clinical chemistry analyzers. The objective was to perform analytical verification of a busulfan immunoassay on the Abbott Alinity c platform.

METHODS

The MyCare Oncology busulfan immunoassay was configured as a third-party reagent on the Abbott Alinity c. Imprecision, linearity, sample carryover, and onboard stability of reagent studies were evaluated. The performance of the busulfan immunoassay using the Abbott Alinity c was compared to the Beckman Coulter AU480 using sodium heparinized plasma, as well as to LC-MS/MS using lithium heparinized plasma.

RESULTS

The imprecision goal of 8% was met, and linearity within the analytical measurement range of 240 to 1700 ng/mL was verified. Sample carryover was negligible, and the reagents were stable onboard for at least 84 days. The busulfan immunoassay correlated well with LC-MS/MS (slope = 0.949, y-intercept = -7.8 ng/mL, r2 = 0.9935) and the Beckman Coulter AU480 (slope = 1.090, y-intercept = -34.5 ng/mL, r2 = 0.9988).

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrated successful analytical verification of a busulfan third-party immunoassay on the Abbott Alinity c platform. The ability to perform TDM of busulfan on a routine clinical chemistry analyzer will positively impact turnaround times to improve patient outcomes.

Liquid Chromatography-Tandem Mass Spectrometry Method for the Quantification of Plasma Busulfan

Busulfan is an alkylating agent and functions as a myeloablative and anti-leukemic chemotherapy drug. It is widely used with cyclophosphamide for conditioning patients undergoing bone marrow transplantation for myeloid leukemia. Studies have shown that the busulfan plasma concentration correlates better with clinical efficacy and toxicity than the patient's administered dosage. Low concentrations predispose to disease recurrence and even graft rejection, and higher concentrations can increase the risk of hepatic toxicity. As a result, dosing levels can vary significantly from patient to patient. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of busulfan plasma concentration guides the dosage adjustment to optimally achieve complete bone marrow ablation while minimizing the dosage-dependent toxicity. The quick and precise (precision <10%) UPLC-MS/MS method described here for monitoring plasma busulfan levels between 50 ng/mL and 5000 ng/mL involves the addition of an organic solvent and deuterated internal standard (busulfan d-8) followed by a liquid-liquid extraction, injection of the extract onto a C18 column, and analysis by multiple reaction monitoring (MRM) in ESI-positive mode.

Busulfan Interlaboratory Proficiency Testing Program Revealed Worldwide Errors in Drug Quantitation and Dose Recommendations

BACKGROUND

The clinical outcomes of busulfan-based conditioning regimens for hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) have been improved by personalizing the doses to target narrow busulfan plasma exposure. An interlaboratory proficiency test program for the quantitation, pharmacokinetic modeling, and busulfan dosing in plasma was developed. Previous proficiency rounds (ie, the first 2) found that 67%-85% and 71%-88% of the dose recommendations were inaccurate, respectively.

METHODS

A proficiency test scheme was developed by the Dutch Foundation for Quality Assessment in Medical Laboratories (SKML) and consisted of 2 rounds per year, with each round containing 2 busulfan samples. In this study, 5 subsequent proficiency tests were evaluated. In each round, the participating laboratories reported their results for 2 proficiency samples (ie, low and high busulfan concentrations) and a theoretical case assessing their pharmacokinetic modeling and dose recommendations. Descriptive statistics were performed, with ±15% for busulfan concentrations and ±10% for busulfan plasma exposure. The dose recommendations were deemed accurate.

RESULTS

Since January 2020, 41 laboratories have participated in at least 1 round of this proficiency test. Over the 5 rounds, an average of 78% of the busulfan concentrations were accurate. Area under the concentration-time curve calculations were accurate in 75%-80% of the cases, whereas only 60%-69% of the dose recommendations were accurate. Compared with the first 2 proficiency test rounds (PMID 33675302, October, 2021), the busulfan quantitation results were similar, but the dose recommendations worsened. Some laboratories repeatedly submit results that deviated by more than 15% from the reference values.

CONCLUSIONS

The proficiency test showed persistent inaccuracies in busulfan quantitation, pharmacokinetic modeling, and dose recommendations. Additional educational efforts have yet to be implemented; regulatory efforts seem to be needed. The use of specialized busulfan pharmacokinetic laboratories or a sufficient performance in busulfan proficiency tests should be required for HCT centers that prescribe busulfan.

Therapeutic drug monitoring for cytotoxic anticancer drugs: Principles and evidence-based practices

Cytotoxic drugs are highly efficacious and also have low therapeutic index. A great degree of caution needs to be exercised in their usage. To optimize the efficacy these drugs need to be given at maximum tolerated dose which leads to significant amount of toxicity to the patient. The fine balance between efficacy and safety is the key to the success of cytotoxic chemotherapeutics. However, it is possibly more rewarding to obtain that balance for this class drugs as the frequency of drug related toxicities are higher compared to the other therapeutic class and are potentially life threatening and may cause prolonged morbidity. Significant efforts have been invested in last three to four decades in therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) research to understand the relationship between the drug concentration and the response achieved for therapeutic efficacy as well as drug toxicity for cytotoxic drugs. TDM evolved over this period and the evidence gathered favored its routine use for certain drugs. Since, TDM is an expensive endeavor both from economic and logistic point of view, to justify its use it is necessary to demonstrate that the implementation leads to perceivable improvement in the patient outcomes. It is indeed challenging to prove the utility of TDM in randomized controlled trials and at times may be nearly impossible to generate such data in view of the obvious findings and concern of compromising patient safety. Therefore, good quality data from well-designed observational study do add immense value to the scientific knowledge base, when they are examined in totality, despite the heterogeneity amongst them. This article compiles the summary of the evidence and the best practices for TDM for the three cytotoxic drug, busulfan, 5-FU and methotrexate. Traditional use of TDM or drug concentration data for dose modification has been witnessing a sea change and model informed precision dosing is the future of cytotoxic drug therapeutic management.