Use of Capecitabine After Renal Allograft Transplantation in Dog Erythrocyte Antigen-Matched Dogs

A pilot study investigating plasma pharmacokinetics and tolerance of oral capecitabine in carcinoma-bearing dogs

BACKGROUND

Capecitabine is an oral prodrug of the active metabolite 5-fluorouracil, which has been used effectively in human colorectal, head and neck, and mammary carcinomas. Capecitabine has several properties that make it an attractive treatment option for dogs: (i) it is relatively inexpensive, (ii) it has a short half-life in humans, allowing for rapid plasma concentration changes to be achieved with dosage adjustments, (iii) it is effective for treating carcinomas in humans, for which there are no widely-effective oral chemotherapy options in dogs, and (iv) it is thought to preferentially target cancer cells due to different expression of thymidine phosphorylase, thereby decreasing the risk of off-target side effects. However, capecitabine has not been widely explored as a chemotherapy agent for dogs. The goal of this study was to determine the plasma disposition of capecitabine in dogs following a single oral dose and to document any adverse events associated with capecitabine administration over the course of 5 weeks.

RESULTS

Capecitabine was well tolerated throughout the 5-week study period when administered to 5 dogs with naturally occurring carcinomas at 750 mg/m[Formula: see text] by mouth once daily for 14 consecutive days in a 3-week cycle. No dogs withdrew from the study due to adverse events or other causes. The median AUC[Formula: see text] was 890 h[Formula: see text]ng/ml (range 750-1100 h[Formula: see text]ng/ml); however, the maximum blood concentration and time to reach that concentration of capecitabine was highly variable after a single dose.

CONCLUSIONS

Capecitabine appears well-tolerated as an oral chemotherapy agent for dogs with carcinomas, although individualized dosing may be necessary, and further studies are warranted.

Assessment of plasma uracil-to-dihydrouracil concentration ratio as an indicator of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity in clinically normal dogs and dogs with neoplasia or renal insufficiency

OBJECTIVE

To determine and compare the ratio of uracil (U) to dihydrouracil (UH(2)) concentrations in plasma as an indicator of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity in clinically normal dogs and dogs with neoplasia or renal insufficiency.

ANIMALS

101 client- and shelter-owned dogs.

PROCEDURES

Study dogs included 74 clinically normal dogs, 17 dogs with neoplasia, and 10 dogs with renal insufficiency. For each dog, a blood sample was collected into an EDTA-containing tube; plasma U and UH(2) concentrations were determined via UV high-performance liquid chromatography, and the U:UH(2) concentration ratio was calculated. Data were compared among dogs grouped on the basis of sex, clinical group assignment, reproductive status (sexually intact, spayed, or castrated), and age.

RESULTS

Mean ± SEM U:UH(2) concentration ratio for all dogs was 1.55 ± 0.08 (median, 1.38; range, 0.4 to 7.14). In 14 (13.9%) dogs, the U:UH(2) concentration ratio was considered abnormal (ie, > 2). Overall, mean ratio for sexually intact dogs was significantly higher than that for neutered dogs; a similar difference was apparent among males but not females. Dogs with ratios > 2 and dogs with ratios ≤ 2 did not differ significantly with regard to sex, clinical group, reproductive status, or age.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Determination of the U:UH(2) concentration ratio was easy to perform. Ratios were variable among dogs, possibly suggesting differences in dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity. However, studies correlating U:UH(2) concentration ratio and fluoropyrimidine antimetabolite drug tolerability are required to further evaluate the test's validity and its appropriate use in dogs.

Histopathologic evidence of capecitabine corneal toxicity in dogs

In an experimental model of transplant rejection, renal transplants were performed on 6 mixed-breed dogs. Capecitabine (CPC) was administered as an oral immunosuppressive agent. All recipients received systemic CPC, cyclosporine (CSA), prednisolone, and famotidine throughout the study. Two dogs developed superficial keratitis, which was characterized by multifocal geographic erosions, superficial corneal epithelial pigmentation, and corneal neovascularization. These clinical signs correlated with the dose of CPC given, whereas other drug doses remained unchanged. After euthanasia, routine histologic sections were stained with hematoxylin and eosin and with alcian blue periodic acid-Schiff for light microscopic evaluation. Ocular histopathologic abnormalities were limited to neovascularization and inflammatory infiltrate of the anterior corneal stroma and abnormal basal cell morphology, disorganization, thinning, and pigmentation of the corneal epithelium. The purpose of this communication is to describe the clinical and histopathologic evidence of CPC corneal toxicity in dogs.

Use of Capecitabine to Prevent Acute Renal Allograft Rejection in Dog Erythrocyte Antigen-Mismatched Mongrel Dogs

OBJECTIVE

To assess efficacy and toxicity of a capecitabine (CAP)-based regimen for preventing rejection of renal allografts in dog erythrocyte antigen (DEA)-mismatched mongrel dogs.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, pilot study.

ANIMALS

Eight healthy, unrelated, DEA mismatched, adult mongrel dogs.

METHODS

All dogs received CAP, starting at 50 mg/m2 PO b.i.d. 4 days preoperatively, increasing to 200 mg/m2 PO b.i.d. by the day of surgery. All dogs received cyclosporine-A (CsA) and prednisolone starting 2 days preoperatively. Standard heterotopic renal transplantation with native nephrectomy was performed. After 90 days, surviving dogs were euthanatized and histopathologic examination was performed.

RESULTS

Two of 8 dogs developed acute neurotoxicity leading to death or euthanasia within 5 days of surgery. For the 6 remaining dogs, there were no statistically significant changes in complete blood count or serum biochemical values. No opportunistic infections developed during the study period. Five of 6 dogs had no to minimal evidence of graft rejection. Two of 6 dogs developed superficial and pigmentary keratitis. Significant histopathologic findings in all dogs included mild lymphoplasmacytic gastroenteritis, steroid hepatopathy, and corneal epithelial thinning. One dog had moderate interstitial nephritis and pyelitis.

CONCLUSIONS

In this experimental model, a CAP-CsA-prednisolone immunosuppressive regimen was effective in preventing rejection of allografts in DEA-mismatched dogs. Severe, unpredictable neurotoxicity and variable ocular toxicity significantly limit clinical applications at this time.

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

A CAP-CsA-prednisolone protocol is an effective, oral immunosuppressive regimen for prevention of allograft rejection in DEA-mismatched mongrel dogs. For clinical application, identification of patients susceptible to toxic side effects would be necessary.