Flat-fixed dosing of irinotecan: influence on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability

Flat dose regimen of toripalimab based on model-informed drug development approach

Introduction: Flat dosing regimen has recently been approved for programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) inhibitors including toripalimab, nivolumab and pembrolizumab. The objective of this study is to provide pharmacological evidence for a flat dosing regimen of toripalimab by assessing the efficacy and safety profile of a 240 mg Q3W flat dose relative to the currently approved 3 mg/kg Q2W. Methods: A population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model was established based on 1,014 evaluable patients in 13 clinical studies. The exposure-objective response rate (ORR, n = 234) and exposure-safety (n = 152) analyses were performed by logistic regression. Three safety endpoints including grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs), treatment-related grade ≥ 3 AEs, and AEs leading to study drug discontinuation were evaluated. Progression-free survival (PFS, n = 234) was evaluated using a Cox proportional hazard model with the Kaplan-Meier survival curve. Results: The PK profiles of toripalimab are best described by a two-compartment model with time-varying clearance characterized by a sigmoidal maximum effect (E_max) function. Simulations for the first dose and steady-state exposures for the 240 mg Q3W dosing regimen were comparable to those for the 3 mg/kg Q2W dosing regimen with 95% exposure coverage ranging from 88% to 96%. The exposure-safety analysis showed that the probability of an adverse event occurring did not increase with increases in toripalimab exposure. A flat exposure-response relationship for ORR was identified. The Kaplan-Meier survival curve showed that exposure was a predictor for PFS; however, no difference in treatment benefit was demonstrated across exposure quantiles using a Cox proportional hazard model. Discussion: This study revealed that toripalimab exposure of 240 mg Q3W dosing regimen was comparable to 3 mg/kg Q2W dosing regimen. The safety and efficacy E-R results of 240 mg Q3W is flat. Hence, the 240 mg Q3W dosing regimen is determined to be a preferred therapeutic dosage for toripalimab due to the convenience of flat dose.

Effects of Protein and Calorie Restriction on the Metabolism and Toxicity Profile of Irinotecan in Cancer Patients

Preclinical data suggests that protein and calorie restriction (PCR) might improve treatment tolerability without impairing antitumor efficacy. Therefore, we have studied the influence of PCR on irinotecan pharmacokinetics and toxicity. In this crossover trial, patients with liver metastases of solid tumors were included and randomized to treatment with irinotecan preceded by 5 days of PCR (~ 30% caloric and ~ 70% protein restriction) during the first cycle and a second cycle preceded by a normal diet or vice versa. Pharmacokinetic blood sampling and biopsies of both healthy liver and liver metastases were performed. The primary end point was the relative difference in geometric means for the active metabolite SN-38 concentration in healthy liver analyzed by a linear mixed model. No significant differences were seen in irinotecan (+ 16.8%, P = 0.22) and SN-38 (+ 9.8%, P = 0.48) concentrations between PCR and normal diet in healthy liver, as well as in liver metastases (irinotecan: -38.8%, P = 0.05 and SN-38: -13.8%, P = 0.50). PCR increased irinotecan plasma area under the curve from zero to 24 hours (AUC_0-24h ) with 7.1% (P = 0.04) compared with normal diet, whereas the SN-38 plasma AUC_0-24h increased with 50.3% (P < 0.001). Grade ≥ 3 toxicity was not increased during PCR vs. normal diet (P = 0.69). No difference was seen in neutropenia grade ≥ 3 (47% vs. 32% P = 0.38), diarrhea grade ≥ 3 (5% vs. 21% P = 0.25), and febrile neutropenia (5% vs. 16% P = 0.50) during PCR vs. normal diet. In conclusion, plasma SN-38 exposure increased dramatically after PCR, whereas toxicity did not change. PCR did not alter the irinotecan and SN-38 exposure in healthy liver and liver metastases. PCR might therefore potentially improve the therapeutic window in patients treated with irinotecan.

Individualization of Irinotecan Treatment: A Review of Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Pharmacogenetics

Since its clinical introduction in 1998, the topoisomerase I inhibitor irinotecan has been widely used in the treatment of solid tumors, including colorectal, pancreatic, and lung cancer. Irinotecan therapy is characterized by several dose-limiting toxicities and large interindividual pharmacokinetic variability. Irinotecan has a highly complex metabolism, including hydrolyzation by carboxylesterases to its active metabolite SN-38, which is 100- to 1000-fold more active compared with irinotecan itself. Several phase I and II enzymes, including cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) 1A, are involved in the formation of inactive metabolites, making its metabolism prone to environmental and genetic influences. Genetic variants in the DNA of these enzymes and transporters could predict a part of the drug-related toxicity and efficacy of treatment, which has been shown in retrospective and prospective trials and meta-analyses. Patient characteristics, lifestyle and comedication also influence irinotecan pharmacokinetics. Other factors, including dietary restriction, are currently being studied. Meanwhile, a more tailored approach to prevent excessive toxicity and optimize efficacy is warranted. This review provides an updated overview on today’s literature on irinotecan pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacogenetics.

Population pharmacokinetic analysis of AR-67, a lactone stable camptothecin analogue, in cancer patients with solid tumors

Background AR-67 is a novel camptothecin analogue at early stages of drug development. The phase 1 clinical trial in cancer patients with solid tumors was completed and a population pharmacokinetic model (POP PK) was developed to facilitate further development of this investigational agent. Methods Pharmacokinetic data collected in the phase 1 clinical trial were utilized for the development of a population POP PK by implementing the non-linear mixed effects approach. Patient characteristics at study entry were evaluated as covariates in the model. Subjects (N = 26) were treated at nine dosage levels (1.2-12.4 mg/m²/day) on a daily × 5 schedule. Hematological toxicity data were modeled against exposure metrics. Results A two-compartment POP PK model best described the disposition of AR-67 by fitting a total of 328 PK observations from 25 subjects. Following covariate model selection, age remained as a significant covariate on central volume. The final model provided a good fit for the concentration versus time data and PK parameters were estimated with good precision. Clearance, inter-compartmental clearance, central volume and peripheral volume were estimated to be 32.2 L/h, 28.6 L/h, 6.83 L and 25.0 L, respectively. Finally, exposure-pharmacodynamic analysis using E_max models showed that plasma drug concentration versus time profiles are better predictors of AR-67-related hematologic toxicity were better predictors of leukopenia and thrombocytopenia, as compared to total dose. Conclusions A POP PK model was developed to characterize AR-67 pharmacokinetics and identified age as a significant covariate. Exposure PK metrics C_max and AUC were shown to predict hematological toxicity. Further efforts to identify clinically relevant determinants of AR-67 disposition and effects in a larger patient population are warranted.

The safety and efficacy of Onivyde (irinotecan liposome injection) for the treatment of metastatic pancreatic cancer following gemcitabine-based therapy

INTRODUCTION

Patients with advanced and metastatic pancreatic cancer refractory to gemcitabine based therapy have a dismal prognosis and limited therapeutic options. Recently, the FDA approved nanoliposomal irinotecan combined with fluorouracil/folinic acid for such patients based upon results of the NAPOLI-1 study which showed this regimen compared to fluorouracil/folinic acid significantly prolonged progression free survival (3.1 vs. 1.5 months) and overall survival (6.2 vs. 4.1 months).

AREAS COVERED

The pharmacokinetic and pharmacogenetic characteristics of this novel formulation of irinotecan, its safety profile, and use in a clinical context for patients with pancreatic cancer are reviewed. Expert commentary: Nanoliposomal irinotecan, in combination with 5-FU/folinic acid, represents an important step forward in improving second line treatment options in patients with progression of metastatic pancreatic cancer. Furthermore, the novel drug formulation offers pharmacokinetic advantages which serve as a basis for further clinical testing in a various pancreatic cancer settings and other malignancies.

Irinotecan, a key chemotherapeutic drug for metastatic colorectal cancer

Irinotecan hydrochloride is a camptothecin derivative that exerts antitumor activity against a variety of tumors. SN-38 produced in the body by carboxylesterase is the active metabolite of irinotecan. After irinotecan was introduced for the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) at the end of the last century, survival has improved dramatically. Irinotecan is now combined with 5-fluorouracil, oxaliplatin and several molecularly-targeted anticancer drugs, resulting in the extension of overall survival to longer than 30 mo. Severe, occasionally life-threatening toxicity occurs sporadically, even in patients in relatively good condition who have a low risk of chemotherapy-induced toxicity, often causing the failure of irinotecan-based chemotherapy. Clinical pharmacological studies have revealed that such severe toxicity is related to exposure to SN-38 and genetic polymorphisms in UDP-glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 gene. The large inter- and intra-patient variability in systemic exposure to SN-38 is determined not only by genetic factors but also by physiological and environmental factors. This review first summarizes the roles of irinotecan in chemotherapy for metastatic CRC and then discusses the optimal dosing of irinotecan based on the aforementioned factors affecting systemic exposure to SN-38, with the ultimate goal of achieving personalized irinotecan-based chemotherapy.

Synthesis and Biological Evaluation of Novel Water-Soluble Poly-(ethylene glycol)-10-hydroxycamptothecin Conjugates

In order to improve the antitumor activity and water solubility of 10-hydroxycamptothecin (HCPT), a series of novel HCPT conjugates were designed and synthesized by conjugating polyethylene glycol (PEG) to the 10-hydroxyl group of HCPT via a valine spacer. The in vitro stability of these synthesized compounds was determined in pH 7.4 buffer at 37 °C, and the results showed that they released HCPT at different rates. All the compounds demonstrated significant antitumor activity in vitro against K562, HepG2 and HT-29 cells. Among them, compounds, 4a, 4d, 4e and 4f, exhibited 2–5 times higher potency than HCPT. The stability and antitumor activity of these conjugates were found to be closely related to the length of PEG and the linker type, conjugates with a relatively short PEG chain and carbamate linkages (compounds 4a and 4f) exhibited controlled release of HCPT and excellent antitumor in vitro activity.

Neutrophil-guided dosing of anthracycline-cyclophosphamide-containing chemotherapy in patients with breast cancer: a feasibility study

The aim of this study was to investigate whether neutrophil-guided dose escalation of anthracycline-cyclophosphamide-containing chemotherapy (ACC) for breast cancer is feasible, in order to optimize outcome. Breast cancer patients planned for 3-weekly ACC were enrolled in this study. The first treatment cycle was administered in a standard BSA-adjusted dose. The absolute neutrophil count was measured at baseline and at day 8, 11 and 15 after administration of ACC. For patients with none or mild (CTC grade 0-2) neutropenia and no other dose-limiting toxicity, we performed a 10-25 % dose escalation of the second cycle with the opportunity to a further 10-25 % dose escalation of the third cycle. Thirty patients were treated in the adjuvant setting with either FE100C (n = 23) or AC (n = 4), or in the palliative setting with FAC (n = 3). Two out of 23 patients (9 %) treated with FEC did not develop grade 3-4 neutropenia after the first treatment cycle. Dose escalation was performed in these two patients (30 % in one and 15 % in the other patient). During dose escalation, there were no complications like febrile neutropenia. No patients treated with FAC or AC could be escalated, since all of them developed grade 3-4 neutropenia. We conclude that asymptomatic grade 3-4 neutropenia is likely to be achieved in the majority of patients with breast cancer treated with ACC according to presently advocated BSA-based dose levels. Escalation of currently advocated ACC doses without G-CSF, with a target of grade 3-4 neutropenia, is feasible, but only possible in a small proportion of patients. EudraCT 2010-020309-33.

Synthesis and biological evaluation of novel 10-substituted-7-ethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin (SN-38) prodrugs

In an attempt to improve the antitumor activity and reduce the side effects of irinotecan (2), novel prodrugs of SN-38 (3) were prepared by conjugating amino acids or dipeptides to the 10-hydroxyl group of SN-38 via a carbamate linkage. The synthesized compounds completely generated SN-38 in pH 7.4 buffer or in human plasma, while remaining stable under acidic conditions. All prodrug compounds demonstrated much greater in vitro antitumor activities against HeLa cells and SGC-7901 cells than irinotecan. The most active compounds, 5h, 7c, 7d, and 7f, exhibited IC₅₀ values that were 1000 times lower against HeLa cells and 30 times lower against SGC-7901 cells than those of irinotecan, and the inhibitory activities of these prodrugs against acetylcholinesterase (AchE) were significantly reduced, with IC₅₀ values more than 6.8 times greater than that of irinotecan. In addition, compound 5e exhibited the same level of tumor growth inhibitory activity as irinotecan (CPT-11) in a human colon xenograft model in vivo.

A phase I study of irinotecan and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in recurrent ovarian cancer (Tohoku Gynecologic Cancer Unit 104 study)

Purpose

A phase I clinical study was conducted to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the recommended dose (RD) of irinotecan hydrochloride (CPT-11) in CPT-11/pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) combination therapy, a novel treatment regimen for platinum- and taxane-resistant recurrent ovarian cancer.

Methods

Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin was administered intravenously on day 3 at a fixed dose of 30 mg/m². CPT-11 was administered intravenously on days 1 and 15, at a dose of 50 mg/m² on both days. One course of chemotherapy was 28 days, and patients were given a maximum of six courses, with the CPT-11 dose being increased in increments of 10 mg/m² (level 1, 50 mg/m²; level 2, 60 mg/m²; level 3, 70 mg/m²; level 4, 80 mg/m²) to determine MTD and RD.

Results

During the period from April 2010 to March 2013, three patients were enrolled for each level. In the first course, no dose-limiting toxicity occurred in any of the patients. Grade 4 neutropenia was observed in two of three patients at level 4. At level 4, the antitumor effect was a partial response (PR) in two of the three patients and stable disease (SD) in one. At level 3, one of the three patients showed PR and two had SD. At level 4, the start of the next course was postponed in two of three patients. In addition, one patient at level 4 experienced hemotoxicity that met the criteria for dose reduction in the next course. The above results suggested that administration of CPT-11 at dose level 5 (90 mg/m²) would result in more patients with severe neutropenia and in more patients requiring postponement of the next course or a dose reduction. Based on the above, the RD of CPT-11 was determined to be 80 mg/m².

Conclusions

The results suggest that CPT-11/PLD combination therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer is a useful treatment method with a high response rate and manageable adverse reactions. In the future phase II study, the safety and efficacy of this therapy will be assessed at 80 mg/m² of CPT-11 and 30 mg/m² of PLD.

Use of pharmacogenetics for predicting cancer prognosis and treatment exposure, response and toxicity

Cancer treatment is complicated because of a multitude of treatment options and little patient-specific information to help clinicians choose appropriate therapy. There are two genomes relevant in cancer treatment: the tumor (somatic) and the patient (germline). Together, these two genomes dictate treatment outcome through four processes: the somatic genome primarily determines tumor prognosis and response while the germline genome modulates treatment exposure and toxicity. In this review, we describe the influence of these genomes on treatment outcomes by highlighting examples of genetic variation that are predictors of each of these four factors, prognosis, response, toxicity and exposure, and discuss the translation and clinical implementation of each. Use of pre-treatment pharmacogenetic testing will someday enable clinicians to make individualized therapy decisions about aggressiveness, drug selection and dose, improving treatment outcomes for cancer patients.

Dose banding as an alternative to body surface area-based dosing of chemotherapeutic agents

BACKGROUND

Dose banding is a recently suggested dosing method that uses predefined ranges (bands) of body surface area (BSA) to calculate each patient's dose by using a single BSA-value per band. Thus, drugs with sufficient long-term stability can be prepared in advance. The main advantages of dose banding are to reduce patient waiting time and improve pharmacy capacity planning; additional benefits include reduced medication errors, reduced drug wastage, and prospective quality control. This study compares dose banding with individual BSA dosing and fixed dose according to pharmacokinetic criteria.

METHODS

Three BSA bands were defined: BSA<1.7 m(2), 1.7 m(2)≤ BSA<1.9 m(2), BSA ≥ 1.9 m(2) and each patient dose was calculated based on a unique BSA-value per band (1.55, 1.80, and 2.05 m(2), respectively). By using individual clearance values of six drugs (cisplatin, docetaxel, paclitaxel, doxorubicin, irinotecan, and topotecan) from 1012 adult cancer patients in total, the AUCs corresponding to three dosing methods (BSA dosing, dose banding, and fixed dose) were compared with a target AUC for each drug.

RESULTS

For all six drugs, the per cent variation in individual dose obtained with dose banding compared with BSA dosing ranged between -14% and +22%, and distribution of AUC values was very similar with both dosing methods. In terms of reaching the target AUC, there was no significant difference in precision between dose banding and BSA dosing, except for paclitaxel (32.0% vs 30.7%, respectively; P<0.05). However, precision was significantly better for BSA dosing compared with fixed dose for four out of six drugs.

CONCLUSION

For the studied drugs, implementation of dose banding should be considered as it entails no significant increase in interindividual plasma exposure.

Appropriate chemotherapy dosing for obese adult patients with cancer: American Society of Clinical Oncology clinical practice guideline

PURPOSE

To provide recommendations for appropriate cytotoxic chemotherapy dosing for obese adult patients with cancer.

METHODS

The American Society of Clinical Oncology convened a Panel of experts in medical and gynecologic oncology, clinical pharmacology, pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics, and biostatistics and a patient representative. MEDLINE searches identified studies published in English between 1996 and 2010, and a systematic review of the literature was conducted. A majority of studies involved breast, ovarian, colon, and lung cancers. This guideline does not address dosing for novel targeted agents.

RESULTS

Practice pattern studies demonstrate that up to 40% of obese patients receive limited chemotherapy doses that are not based on actual body weight. Concerns about toxicity or overdosing in obese patients with cancer, based on the use of actual body weight, are unfounded.

RECOMMENDATIONS

The Panel recommends that full weight-based cytotoxic chemotherapy doses be used to treat obese patients with cancer, particularly when the goal of treatment is cure. There is no evidence that short- or long-term toxicity is increased among obese patients receiving full weight-based doses. Most data indicate that myelosuppression is the same or less pronounced among the obese than the non-obese who are administered full weight-based doses. Clinicians should respond to all treatment-related toxicities in obese patients in the same ways they do for non-obese patients. The use of fixed-dose chemotherapy is rarely justified, but the Panel does recommend fixed dosing for a few select agents. The Panel recommends further research into the role of pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics to guide appropriate dosing of obese patients with cancer.

A water soluble prodrug of a novel camptothecin analog is efficacious against breast cancer resistance protein-expressing tumor xenografts

PURPOSE

Identification of a novel topoisomerase I inhibitor which shows superior efficacy and less individual variation than irinotecan hydrochloride (CPT-11).

METHODS

A novel camptothecin analog that is effective against breast cancer resistance protein (BCRP)-positive cells was screened, and a water soluble prodrug was generated. Antitumor activity of the prodrug was examined in BCRP-positive and -negative xenografts both as a single agent and in combination with other anti-cancer drugs.

RESULTS

A novel camptothecin analog, CH0793076, was discovered. Because CH0793076 was found to be highly lipophilic, a water soluble prodrug (TP300) was generated. TP300 is stable in an acidic solution but is rapidly converted to CH0793076 under physiological pH conditions such as in sera. This efficient prodrug activation would minimize interpatient differences in pharmacokinetic and toxicity profiles. Unlike CPT-11, TP300 does not exhibit cholinergic interaction or cause acute diarrhea at effective doses. In mouse xenograft models, TP300 showed antitumor activity against both BCRP-positive and -negative xenografts, whereas CPT-11 was less active against BCRP-positive xenografts. In addition, the effective dose range (MTD/ED(50)) for TP300 was wider than for CPT-11 and TP300 showed additive or synergistic antitumor effects in combination with other anti-cancer drugs such as capecitabine, oxaliplatin, cisplatin, bevacizumab and cetuximab.

CONCLUSION

It is therefore expected that TP300 will provide an additional treatment option for patients who will undergo chemotherapy with camptothecins.

Effect of omeprazole on the pharmacokinetics and toxicities of irinotecan in cancer patients: a prospective cross-over drug-drug interaction study

BACKGROUND

Omeprazole is one of the most prescribed medications worldwide and within the class of proton pump inhibitors, it is most frequently associated with drug interactions. In vitro studies have shown that omeprazole can alter the function of metabolic enzymes and transporters that are involved in the metabolism of irinotecan, such as uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase subfamily 1A1 (UGT1A1), cytochrome P-450 enzymes subfamily 3A (CYP3A) and ATP-binding cassette drug-transporter G2 (ABCG2). In this open-label cross-over study we investigated the effects of omeprazole on the pharmacokinetics and toxicities of irinotecan.

METHODS

Fourteen patients were treated with single agent irinotecan (600mg i.v., 90min) followed 3weeks later by a second cycle with concurrent use of omeprazole 40mg once daily, which was started 2weeks prior to the second cycle. Plasma samples were obtained up to 55h after infusion and analysed for irinotecan and its metabolites 7-ethyl-10-hydroxycampothecin (SN-38), SN-38-glucuronide (SN-38G), 7-ethyl-10-[4-(1-piperidino)-1-amino]-carbonyloxycamptothecin (NPC) and 7-ethyl-10-[4-N-(5-aminopentanoic acid)-1-piperidino]-carbonyloxycamptothecin (APC) by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Non-compartmental modelling was performed. Toxicities were monitored during both cycles. Paired statistical tests were performed with SPSS.

RESULTS

The exposure to irinotecan and its metabolites was not significantly different between both cycles. Neither were there significant differences in the absolute nadir and percentage decrease of WBC and ANC, nor on the incidence and severity of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, diarrhoea, nausea and vomiting when irinotecan was combined with omeprazole.

CONCLUSION

Omeprazole 40mg did not alter the pharmacokinetics and toxicities of irinotecan. This widely used drug can, therefore, be safely administered during a 3-weekly single agent irinotecan schedule.

Effects of mannose-binding lectin polymorphisms on irinotecan-induced febrile neutropenia

OBJECTIVE

Mannose-binding lectin (MBL) is important in the innate immune response. MBL2 gene polymorphisms affect MBL expression, and genotypes yielding low MBL levels have been associated with an elevated risk for infections in hematological cancer patients undergoing chemotherapy. However, these reported associations are inconsistent, and data on patients with solid tumors are lacking. Here, we investigated the effects of MBL2 genotypes on irinotecan-induced febrile neutropenia in patients with solid tumors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Irinotecan-treated patients were genotyped for the MBL2 gene. Two promoter (-550 H/L and -221 X/Y) and three exon polymorphisms (52 A/D, 54 A/B, and 57 A/C) were determined, together with known risk factors for irinotecan-induced toxicity. Neutropenia and febrile neutropenia were recorded during the first course.

RESULTS

Of the 133 patients, 28% experienced severe neutropenia and 10% experienced febrile neutropenia. No associations were found between exon polymorphisms and febrile neutropenia. However, patients with the H/H promoter genotype, associated with high MBL levels, experienced significantly more febrile neutropenia than patients with the H/L and L/L genotypes (20% versus 13% versus 5%). Moreover, patients with the HYA haplotype encountered significantly more febrile neutropenia than patients without this high MBL-producing haplotype (16% versus 4%). In the subgroup with wild-type exon polymorphisms (A/A), patients with the high MBL promoter phenotype had the highest incidence of febrile neutropenia, regardless of known risk factors.

CONCLUSION

Patients with high MBL2 promoter genotypes and haplotypes seem more at risk for developing febrile neutropenia. If confirmed, these preliminary findings may contribute to more individualized approaches of irinotecan treatment.

Individualizing dosing of irinotecan

Individualized drug dosing is a longstanding goal of clinical pharmacologists. Given the narrow therapeutic index of most anticancer agents, it is plausible that this approach would be of particular value in oncology. Irinotecan is an interesting agent for individualized dosing, given its complex metabolism and increasing knowledge of its pharmacokinetics predictors.

A CYP3A4 phenotype-based dosing algorithm for individualized treatment of irinotecan

PURPOSE

Irinotecan, the prodrug of SN-38, is extensively metabolized by cytochrome P450-3A4 (CYP3A4). A randomized trial was done to assess the utility of an algorithm for individualized irinotecan dose calculation based on a priori CYP3A4 activity measurements by the midazolam clearance test.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Patients were randomized to receive irinotecan at a conventional dose level of 350 mg/m(2) (group A) or doses based on an equation consisting of midazolam clearance, gamma-glutamyl-transferase, and height (group B). Pharmacokinetics and toxicities were obtained during the first treatment course.

RESULTS

Demographics of 40 evaluable cancer patients were balanced between both groups, including UGT1A1*28 genotype and smoking status. The absolute dose of irinotecan ranged from 480 to 800 mg in group A and 380 to 1,060 mg in group B. The mean absolute dose and area under the curve of irinotecan and SN-38 were not significantly different in either group (P > 0.18). In group B, the interindividual variability in the area under the curve of irinotecan and SN-38 was reduced by 19% and 25%, respectively (P > 0.22). Compared with group A, the incidence of grades 3 to 4 neutropenia was >4-fold lower in group B (45 versus 10%; P = 0.013). The incidence of grades 3 to 4 diarrhea was equal in both groups (10%).

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporation of CYP3A4 phenotyping in dose calculation resulted in an improved predictability of the pharmacokinetic and toxicity profile of irinotecan, thereby lowering the incidence of severe neutropenia. In combination with UGT1A1*28 genotyping, CYP3A4 phenotype determination should be explored further as a strategy for the individualization of irinotecan treatment.

Comprehensive pharmacogenetic analysis of irinotecan neutropenia and pharmacokinetics

PURPOSE

We aim to identify genetic variation, in addition to the UGT1A1*28 polymorphism, that can explain the variability in irinotecan (CPT-11) pharmacokinetics and neutropenia in cancer patients.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pharmacokinetic, genetic, and clinical data were obtained from 85 advanced cancer patients treated with single-agent CPT-11 every 3 weeks at doses of 300 mg/m(2) (n = 20) and 350 mg/m(2) (n = 65). Forty-two common variants were genotyped in 12 candidate genes of the CPT-11 pathway using several methodologies. Univariate and multivariate models of absolute neutrophil count (ANC) nadir and pharmacokinetic parameters were evaluated.

RESULTS

Almost 50% of the variation in ANC nadir is explained by UGT1A1*93, ABCC1 IVS11 -48C>T, SLCO1B1*1b, ANC baseline levels, sex, and race (P < .0001). More than 40% of the variation in CPT-11 area under the curve (AUC) is explained by ABCC2 -24C>T, SLCO1B1*5, HNF1A 79A>C, age, and CPT-11 dose (P < .0001). Almost 30% of the variability in SN-38 (the active metabolite of CPT-11) AUC is explained by ABCC1 1684T>C, ABCB1 IVS9 -44A>G, and UGT1A1*93 (P = .004). Other models explained 17%, 23%, and 27% of the variation in APC (a metabolite of CPT-11), SN-38 glucuronide (SN-38G), and SN-38G/SN-38 AUCs, respectively. When tested in univariate models, pretreatment total bilirubin was able to modify the existing associations between genotypes and phenotypes.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of this exploratory analysis, common polymorphisms in genes encoding for ABC and SLC transporters may have a significant impact on the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of CPT-11. Confirmatory studies are required.

Irinotecan in Cancer Patients with End-Stage Renal Failure

Objective:

To observe and report on the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan in a patient with end-stage renal failure (ESRF) who was undergoing hemodialysis.

Case Summary:

A 64-year-old man with metastatic colorectal cancer who was on hemodialysis was treated with Irinotecan 50 mg/m2 weekly for 3 weeks, followed by 1 week with no treatment. As the drug was well tolerated, the dosage was increased to 80 mg/m2 after 2 cycles. Diagnostic testing of a hepatic lesion after 2 and 6 treatment cycles showed stable disease. The carcinoembryonic antigen value decreased to 40% of its pretreatment level. Pharmacokinetically, our patient had a lower apparent clearance and a higher maximum concentration of the active metabolite SN-38 (130 L/h/m2, maximum concentration 0.4 μg/L per mg of irinotecan) compared with published values from patients with normal renal function. Removal of irinotecan and its metabolites by hemodialysis was negligible.

Discussion:

The reason for the unexpectedly low clearance of SN-38 in our patient remains unclear. We speculate that inhibition of the OATP1B1 transporter by uremic toxins could be an explanation. Such a mechanism would explain excessive irinotecan toxicity, as reported in previous case reports of patients undergoing hemodialysis.

Conclusions:

We conclude that approximately two-thirds of the standard weekly irinotecan dosage regimen should be considered in patients with ESRF.

Dose calculation of anticancer drugs

BACKGROUND

Anticancer drugs are characterized by a narrow therapeutic window and significant inter-patient variability in therapeutic and toxic effects. Current body surface area (BSA)-based dosing fails to standardize systemic anticancer drug exposure and other alternative dosing strategies also have their limitations. Just as important as the initial dose selection is the subsequent dose revision to ensure the dose is correct.

OBJECTIVE

To provide an insight into the different dose individualization and dose adjustment methods, their feasibility and applicability in daily oncology practice and to suggest a practical framework for dose calculation and a basis for future research.

METHODS

Review of relevant literature related to dose calculation of anticancer drugs.

RESULTS

Strategies using clinical parameters, genotype and phenotype markers, and therapeutic drug monitoring all have potential and each has a role for specific drugs. However, no one method is a practical dose calculation strategy for many or all drugs.

CONCLUSION

Given that BSA-dosing leads to significant underdosing it is not reasonable to use this as the sole method of dose calculation. Because of wide disparity in individual patient characteristics and elimination mechanisms, we are unlikely to find the 'Holy Grail' of a single individualized dosing strategy for every patient and anticancer drug in the near future. We propose a pragmatic, although invalidated system for initial dose calculation using dose clusters and structured subsequent dose revision based on treatment-related toxicities and therapeutic drug monitoring. These models need to be tested in clinical trials.

Renal function as a predictor of irinotecan-induced neutropenia

Although approximately half of the administered dose of irinotecan is recovered in urine, scarce data are available on the association of renal function with irinotecan pharmacokinetics and toxicity. Here, these relationships are investigated in 187 patients treated with irinotecan in a three-weekly schedule. No significant effects on irinotecan pharmacokinetics were found in these patients. However, in 131 patients treated with the registered dose, categorized renal function was related to hematological toxicity. The incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia decreased as function of creatinine clearance, particularly in nonsmoking patients (P < 0.01). Patients with slower creatinine clearance (35-66 ml/min) had a four-times higher risk of grade 3-4 neutropenia (58% vs. 14%; P < 0.001). This study suggests that pretreatment renal function values are associated with irinotecan-induced neutropenia. A confirmatory analysis is warranted to determine whether measures of renal function should be incorporated in future attempts toward individualized treatment with irinotecan.

Flat-fixed dosing versus body surface area based dosing of anticancer drugs in adults: does it make a difference?

The current practice of using body-surface area (BSA) in dosing anticancer agents was implemented in clinical oncology half a century ago. By correcting for BSA, it was generally assumed that cancer patients would receive a dose of a particular cytotoxic drug associated with an acceptable degree of toxicities without reducing the agent's therapeutic effect. More recently, doubt has arisen to this hypothesis, and for many drugs, the effects of BSA on the pharmacokinetics of these agents have therefore been studied retrospectively. In (by far) most cases, use of BSA does not reduce the interindividual variation in the pharmacokinetics of adults, and thus, a logical rationale for further use of this tool in dosing adults is lacking. As a result, alternative dosing strategies have been proposed in order to replace BSA-based dosing. Flat-fixed dosing regimens have been suggested, thereby avoiding potential dose calculation mistakes. As flat-fixed dosing does not typically lead to greater pharmacokinetic variability, it does not seem worse than using BSA-based dosing. While it provides a simplification, it can, however, be questioned whether to call this an improvement or not. The implementation of so-called genotyping and phenotyping strategies, and therapeutic drug monitoring, may probably be of more clinical value. In the end, the nonscientifically based BSA-based dosing strategy should be replaced by alternative strategies. Despite the lack of basic fundamentals, BSA-based dosing still seems "untouchable" in clinical oncology. Even when alternatives will be shown to be indisputably better, many hurdles will probably have to be overcome before physicians will be willing to ban BSA-based dosing. Disclosure of potential conflicts of interest is found at the end of this article.

Cigarette smoking and irinotecan treatment: pharmacokinetic interaction and effects on neutropenia

PURPOSE

Several constituents of cigarette smoke are known to interact with drug metabolizing enzymes and potentially affect treatment outcome with substrate drugs. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of cigarette smoking on the pharmacokinetics and adverse effects of irinotecan.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 190 patients (49 smokers, 141 nonsmokers) treated with irinotecan (90-minute intravenous administration on a 3-week schedule) were evaluated for pharmacokinetics. Complete toxicity data were available in a subset of 134 patients receiving 350 mg/m2 or 600 mg flat-fixed dose irinotecan.

RESULTS

In smokers, the dose-normalized area under the plasma concentration-time curve of irinotecan was significantly lower (median, 28.7 v 33.9 ng x h/mL/mg; P = .001) compared with nonsmokers. In addition, smokers showed an almost 40% lower exposure to SN-38 (median, 0.54 v 0.87 ng x h/mL/mg; P < .001) and a higher relative extent of glucuronidation of SN-38 into SN-38G (median, 6.6 v 4.5; P = .006). Smokers experienced considerably less hematologic toxicity. In particular, the incidence of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia was 6% in smokers versus 38% in nonsmokers (odds ratio [OR], 0.10; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.43; P < .001). There was no significant difference in incidence of delayed-onset diarrhea (6% v 15%; OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.07 to 1.57; P = .149).

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that smoking significantly lowers both the exposure to irinotecan and treatment-induced neutropenia, indicating a potential risk of treatment failure. Although the underlying mechanism is not entirely clear, modulation of CYP3A and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase isoform 1A1 may be part of the explanation. The data suggest that additional investigation is warranted to determine whether smokers are at increased risk for treatment failure.

Medicinal Cannabis Does Not Influence the Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Irinotecan and Docetaxel

OBJECTIVE

To date, data regarding the potential of cannabinoids to modulate cytochrome P450 isozyme 3A (CYP3A) activity are contradictory. Recently, a standardized medicinal cannabis product was introduced in The Netherlands. We anticipated an increased use of medicinal cannabis concurrent with anticancer drugs, and undertook a drug-interaction study to evaluate the effect of concomitant medicinal cannabis on the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and docetaxel, both subject to CYP3A-mediated biotransformation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty-four cancer patients were treated with i.v. irinotecan (600 mg, n = 12) or docetaxel (180 mg, n = 12), followed 3 weeks later by the same drugs concomitant with medicinal cannabis (200 ml herbal tea, 1 g/l) for 15 consecutive days, starting 12 days before the second treatment. Blood samples were obtained up to 55 hours after dosing and analyzed for irinotecan and its metabolites (SN-38, SN-38G), respectively, or docetaxel. Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed during both treatments. Results are reported as the mean ratio (95% confidence interval [CI]) of the observed pharmacokinetic parameters with and without concomitant medicinal cannabis.

RESULTS

Medicinal cannabis administration did not significantly influence exposure to and clearance of irinotecan (1.04; CI, 0.96-1.11 and 0.97; CI, 0.90-1.05, respectively) or docetaxel (1.11; CI, 0.94-1.28 and 0.95; CI, 0.82-1.08, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Coadministration of medicinal cannabis, as herbal tea, in cancer patients treated with irinotecan or docetaxel does not significantly influence the plasma pharmacokinetics of these drugs. The evaluated variety of medicinal cannabis can be administered concomitantly with both anticancer agents without dose adjustments.

Chemotherapy Dosing Part I: Scientific Basis for Current Practice and Use of Body Surface Area

Cytotoxic chemotherapy is characterised by a low therapeutic index and significant variability in therapeutic and toxic effects. In an attempt to reduce this variability, most chemotherapy doses are individualised according to patient body surface area (BSA). This practice, which was introduced almost 50 years ago, clearly has practical and economic implications for the healthcare system. Furthermore, the clinical value of this approach has, in recent years, been questioned. Despite established practice, chemotherapy dose selection remains complicated, partly because treatment effects are difficult to measure, partly because drugs are used in combination with other treatment modalities, and also because the patient's condition may change with disease progression. Various patient-related factors can affect drug pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD), for example organ function, expression and activity of metabolising enzymes, drug resistance, body size, gender, age, concomitant disease and co-administration of other drugs. These factors may be of clinical significance in chemotherapy dose determination and measures of PK, PD or both feature in attempts to devise more rigorous methods for chemotherapy dosing. Part I of this series of two reviews describes the history and clinical impact of BSA-based chemotherapy, and examines the scientific evidence to support BSA dosing. It evaluates the factors affecting PK and PD for specific drugs that could inform and refine dose determination.

Irinotecan-induced diarrhea: functional significance of the polymorphic ABCC2 transporter protein

Interindividual pharmacokinetic variability of the anticancer agent irinotecan is high. Life-threatening diarrhea is observed in up to 25% of patients receiving irinotecan and has been related with irinotecan pharmacokinetics and UGT1A1 genotype status. Here, we explore the association of ABCC2 (MRP2) polymorphisms and haplotypes with irinotecan disposition and diarrhea. A cohort of 167 Caucasian cancer patients who were previously assessed for irinotecan pharmacokinetics (90-min infusion given every 21 days), toxicity, and UGT1A1*28 genotype were genotyped for polymorphisms in ABCC2 using Pyrosequencing. Fifteen ABCC2 haplotypes were identified in the studied patients. The haplotype ABCC2*2 was associated with lower irinotecan clearance (28.3 versus 31.6 l/h; P=0.020). In patients who did not carry a UGT1A1*28 allele, a significant reduction of severe diarrhea was noted in patients with the ABCC2*2 haplotype (10 versus 44%; odds ratio, 0.15; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.61; P=0.005). This effect was not observed in patients with at least one UGT1A1*28 allele (32 versus 20%; odds ratio, 1.87; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-7.05; P=0.354). This study suggests that the presence of the ABCC2*2 haplotype is associated with less irinotecan-related diarrhea, maybe as a consequence of reduced hepatobiliary secretion of irinotecan. As the association was seen in patients not genetically predisposed at risk for diarrhea due to UGT1A1*28, confirmatory studies of the relationships of ABCC2 genotypes and irinotecan disposition and toxicity are warranted.

Prophylaxis of irinotecan-induced diarrhea with neomycin and potential role for UGT1A1*28 genotype screening: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study

OBJECTIVE

Delayed-type diarrhea is a common side effect of irinotecan and is associated with a bacterial-mediated formation of the active irinotecan metabolite SN-38 from its glucuronide conjugate in the intestine. Based on a pilot study, we hypothesized that concomitant administration of the antibiotic neomycin would diminish exposure of the gut to SN-38 and ameliorate the incidence and severity of diarrhea.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were treated with irinotecan in a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Eligible patients received irinotecan (350 mg/m(2) once every 3 weeks) combined with neomycin (660 mg three times daily for three consecutive days, starting 2 days before chemotherapy) or combined with placebo. Blood samples were obtained for additional pharmacokinetic and pharmacogenetic analyses.

RESULTS

Sixty-two patients were evaluable for the toxicity analysis. Baseline patient characteristics, systemic SN-38 exposure, and UGT1A1*28 genotype status (i.e., an additional TA repeat in the promoter region of uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferase isoform 1A1) were similar in both arms. Although distribution, severity, and duration of delayed-type diarrhea did not differ significantly between arms, grade 3 diarrhea tended to be less frequent in the neomycin arm. The presence of at least one UGT1A1*28 allele was strongly related to the incidence of grade 2-3 diarrhea. In the neomycin arm, grade 2 nausea was significantly more common.

CONCLUSION

Our results do not suggest a major role for neomycin as prophylaxis for irinotecan-induced delayed-type diarrhea. It is suggested that the UGT1A1*28 genotype status could be used as a screening tool for a priori prevention of irinotecan-induced delayed-type diarrhea.

Prevention of irinotecan associated diarrhea by intestinal alkalization. A pilot study in gastrointestinal cancer patients

AIM AND BACKGROUND

Intestinal alkalization could prevent irinotecan associated diarrhea modulating some chemical equilibria between irinotecan metabolites. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of this procedure in advanced gastrointestinal cancer patients (GICP).

MATERIALS AND METHOD

In this prospective study advanced GICP, receiving irinotecan based chemotherapy regimens, were well trained to add sodium bicarbonate to the water intake in order to accomplish intestinal alkalization.

RESULTS

A total of twenty four advanced GICP were enrolled. Grade III-IV diarrhea has been observed in four patients (16%), some of whom had several risk factors for diarrhea. Only one out of seventeen colorectal cancer patients, receiving the irinotecan combination as first line therapy, had grade III-IV diarrhea. No side effects of the procedure have been appreciated.

CONCLUSIONS

Intestinal alkalization may be effective as a preventive treatment for irinotecan associated diarrhea in chemotherapy regimens used in GICP. This procedure deserves further investigation.

Rationale for fixed dosing of pertuzumab in cancer patients based on population pharmacokinetic analysis

OBJECTIVE

Our objectives were to develop the population pharmacokinetic (PK) for pertuzumab and examine the variability of steady-state trough serum concentrations (C(SS,trough)) and exposure after fixed, body-weight-based, or body-surface area (BSA)-based dosing methods in cancer patients.

METHODS

Pertuzumab was administered by i.v. infusion (every 3 weeks) either as a weight-based dose (0.5-15 mg/kg) or a fixed dose (420 or 1050 mg). Data from three clinical studies, comprising 153 patients and 1458 concentration-time points, were pooled for this analysis using NONMEM.

RESULTS

A linear two-compartment model best described the data. Body weight and BSA were significant covariates affecting clearance (CL) and distribution volume (Vc), respectively. However, weight and BSA only explained small percentage of interpatient variability for CL and Vc, respectively. Simulation results indicated that PK profiles were very similar after the three dosing methods. Compared to fixed dosing, weight- and BSA-based dosing only reduced the population variability of C(SS,trough) moderately.

CONCLUSION

A population PK model was developed for pertuzumab, the first monoclonal IgG1 antibody in a new class of agents known as HER dimerization inhibitors. In addition, our analyses demonstrate the feasibility of administering pertuzumab using a fixed dose in women with ovarian and breast cancers.

Role of pharmacogenetics in irinotecan therapy

In the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer, irinotecan has become one of the most important drugs, despite its sometimes unpredictable adverse effects. To understand why some patients experience severe adverse effects (diarrhea and neutropenia), while others do not, the metabolic pathways of this drug have to be unraveled in detail. Individual variation in expression of several phase I and phase II metabolizing enzymes and ABC-transporters involved in irinotecan metabolism and excretion, at least partly explains the observed pharmacokinetic interpatient variability. Although the difference in expression-level of these proteins to a certain amount is explained by physiologic and environmental factors, the presence of specific genetic determinants also does influence their expression and function. In this review, the role of genetic polymorphisms in the main enzyme-systems (carboxylesterase, cytochrome P450 3A, and uridine diphosphate-glucuronosyltransferase) and ABC-transporters (ABCB1, ABCC2, and ABCG2) involved in irinotecan metabolism, are discussed. Since at this moment the field of pharmacogenetics and pharmacogenomics is rapidly expanding and simultaneously more rapid and cost-effective screening methods are emerging, a wealth of future data is expected to enrich our knowledge of the genetic basis of irinotecan metabolism. Eventually, this may help to truly individualize the dosing of this (and other) anti-cancer agent(s), using a personal genetic profile of the most relevant enzymes for every patient.

Randomized Phase II study of two opposite administration sequences of irinotecan and cisplatin in patients with advanced nonsmall cell lung carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Combined chemotherapy with irinotecan and cisplatin (IP) is active in patients with nonsmall cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). However, the optimal administration schedule needs to be defined to maximize its synergic effect. The authors evaluated the efficacy, toxicity, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of IP chemotherapy given on two administration sequences in chemotherapy-naive patients with NSCLC.

METHODS

Eighty eligible patients were assigned randomly to receive 1 of 2 irinotecan and cisplatin administration sequences on Day 1: irinotecan followed by cisplatin (I-P) (n = 39 patients) or cisplatin followed by irinotecan (P-I) (n = 41 patients). Treatment was comprised of irinotecan at a dose of 80 mg/m(2) intravenously on Days 1 and 8 and cisplatin at a dose of 60 mg/m(2) intravenously on Day 1 of a 21-day cycle for a maximum of 6 cycles. For PK analysis, serial plasma samples were obtained on Day 1 of the first cycle.

RESULTS

In total, 77 patients were assessable for efficacy. The overall response rate was 47%, and there was a trend in favor of P-I (54%) compared with I-P (39%). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, the P-I sequence and female gender were found to be significant predictors of a better response (P = 0.047 and P = 0.011, respectively). Overall toxicity profiles and PK parameters were similar in both arms.

CONCLUSIONS

IP chemotherapy showed promising activity with a favorable 1-year survival rate. For future clinical use, the authors recommend administering cisplatin first and then irinotecan, because that sequence was associated with a higher response rate.

Pharmacogenetics of irinotecan metabolism and transport: an update

The anticancer agent irinotecan (CPT-11) is converted to SN-38, which is approximately 100 to 1,000-fold more cytotoxic than the parent drug. The pharmacokinetics of irinotecan are extremely complex and have been the subject of intensive investigation in recent years. Irinotecan is subject to extensive metabolism by various polymorphic enzymes, including CES2 to form SN-38, members of the UGT1A subfamily, and CYP3A4 and CYP3A5, which form several pharmacologically inactive oxidation products. Elimination of irinotecan is also dependent on drug-transporting proteins, notably ABCB1 (P-glycoprotein), ABCC2 (cMOAT) and ABCG2 (BCRP), present on the bile canalicular membrane. The various processes mediating drug elimination, either through metabolic breakdown or excretion, likely impact substantially on interindividual variability in drug handling. This report provides an update on current strategies to individualize irinotecan chemotherapy based on each patient's genetic constitution, which may ultimately lead to more selective use of this agent.

A pilot study on the safety of combining chrysin, a non-absorbable inducer of UGT1A1, and irinotecan (CPT-11) to treat metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Recently, it was shown that chrysin causes upregulation of UGT1A1 in Caco-2 intestinal cells. Therefore, we proposed that oral chrysin may reduce irinotecan (CPT-11) induced diarrhoea by shifting the SN-38G/SN-38 equilibrium towards the inactive SN-38G in the gastrointestinal mucosa. The purpose of this study was to examine the safety of combining single agent CPT-11 with chrysin.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty patients with previously treated advanced colorectal cancer were administered chrysin twice daily for 1 week preceding and succeeding treatment with single agent CPT-11 (350 mg/m(2) over 90 min every 3 weeks). Loperamide usage and bowel frequency/consistency were recorded by patients into a study diary and blood samples were collected for CPT-11 pharmacokinetic analysis.

RESULTS

There were no observable toxicities that could be attributed to chrysin use. The grades and frequency of delayed diarrhoea were mild, with only 10% of patients experiencing grade 3 toxicity. Loperamide usage was also modest with a median of 1-5 tablets per cycle (range: 0-22). Pharmacokinetic results revealed a mass ratio of plasma SN-38G/SN-38, which was very similar to historical controls (7.15 +/- 5.67, n = 18).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings, combined with the observation of clinical activity and grade 3/4 neutropenia in 25% of patients, suggest that combining chrysin with CPT-11 may be a safe and potentially useful means of preventing diarrhoea, although this needs to be further investigated in the setting of a randomised trial.

Prediction of irinotecan pharmacokinetics by use of cytochrome P450 3A4 phenotyping probes

BACKGROUND

Irinotecan is a topoisomerase I inhibitor that has been approved for use as a first- and second-line treatment for colorectal cancer. The response to irinotecan is variable, possibly because of interindividual variation in the expression of the enzymes that metabolize irinotecan, including cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1). We prospectively explored the relationships between CYP3A phenotype, as assessed by erythromycin metabolism and midazolam clearance, and the metabolism of irinotecan and its active metabolite SN-38.

METHODS

Of the 30 white cancer patients, 27 received at least two treatments with irinotecan administered as one 90-minute infusion (dose, 600 mg) with 3 weeks between treatments, and three received only one treatment. Before the first and second treatments, patients underwent an erythromycin breath test and a midazolam clearance test as phenotyping probes for CYP3A4. Erythromycin metabolism was assessed as the area under the curve for the flux of radioactivity in exhaled CO2 within 40 minutes after administration of [N-methyl-14C]erythromycin. Midazolam and irinotecan were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. Genomic DNA was isolated from blood and screened for genetic variants in CYP3A4 and UGT1A1. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

CYP3A4 activity varied sevenfold (range = 0.223%-1.53% of dose) among patients, whereas midazolam clearance varied fourfold (range = 262-1012 mL/min), although intraindividual variation was small. Erythromycin metabolism was not statistically significantly associated with irinotecan clearance (P = .090), whereas midazolam clearance was highly correlated with irinotecan clearance (r = .745, P<.001). In addition, the presence of a UGT1A1 variant with a (TA)7 repeat in the promoter (UGT1A1*28) was associated with increased exposure to SN-38 (435 ng x h/mL, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 339 to 531 ng x h/mL in patients who are homozygous for wild-type UGT1A1; 631 ng x h/mL, 95% CI = 499 to 762 ng . h/mL in heterozygous patients; and 1343 ng x h/mL, 95% CI = 0 to 4181 ng x h/mL in patients who are homozygous for UGT1A1*28) (P = .006).

CONCLUSION

CYP3A4 phenotype, as assessed by midazolam clearance, is statistically significantly associated with irinotecan pharmacokinetics. Evaluation of midazolam clearance combined with UGT1A1*28 genotyping may assist with optimization of irinotecan chemotherapy.

ABCG2 pharmacogenetics: ethnic differences in allele frequency and assessment of influence on irinotecan disposition

PURPOSE

The ATP-binding cassette transporter ABCG2 (breast cancer resistance protein) is an efflux protein that plays a role in host detoxification of various xenobiotic substrates, including the irinotecan metabolite 7- ethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin (SN-38). The ABCG2 421C>A polymorphism has been associated with reduced protein expression and altered function in vitro. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ethnic distribution and potential functional consequence of the ABCG2 421C>A genotype in cancer patients treated with irinotecan.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

ABCG2 genotyping was performed using Pyrosequencing on DNA from 88 American Caucasians, 94 African Americans, 938 Africans, and 95 Han Chinese, as well as in 84 European Caucasian patients treated with irinotecan undergoing additional blood sampling for pharmacokinetic studies.

RESULTS

Significant differences in allele frequencies were observed between the given world populations (P < 0.001), the variant allele being most common in the Han Chinese population with a frequency as high as 34%. The mean area under the curve of irinotecan and SN-38 were 19,851 and 639 ng x hour/mL, respectively. The frequency of the variant allele (10.7%) was in line with results in American Caucasians. No significant changes in irinotecan pharmacokinetics were observed in relation to the ABCG2 421C>A genotype, although one of two homozygous variant allele carriers showed extensive accumulation of SN-38 and SN-38 glucuronide.

CONCLUSIONS

The ABCG2 421C>A polymorphism appears to play a limited role in the disposition of irinotecan in European Caucasians. It is likely that the contribution of this genetic variant is obscured by a functional role of other polymorphic proteins.