24 resultados para FLUOROURACIL
Resumo:
The importance of polymorphisms in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) gene (DPYD) for the prediction of severe toxicity in 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) based chemotherapy has been controversially debated. As a key enzyme in the catabolism of 5-FU, DPD is the top candidate for pharmacogenetic studies on 5-FU toxicity, since a reduced DPD activity is thought to result in an increased half-life of the drug, and thus, an increased risk of toxicity. Here, we review the current knowledge on well-known and frequently studied DPYD variants such as the c.1905+1G>A splice site variant, as well as the recent discoveries of important functional variation in the noncoding regions of DPYD. We also outline future directions that are needed to further improve the risk assessment of 5-FU toxicity, in particular with respect to metabolic profiling and in the context of different combination therapeutic regimens, in which 5-FU is used today.
Resumo:
The chemotherapeutic drug 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is widely used for treating solid tumors. Response to 5-FU treatment is variable with 10-30% of patients experiencing serious toxicity partly explained by reduced activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). DPD converts endogenous uracil (U) into 5,6-dihydrouracil (UH(2) ), and analogously, 5-FU into 5-fluoro-5,6-dihydrouracil (5-FUH(2) ). Combined quantification of U and UH(2) with 5-FU and 5-FUH(2) may provide a pre-therapeutic assessment of DPD activity and further guide drug dosing during therapy. Here, we report the development of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay for simultaneous quantification of U, UH(2) , 5-FU and 5-FUH(2) in human plasma. Samples were prepared by liquid-liquid extraction with 10:1 ethyl acetate-2-propanol (v/v). The evaporated samples were reconstituted in 0.1% formic acid and 10 μL aliquots were injected into the HPLC system. Analyte separation was achieved on an Atlantis dC(18) column with a mobile phase consisting of 1.0 mm ammonium acetate, 0.5 mm formic acid and 3.3% methanol. Positively ionized analytes were detected by multiple reaction monitoring. The analytical response was linear in the range 0.01-10 μm for U, 0.1-10 μm for UH(2) , 0.1-75 μm for 5-FU and 0.75-75 μm for 5-FUH(2) , covering the expected concentration ranges in plasma. The method was validated following the FDA guidelines and applied to clinical samples obtained from ten 5-FU-treated colorectal cancer patients. The present method merges the analysis of 5-FU pharmacokinetics and DPD activity into a single assay representing a valuable tool to improve the efficacy and safety of 5-FU-based chemotherapy.
Resumo:
This study was initiated to assess the quantitative impact of patient anthropometrics and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) mutations on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) and to explore limited sampling strategies of 5FU.
Resumo:
Chemotherapeutic use of 5-fluorouracil (5FU) is compromised by 10-20% of patients developing severe toxicity. Recently described genetic variation in dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) has been shown to be a major predictor of 5FU toxicity. Here, we describe a new genotyping assay for routine clinical use that covers all the major DPYD risk variants.
Resumo:
This randomized phase II trial evaluated two docetaxel-based regimens to see which would be most promising according to overall response rate (ORR) for comparison in a phase III trial with epirubicin-cisplatin-fluorouracil (ECF) as first-line advanced gastric cancer therapy.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: The activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), the key enzyme of pyrimidine catabolism, is thought to be an important determinant for the occurrence of severe toxic reactions to 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), which is one of the most commonly prescribed chemotherapeutic agents for the treatment of solid cancers. Genetic variation in the DPD gene (DPYD) has been proposed as a main factor for variation in DPD activity in the population. However, only a small proportion of severe toxicities in 5-FU based chemotherapy can be explained with such rare deleterious DPYD mutations resulting in severe enzyme deficiencies. Recently, hypermethylation of the DPYD promoter region has been proposed as an alternative mechanism for DPD deficiency and thus as a major cause of severe 5-FU toxicity. METHODS: Here, the prognostic significance of this epigenetic marker with respect to severe 5-FU toxicity was assessed in 27 cancer patients receiving 5-FU based chemotherapy, including 17 patients experiencing severe toxic side effects following drug administration, none of which were carriers of a known deleterious DPYD mutation, and ten control patients. The methylation status of the DPYD promoter region in peripheral blood mononuclear cells was evaluated by analysing for each patient between 19 and 30 different clones of a PCR-amplified 209 base pair fragment of the bisulfite-modified DPYD promoter region. The fragments were sequenced to detect bisulfite-induced, methylation-dependent sequence differences. RESULTS: No evidence of DPYD promoter methylation was observed in any of the investigated patient samples, whereas in a control experiment, as little as 10% methylated genomic DNA could be detected. CONCLUSION: Our results indicate that DYPD promoter hypermethylation is not of major importance as a prognostic factor for severe toxicity in 5-FU based chemotherapy.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Chemotherapies of solid tumors commonly include 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). With standard doses of 5-FU, substantial inter-patient variability has been observed in exposure levels and treatment response. Recently, improved outcomes in colorectal cancer patients due to pharmacokinetically guided 5-FU dosing were reported. We aimed at establishing a rapid and sensitive method for monitoring 5-FU plasma levels in cancer patients in our routine clinical practice. METHODS: Performance of the Saladax My5-FU™ immunoassay was evaluated on the Roche Cobas® Integra 800 analyzer. Subsequently, 5-FU concentrations of 247 clinical plasma samples obtained with this assay were compared to the results obtained by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) and other commonly used clinical analyzers (Olympus AU400, Roche Cobas c6000, and Thermo Fisher CDx90). RESULTS: The My-FU assay was successfully validated on the Cobas Integra 800 analyzer in terms of linearity, precision, accuracy, recovery, interference, sample carryover, and dilution integrity. Method comparison between the Cobas Integra 800 and LC-MS/MS revealed a proportional bias of 7% towards higher values measured with the My5-FU assay. However, when the Cobas Integra 800 was compared to three other clinical analyzers in addition to LC-MS/MS including 50 samples representing the typical clinical range of 5-FU plasma concentrations, only a small proportional bias (≤1.6%) and a constant bias below the limit of detection was observed. CONCLUSIONS: The My5-FU assay demonstrated robust and highly comparable performance on different analyzers. Therefore, the assay is suitable for monitoring 5-FU plasma levels in routine clinical practice and may contribute to improved efficacy and safety of commonly used 5-FU-based chemotherapies.
Resumo:
AIM Decreased DPD activity is a major cause of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) toxicity, but known reduced-function variants in the DPD gene (DPYD) explain only a part of DPD-related 5-FU toxicities. Here, we evaluated the baseline (pretherapeutic) plasma 5,6-dihydrouracil:uracil (UH2:U) ratio as a marker of DPD activity in the context of DPYD genotypes. MATERIALS & METHODS DPYD variants were genotyped and plasma U, UH2 and 5-FU concentrations were determined by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry in 320 healthy blood donors and 28 cancer patients receiving 5-FU-based chemotherapy. RESULTS Baseline UH2:U ratios were strongly correlated with generally low and highly variable U concentrations. Reduced-function DPYD variants were only weakly associated with lower baseline UH2:U ratios. However, the interindividual variability in the UH2:U ratio was reduced and a stronger correlation between ratios and 5-FU exposure was observed in cancer patients during 5-FU administration. CONCLUSION These results suggest that the baseline UH2:U plasma ratio in most individuals reflects the nonsaturated state of DPD and is not predictive of decreased DPD activity. It may, however, be highly predictive at increased substrate concentrations, as observed during 5-FU administration.
Resumo:
The International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VIII compared long-term efficacy of endocrine therapy (goserelin), chemotherapy [cyclophosphamide, methotrexate and fluorouracil (CMF)], and chemoendocrine therapy (CMF followed by goserelin) for pre/perimenopausal women with lymph-node-negative breast cancer.
Resumo:
PURPOSE: The value of adjuvant tamoxifen after chemotherapy for premenopausal women with breast cancer has not been adequately assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between 1993 and 1999, International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial 13-93 enrolled 1,246 assessable premenopausal women with axillary node-positive, operable breast cancer. All patients received chemotherapy (cyclophosphamide plus either doxorubicin or epirubicin for four courses followed by immediate or delayed classical cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil for three courses), which was followed by either tamoxifen (20 mg daily) for 5 years or no further treatment. The primary end point was disease-free survival (DFS). Tumors were classified as estrogen receptor (ER) -positive (n = 735, 59%) if immunohistochemical (IHC) or ligand-binding assays (LBA) were clearly positive. The ER-negative group included all other tumors (n = 511, 41%). A subset of the ER-negative group was defined as ER absent (n = 108, 9%) if IHC staining was none or if the LBA result was 0 fmol/mg cytosol protein. The median follow-up time was 7 years. RESULTS: Tamoxifen improved DFS in the ER-positive cohort (hazard ratio [HR] for tamoxifen v no tamoxifen = 0.59; 95% CI, 0.46 to 0.75; P < .0001) but not in the ER-negative cohort (HR = 1.02; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.35; P = .89). Tamoxifen had a detrimental effect on patients with ER-absent tumors compared with no tamoxifen in an unplanned exploratory analysis (HR = 2.10; 95% CI, 1.03 to 4.29; P = .04). Patients with ER-positive tumors who achieved chemotherapy-induced amenorrhea had a significantly improved outcome (HR for amenorrhea v no amenorrhea = 0.61; 95% CI, 0.44 to 0.86; P = .004), whether or not they received tamoxifen. CONCLUSION: Tamoxifen after adjuvant chemotherapy significantly improved treatment outcome in premenopausal patients with endocrine-responsive disease, but its use as adjuvant therapy for patients with ER-negative tumors is not recommended.
Resumo:
BACKGROUND: Extracapsular tumor spread (ECS) has been identified as a possible risk factor for breast cancer recurrence, but controversy exists regarding its role in decision making for regional radiotherapy. This study evaluates ECS as a predictor of local, axillary, and supraclavicular recurrence. PATIENTS AND METHODS: International Breast Cancer Study Group Trial VI accrued 1475 eligible pre- and perimenopausal women with node-positive breast cancer who were randomly assigned to receive three to nine courses of classical combination chemotherapy with cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, and fluorouracil. ECS status was determined retrospectively in 933 patients based on review of pathology reports. Cumulative incidence and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using methods for competing risks analysis. Adjustment factors included treatment group and baseline patient and tumor characteristics. The median follow-up was 14 years. RESULTS: In univariable analysis, ECS was significantly associated with supraclavicular recurrence (HR = 1.96; 95% confidence interval 1.23-3.13; P = 0.005). HRs for local and axillary recurrence were 1.38 (P = 0.06) and 1.81 (P = 0.11), respectively. Following adjustment for number of lymph node metastases and other baseline prognostic factors, ECS was not significantly associated with any of the three recurrence types studied. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that the decision for additional regional radiotherapy should not be based solely on the presence of ECS.
Resumo:
GOAL OF THE WORK: Anemia is a common side effect of chemotherapy. Limited information exists about its incidence and risk factors. The objective of this study was to evaluate the incidence of anemia and risk factors for anemia occurrence in patients with early breast cancer who received adjuvant chemotherapy. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We evaluated risk factors for anemia in pre- and post/perimenopausal patients with lymph node-positive early breast cancer treated with adjuvant chemotherapy in two randomized trials. All patients received four cycles of doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) followed by three cycles of cyclophosphamide, methotrexate, fluorouracil (CMF). Anemia incidence was related to baseline risk factors. Multivariable analysis used logistic and Cox regression. MAIN RESULTS: Among the 2,215 available patients, anemia was recorded in 11% during adjuvant chemotherapy. Grade 2 and 3 anemia occurred in 4 and 1% of patients, respectively. Pretreatment hemoglobin and white blood cells (WBC) were significant predictors of anemia. Adjusted odds ratios (logistic regression) comparing highest versus lowest quartiles were 0.18 (P < 0.0001) for hemoglobin and 0.52 (P = 0.0045) for WBC. Age, surgery type, platelets, body mass index, and length of time from surgery to chemotherapy were not significant predictors. Cox regression results looking at time to anemia were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate or severe anemia is rare among patients treated with AC followed by CMF. Low baseline hemoglobin and WBC are associated with a higher risk of anemia.
Resumo:
The efficacy of photodynamic therapy (PDT) with 5-aminolevulinate and methyl aminolevulinate in the treatment of actinic keratosis has been demonstrated in a large number of clinical studies over the last several years. Here, we recapitulate the major findings, comparing the various photosensitizers, light sources and therapeutic regimens, and present a retrospective analysis of 142 own cases treated with 259 PDTs. In addition, we also discuss the value of PDT in comparison with cryotherapy or 5-fluorouracil. The efficacy and the low risk of side effects of PDT have resulted in a high patient preference in clinical trials.
Resumo:
Although chemotherapy for breast cancer can increase inflammation, few studies have examined predictors of this phenomenon. This study examined potential contributions of demographics, disease characteristics, and treatment regimens to markers of inflammation in response to chemotherapy for breast cancer. Thirty-five women with stage I-III-A breast cancer (mean age 50 years) were studied prior to cycle 1 and prior to cycle 4 of anthracycline-based chemotherapy. Circulating levels of inflammatory markers with high relevance to breast cancer were examined, including C-reactive protein (CRP), tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-alpha), Interleukin-1 receptor antagonist (IL1-RA), vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), soluble intercellular adhesion molecule-1 (sICAM-1), Interleukin- (IL-6), soluble P-selectin (sP-selectin), and von Willebrand factor (vWf). Chemotherapy was associated with elevations in VEGF (p < or = 0.01), sICAM-1 (p < or = 0.01), sP-selectin (p < or = 0.02) and vWf (p < or = 0.05). Multiple regression analysis controlling for age and body mass index (BMI) showed that higher post-chemotherapy levels of inflammation were consistently related to higher pre-chemotherapy levels of inflammation (ps < or =0.05) as well as to certain disease characteristics. Post-chemotherapy IL-6 levels were higher in patients who had larger tumors (p < or = 0.05) while post-chemotherapy VEGF levels were higher in patients who had smaller tumors (p < or = 0.05). Post-chemotherapy sP-selectin levels were highest in women who had received epirubicin, cytoxan, 5-fluorouracil chemotherapy (p < or = 0.01). These findings indicate that chemotherapy treatment can be associated with elevations in certain markers of inflammation, particularly markers of endothelial and platelet activation. Inflammation in response to chemotherapy is most significantly related to inflammation that existed prior to chemotherapy but also potentially to treatment regimen and to certain disease characteristics.