BACKGROUND: The Alpe-DPD study (NCT02324452) demonstrated that prospective genotyping and dose-individualization using four alleles in DPYD (DPYD*2A/rs3918290, c.1236G > A/rs75017182, c.2846A > T/rs67376798 and c.1679 T > G/rs56038477) can mitigate the risk of severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity. However, this could not prevent all toxicities. The goal of this study was to identify additional genetic variants, both inside and outside DPYD, that may contribute to fluoropyrimidine toxicity.
METHODS: Biospecimens and data from the Alpe-DPD study were used. Exon sequencing was performed to identify risk variants inside DPYD. In silico and in vitro analyses were used to classify DPYD variants. A genome-wide association study (GWAS) with severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity was performed to identify variants outside DPYD. Association with severe toxicity was assessed using matched-pair analyses for the exon sequencing and logistic, Cox, and ordinal regression analyses for GWAS.
RESULTS: Twenty-four non-synonymous, frameshift, and splice site DPYD variants were detected in ten of 986 patients. Seven of these variants (c.1670C > T, c.1913 T > C, c.1925 T > C, c.506delC, c.731A > C, c.1740 + 1G > T, c.763 - 2A > G) were predicted to be deleterious. The carriers of either of these variants showed a trend towards a 2.14-fold (95% CI, 0.41-11.3, P = 0.388) increased risk of severe toxicity compared to matched controls (N = 30). After GWAS of 942 patients, no individual single nucleotide polymorphisms achieved genome-wide significance (P ≤ 5 × 10-8), however, five variants were suggestive of association (P < 5 × 10-6) with severe toxicity.
CONCLUSIONS: Results from DPYD exon sequencing and GWAS analysis did not identify additional genetic variants associated with severe toxicity, which suggests that testing for single markers at a population level currently has limited clinical value. Identifying additional variants on an individual level is still promising to explain fluoropyrimidine-related severe toxicity. In addition, studies with larger samples sizes, in more diverse cohorts are needed to identify potential clinically relevant genetic variants related to severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity.

To reduce severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity, pharmacogenetic guidelines recommend a dose reduction for carriers of four high-risk variants in the DPYD gene (*2A, *13, c.2846A>T, HapB3). The polymorphism in the MIR27A gene has been shown to enhance the predictive value of these variants. Our study aimed to explore whether rs895819 in the MIR27A gene modifies the effect of five common DPYD variants: c.1129-5923C>G (rs75017182, HapB3), c.2194G>A (rs1801160, *6), c.1601G>A (rs1801158, *4), c.496A>G (rs2297595), and c.85T>C (rs1801265, *9A). The study included 370 Caucasian patients with gastrointestinal tumors who received fluoropyrimidine-containing chemotherapy. Genotyping was performed using high-resolution melting analysis. The DPYD*6 allele was associated with overall severe toxicity and neutropenia with an increased risk particularly pronounced in patients carrying the MIR27A variant. All carriers of DPYD*6 exhibited an association with asthenia regardless of their MIR27A status. The increased risk of neutropenia in patients with c.496G was only evident in those co-carrying the MIR27A variant. DPYD*4 was also significantly linked to neutropenia risk in co-carriers of the MIR27A variant. Thus, we have demonstrated the predictive value of the *6, *4, and c.496G alleles of the DPYD gene, considering the modifying effect of the MIR27A polymorphism.

Fluoropyrimidines are metabolized mainly by the enzyme dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). Some variants in the coding gene, DPYD, have already been associated with increased toxicity, and their testing is recommended in patients proposed for treatment with these drugs. In this clinical case, a patient without the four variants recommended for testing showed toxicity from the second cycle of capecitabine onwards, requiring hospitalization in the third cycle. Sequencing of the DPYD gene showed the presence of three heterozygous variants which the laboratory interpreted as deleterious to the expression or function of DPD. In the absence of phenotypic testing, the patient stopped treatment, which is also the usual procedure in the case of compound heterozygosity of the variants usually tested. The literature review shows data for and against the role of each variant found in fluoropyrimidine toxicity, but there may be more concrete data in the study of haplotypes with multiple variants and the need to research alterations in other genes to better understand their relationship with toxicity.

Fluoropyrimidines (FPs) are commonly prescribed in many cancer streams. The EMA and FDA-approved drug labels for FPs recommend genotyping the DPYD*2A (rs3918290), *13 (rs55886062), *HapB3 (rs56038477), alleles, and DPYD rs67376798 before treatment starts. We implemented the DPYD genotyping in our daily clinical routine, but we still found patients showing severe adverse drug events (ADEs) to FPs. We studied among these patients the DPYD rs1801265, rs17376848, rs1801159, rs1801160, rs1801158, and rs2297595 as explanatory candidates of the interindividual differences for FP-related toxicities, examining the association with the response to FPs . We also studied the impact of DPYD testing for FP dose tailoring in our clinical practice and characterized the DPYD gene in our population. We found a total acceptance among physicians of therapeutic recommendations translated from the DPYD test, and this dose tailoring does not affect the treatment efficacy. We also found that the DPYD*4 (defined by rs1801158) allele is associated with a higher risk of ADEs (severity grade ≥ 3) in both the univariate (O.R. = 5.66; 95% C.I. = 1.35-23.67; p = 0.014) and multivariate analyses (O.R. = 5.73; 95% C.I. = 1.41-28.77; p = 0.019) among FP-treated patients based on the DPYD genotype. This makes it a candidate variant for implementation in clinical practice.

Pre-treatment genotyping of four well-characterized toxicity risk-variants in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene (DPYD) has been widely implemented in Europe to prevent serious adverse effects in cancer patients treated with fluoropyrimidines. Current genotyping practices are largely limited to selected commonly studied variants and are unable to determine phasing when more than one variant allele is detected. Recent evidence indicates that common DPYD variants modulate the functional impact of deleterious variants in a phase-dependent manner, where a cis- or a trans-configuration translates into different toxicity risks and dosing recommendations. DPYD is a large gene with 23 exons spanning nearly a mega-base of DNA, making it a challenging candidate for full-gene sequencing in the diagnostic setting. Herein, we present a time- and cost-efficient long-read sequencing approach for capturing the complete coding region of DPYD. We demonstrate that this method can reliably produce phased genotypes, overcoming a major limitation with current methods. This method was validated using 21 subjects, including two cancer patients, each of whom carried multiple DPYD variants. Genotype assignments showed complete concordance with conventional approaches. Furthermore, we demonstrate that the method is robust to technical challenges inherent in long-range sequencing of PCR products, including reference alignment bias and PCR chimerism.

暂无摘要。

OBJECTIVE: Patients with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency are at high risk for severe and fatal toxicity from fluoropyrimidine (FP) chemotherapy. Pre-treatment DPYD testing is standard of care in many countries, but not the United States (US). This survey assessed pre-treatment DPYD testing approaches in the US to identify best practices for broader adoption.
METHODS: From August to October 2023, a 22-item QualtricsXM survey was sent to institutions and clinicians known to conduct pre-treatment DPYD testing and broadly distributed through relevant organizations and social networks. Responses were analyzed using descriptive analysis.
RESULTS: Responses from 24 unique US sites that have implemented pre-treatment DPYD testing or have a detailed implementation plan in place were analyzed. Only 33% of sites ordered DPYD testing for all FP-treated patients; at the remaining sites, patients were tested depending on disease characteristics or clinician preference. Almost 50% of sites depend on individual clinicians to remember to order testing without the assistance of electronic alerts or workflow reminders. DPYD testing was most often conducted by commercial laboratories that tested for at least the four or five DPYD variants considered clinically actionable. Approximately 90% of sites reported receiving results within 10 days of ordering.
CONCLUSIONS: Implementing DPYD testing into routine clinical practice is feasible and requires a coordinated effort among the healthcare team. These results will be used to develop best practices for the clinical adoption of DPYD testing to prevent severe and fatal toxicity in cancer patients receiving FP chemotherapy.

OBJECTIVE: Fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy is important for treatment of many solid tumours but is associated with cardiotoxicity. The relationship of fluoropyrimidine-associated cardiotoxicity (FAC) with conventional cardiovascular (CV) risk factors is poorly understood, and standard cardiovascular risk scores are not validated in this context.
RESULTS: Single-centre retrospective study of patients treated with fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy using electronic health records for cardiovascular risk factors (and calculation of QRISK3 score), cancer treatment, and clinical outcomes. FAC was defined by cardiovascular events during or within 3 months of fluoropyrimidine treatment, and Cox regression was used to assess associations of CV risk and cancer treatment with FAC. One thousand eight hundred ninety-eight patients were included (45% male; median age 64 years), with median follow up 24.5 (11.5-48.3 months); 52.7% of patients were at moderate or high baseline CV risk (QRISK3 score >10%) Cardiovascular events occurred in 3.1% (59/1898)-most commonly angina (64.4%, 38/59) and atrial fibrillation (13.6%, 8/59), with 39% events during cycle one of treatment. In univariable analysis, QRISK3 score >20% was significantly associated with incident FAC (HR 2.25, 95% CI 1.11-4.93, P = 0.03). On multivariable analysis, beta-blocker use (HR 1.04, 95% CI 1.00-1.08, P = 0.04) and higher BMI (HR 2.33, 95% CI 1.04-5.19, P = 0.04) were independently associated with incident CV events. Thirty-two of the 59 patients with FAC were subsequently rechallenged with fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy, with repeat CV events in 6% (2/32). Incident FAC did not affect overall survival (P = 0.50).
CONCLUSIONS: High BMI and use of beta-blockers are associated with risk of CV events during fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. QRISK3 score may also play a role in identifying patients at high risk of CV events during fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. Re-challenge with further fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy can be considered in patients following CV events during prior treatment.

BACKGROUND: Hand-foot syndrome (HFS) significantly impacts quality of life in cancer patients undergoing capecitabine treatment. This study assessed capecitabine-associated HFS prevalence, its impacts on chemotherapy treatment, and identified risk factors in multiracial Malaysian patients.
METHODS: We included adult cancer patients receiving capecitabine at Sarawak General Hospital for at least two cycles from April 1, 2021 to June 30, 2022. HFS rates, time to HFS, and proportions of HFS-related treatment modifications were determined. Characteristics between patients with and without HFS were compared and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for all-grade HFS and grade ≥2.
RESULTS: Among 369 patients, 185 (50.1%) developed HFS, with 14.6% experiencing grade ≥2 and 21.6% (40/185) underwent treatment modifications. Risk factors for all-grade HFS include older age (OR 1.03 95%CI 1.01, 1.06), prior chemotherapy (OR 2.09 95%CI 1.22, 3.58), higher capecitabine dose (OR 2.96 95%CI 1.62, 5.38), prolonged treatment (OR 1.36 95%CI 1.21, 1.51), folic acid intake (OR 3.27 95%CI 1.45, 7.35) and lower neutrophil count (OR 0.77 95%CI 0.66, 0.89). For HFS grade ≥2, older age (OR 1.04 95%CI 1.01, 1.08), female sex (OR 2.10 95%CI 1.05, 4.18), Chinese race (OR 2.10 95%CI 1.06, 4.18), and higher capecitabine dose (OR 2.62 95%CI 1.28, 5.35) are significant risk factors. Use of calcium channel blockers were associated with reduced risks of all-grade HFS (OR 0.27, 95%CI 0.12, 0.60) and grade ≥2 (OR 0.21 95%CI 0.06, 0.78).
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides real-world data on capecitabine-induced HFS in Malaysian patients and identifies risk factors that may offer insights into its understanding and management.

OBJECTIVE: 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is inefficiently converted to the active anti-cancer metabolite, fluorodeoxyuridine-monophosphate (FUDR-MP), is associated with dose-limiting toxicities and challenging administration schedules. NUC-3373 is a phosphoramidate nucleotide analog of fluorodeoxyuridine (FUDR) designed to overcome these limitations and replace fluoropyrimidines such as 5-FU.
METHODS: NUC-3373 was administered as monotherapy to patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapy via intravenous infusion either on Days 1, 8, 15 and 22 (Part 1) or on Days 1 and 15 (Part 2) of 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary objectives were maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) and schedule of NUC-3373. Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics (PK), and anti-tumor activity.
RESULTS: Fifty-nine patients received weekly NUC-3373 in 9 cohorts in Part 1 (n = 43) and 3 alternate-weekly dosing cohorts in Part 2 (n = 16). They had received a median of 3 prior lines of treatment (range: 0-11) and 74% were exposed to prior fluoropyrimidines. Four experienced dose-limiting toxicities: two Grade (G) 3 transaminitis; one G2 headache; and one G3 transient hypotension. Commonest treatment-related G3 adverse event of raised transaminases occurred in < 10% of patients. NUC-3373 showed a favorable PK profile, with dose-proportionality and a prolonged half-life compared to 5-FU. A best overall response of stable disease was observed, with prolonged progression-free survival.
CONCLUSIONS: NUC-3373 was well-tolerated in a heavily pre-treated solid tumor patient population, including those who had relapsed on prior 5-FU. The MTD and RP2D was defined as 2500 mg/m2 NUC-3373 weekly. NUC-3373 is currently in combination treatment studies.
BACKGROUND: Clinicaltrials.gov registry number NCT02723240. Trial registered on 8th December 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/study/NCT02723240 .