Govind Kallee, Gérard Milano, Florence Duffaud, Laetitia Dahan, Joseph Ciccolini
{"title":"5-氟尿嘧啶治疗DPD超快速代谢状态和疗效:一项现实世界研究","authors":"Govind Kallee, Gérard Milano, Florence Duffaud, Laetitia Dahan, Joseph Ciccolini","doi":"10.1111/fcp.70035","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Anticancer drug 5FU is extensively metabolized by dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), an enzyme with high interindividual variability. Poor metabolizer (PM, i.e., DPD deficient) patients are at risk of life-threatening toxicities. Whether ultra-rapid metabolizer (UM) status could conversely compromise 5FU efficacy remains to be investigated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>In this real-world study, 352 adult patients treated with a 5FU-containing regimen were screened. Patients were classified as normal (extensive metabolizer, EM), PM, or UM on DPD function based upon baseline plasma uracil monitoring. The impact of DPD status on efficacy and safety endpoints was investigated.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results</h3>\n \n <p>Patients were categorized on DPD as UM (11.9%), EM (75.9%), and PM (12.2%). The response rate was 54.5%, with median PFS and OS of 13.9 and 19 months, respectively. PM patients were treated with an average 13% lower 5FU starting dose. There was no statistical difference in efficacy between UM and other patients. Severe toxicities were observed in less than 5% of patients, an incidence significantly lower than commonly reported with 5FU-containing regimen and was comparable between UM, EM, and PM patients. Our observations suggest that UM status is not associated with the lack of efficacy of 5FU. In addition, upfront DPD testing with adaptive dosing helps to reduce the incidence of severe toxicities, as PM patients on reduced doses did not have more severe toxicities than other patients treated with standard doses, while exhibiting similar efficacy in terms of response rate and survival.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\n \n <p>When upfront DPD screening with adaptive dosing is performed, no difference is observed between UM, EM, and PM patients in terms of efficacy and safety.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\n \n <p>#PADSA3GKW7</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":12657,"journal":{"name":"Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology","volume":"39 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/fcp.70035","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"DPD Ultra-Rapid Metabolizer Status and Efficacy of 5-Fluorouracil Treatment: A Real-World Study\",\"authors\":\"Govind Kallee, Gérard Milano, Florence Duffaud, Laetitia Dahan, Joseph Ciccolini\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/fcp.70035\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Anticancer drug 5FU is extensively metabolized by dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), an enzyme with high interindividual variability. Poor metabolizer (PM, i.e., DPD deficient) patients are at risk of life-threatening toxicities. Whether ultra-rapid metabolizer (UM) status could conversely compromise 5FU efficacy remains to be investigated.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>In this real-world study, 352 adult patients treated with a 5FU-containing regimen were screened. Patients were classified as normal (extensive metabolizer, EM), PM, or UM on DPD function based upon baseline plasma uracil monitoring. The impact of DPD status on efficacy and safety endpoints was investigated.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results</h3>\\n \\n <p>Patients were categorized on DPD as UM (11.9%), EM (75.9%), and PM (12.2%). The response rate was 54.5%, with median PFS and OS of 13.9 and 19 months, respectively. PM patients were treated with an average 13% lower 5FU starting dose. There was no statistical difference in efficacy between UM and other patients. Severe toxicities were observed in less than 5% of patients, an incidence significantly lower than commonly reported with 5FU-containing regimen and was comparable between UM, EM, and PM patients. Our observations suggest that UM status is not associated with the lack of efficacy of 5FU. In addition, upfront DPD testing with adaptive dosing helps to reduce the incidence of severe toxicities, as PM patients on reduced doses did not have more severe toxicities than other patients treated with standard doses, while exhibiting similar efficacy in terms of response rate and survival.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Conclusion</h3>\\n \\n <p>When upfront DPD screening with adaptive dosing is performed, no difference is observed between UM, EM, and PM patients in terms of efficacy and safety.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Trial Registration</h3>\\n \\n <p>#PADSA3GKW7</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12657,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology\",\"volume\":\"39 4\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/fcp.70035\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fcp.70035\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/fcp.70035","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY","Score":null,"Total":0}
DPD Ultra-Rapid Metabolizer Status and Efficacy of 5-Fluorouracil Treatment: A Real-World Study
Background
Anticancer drug 5FU is extensively metabolized by dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), an enzyme with high interindividual variability. Poor metabolizer (PM, i.e., DPD deficient) patients are at risk of life-threatening toxicities. Whether ultra-rapid metabolizer (UM) status could conversely compromise 5FU efficacy remains to be investigated.
Methods
In this real-world study, 352 adult patients treated with a 5FU-containing regimen were screened. Patients were classified as normal (extensive metabolizer, EM), PM, or UM on DPD function based upon baseline plasma uracil monitoring. The impact of DPD status on efficacy and safety endpoints was investigated.
Results
Patients were categorized on DPD as UM (11.9%), EM (75.9%), and PM (12.2%). The response rate was 54.5%, with median PFS and OS of 13.9 and 19 months, respectively. PM patients were treated with an average 13% lower 5FU starting dose. There was no statistical difference in efficacy between UM and other patients. Severe toxicities were observed in less than 5% of patients, an incidence significantly lower than commonly reported with 5FU-containing regimen and was comparable between UM, EM, and PM patients. Our observations suggest that UM status is not associated with the lack of efficacy of 5FU. In addition, upfront DPD testing with adaptive dosing helps to reduce the incidence of severe toxicities, as PM patients on reduced doses did not have more severe toxicities than other patients treated with standard doses, while exhibiting similar efficacy in terms of response rate and survival.
Conclusion
When upfront DPD screening with adaptive dosing is performed, no difference is observed between UM, EM, and PM patients in terms of efficacy and safety.
期刊介绍:
Fundamental & Clinical Pharmacology publishes reports describing important and novel developments in fundamental as well as clinical research relevant to drug therapy. Original articles, short communications and reviews are published on all aspects of experimental and clinical pharmacology including:
Antimicrobial, Antiviral Agents
Autonomic Pharmacology
Cardiovascular Pharmacology
Cellular Pharmacology
Clinical Trials
Endocrinopharmacology
Gene Therapy
Inflammation, Immunopharmacology
Lipids, Atherosclerosis
Liver and G-I Tract Pharmacology
Metabolism, Pharmacokinetics
Neuropharmacology
Neuropsychopharmacology
Oncopharmacology
Pediatric Pharmacology Development
Pharmacoeconomics
Pharmacoepidemiology
Pharmacogenetics, Pharmacogenomics
Pharmacovigilance
Pulmonary Pharmacology
Receptors, Signal Transduction
Renal Pharmacology
Thrombosis and Hemostasis
Toxicopharmacology
Clinical research, including clinical studies and clinical trials, may cover disciplines such as pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, pharmacovigilance, pharmacoepidemiology, pharmacogenomics and pharmacoeconomics. Basic research articles from fields such as physiology and molecular biology which contribute to an understanding of drug therapy are also welcomed.