DPD status and fluoropyrimidines-based treatment: high activity matters too.
Aged
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols
/ therapeutic use
Biomarkers, Tumor
/ metabolism
Capecitabine
/ administration & dosage
Dihydrouracil Dehydrogenase (NADP)
/ metabolism
Female
Fluorouracil
/ administration & dosage
Follow-Up Studies
Humans
Leucovorin
/ administration & dosage
Male
Middle Aged
Neoplasms
/ drug therapy
Prognosis
Retrospective Studies
Survival Rate
5-fluorouracil
Breast neoplasms
Capecitabine
Digestive neoplasms
Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase
Head and neck neoplasms
Journal
BMC cancer
ISSN: 1471-2407
Titre abrégé: BMC Cancer
Pays: England
ID NLM: 100967800
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
18 May 2020
18 May 2020
Historique:
received:
02
12
2019
accepted:
27
04
2020
entrez:
20
5
2020
pubmed:
20
5
2020
medline:
13
1
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) status is an indicator of a marked risk for toxicity following fluoropyrimidine (FP)-based chemotherapy. This notion is well-established for low DPD status but little is known about the clinical impact of high DPD activity. This study examined the possible link between high intrinsic lymphocytic DPD activity and overall survival, progression free survival and response to FP-based treatment in patients treated in our institution. Lymphocytic DPD activity was assessed in a group of 136 patients receiving FP-based chemotherapy from 2004 to 2016. There were 105 digestive (77.2%), 24 breast (17.6%) and 7 head and neck cancers (5.2%). Cox or logistic regression models were applied with adjustment on all confounding factors that could modify OS, PFS or response. All models were stratified on the three cancer locations. A cut-off for DPD activity was assessed graphically and analytically. An optimal cut-off for DPD activity at 0.30 nmol/min/mg protein was identified as the best value for discriminating survivals and response. In multivariate analysis, individual lymphocytic DPD activity was significantly related to overall survival (p = 0.013; HR: 3.35 CI95%[1.27-8.86]), progression-free survival (p < 0.001; HR: 3.15 CI95%[1.75-5.66]) and response rate (p = 0.033; HR: 0.33 CI95%[0.12-0.92]) with a marked detrimental effect associated with high DPD activity. DPD status screening should result in a two-pronged approach with FP dose reduction in case of low intrinsic DPD and, inversely, an increased FP dose for high intrinsic DPD. In a context of personalized FP-based treatment, this innovative strategy needs to be prospectively validated.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) status is an indicator of a marked risk for toxicity following fluoropyrimidine (FP)-based chemotherapy. This notion is well-established for low DPD status but little is known about the clinical impact of high DPD activity. This study examined the possible link between high intrinsic lymphocytic DPD activity and overall survival, progression free survival and response to FP-based treatment in patients treated in our institution.
METHODS
METHODS
Lymphocytic DPD activity was assessed in a group of 136 patients receiving FP-based chemotherapy from 2004 to 2016. There were 105 digestive (77.2%), 24 breast (17.6%) and 7 head and neck cancers (5.2%). Cox or logistic regression models were applied with adjustment on all confounding factors that could modify OS, PFS or response. All models were stratified on the three cancer locations. A cut-off for DPD activity was assessed graphically and analytically.
RESULTS
RESULTS
An optimal cut-off for DPD activity at 0.30 nmol/min/mg protein was identified as the best value for discriminating survivals and response. In multivariate analysis, individual lymphocytic DPD activity was significantly related to overall survival (p = 0.013; HR: 3.35 CI95%[1.27-8.86]), progression-free survival (p < 0.001; HR: 3.15 CI95%[1.75-5.66]) and response rate (p = 0.033; HR: 0.33 CI95%[0.12-0.92]) with a marked detrimental effect associated with high DPD activity.
CONCLUSIONS
CONCLUSIONS
DPD status screening should result in a two-pronged approach with FP dose reduction in case of low intrinsic DPD and, inversely, an increased FP dose for high intrinsic DPD. In a context of personalized FP-based treatment, this innovative strategy needs to be prospectively validated.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32423482
doi: 10.1186/s12885-020-06907-0
pii: 10.1186/s12885-020-06907-0
pmc: PMC7236295
doi:
Substances chimiques
Biomarkers, Tumor
0
Capecitabine
6804DJ8Z9U
Dihydrouracil Dehydrogenase (NADP)
EC 1.3.1.2
Leucovorin
Q573I9DVLP
Fluorouracil
U3P01618RT
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
436Références
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2017 May 30;114(22):E4442-E4451
pubmed: 28416670
PLoS One. 2017 May 8;12(5):e0175998
pubmed: 28481884
Br J Cancer. 2018 Apr;118(7):947-954
pubmed: 29515256
Eur J Cancer. 2004 May;40(7):939-50
pubmed: 15093568
Clin Cancer Res. 1996 Mar;2(3):507-10
pubmed: 9816197
Cancer Res. 2014 May 1;74(9):2545-54
pubmed: 24648345
Cancer Res. 1993 Nov 15;53(22):5433-8
pubmed: 8221682
J Clin Oncol. 1994 Nov;12(11):2248-53
pubmed: 7964939
J Natl Cancer Inst. 2011 Jun 8;103(11):863-75
pubmed: 21597022
Biochim Biophys Acta Mol Basis Dis. 2017 Mar;1863(3):721-730
pubmed: 28024938
Lancet Oncol. 2015 Dec;16(16):1639-50
pubmed: 26603945
Mol Cancer Ther. 2014 Mar;13(3):742-51
pubmed: 24401318
Cancer Res. 2016 Nov 1;76(21):6362-6373
pubmed: 27578004
J Clin Oncol. 1994 Jun;12(6):1291-5
pubmed: 8201391
Biochem Pharmacol. 1988 Dec 15;37(24):4759-62
pubmed: 3202908
Eur J Cancer. 2000 Jan;36(1):37-42
pubmed: 10741292
J Clin Oncol. 1995 Jul;13(7):1663-70
pubmed: 7602356
Eur J Cancer. 1994;30A(10):1517-22
pubmed: 7833111
JIMD Rep. 2019;45:65-69
pubmed: 30349988
Cell. 2018 Sep 6;174(6):1559-1570.e22
pubmed: 30100185
Cancer Res. 1990 Jan 1;50(1):197-201
pubmed: 2293556
Cancer. 2012 Jun 1;118(11):2935-43
pubmed: 22020693
Sci Rep. 2017 Aug 29;7(1):9711
pubmed: 28851987
Dis Markers. 2017;2017:9202676
pubmed: 28255193
Lancet Oncol. 2018 Nov;19(11):1459-1467
pubmed: 30348537
J Clin Oncol. 2008 May 1;26(13):2099-105
pubmed: 18445839
Br J Cancer. 2014 May 27;110(11):2728-37
pubmed: 24800948
Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2018 Feb;103(2):210-216
pubmed: 29152729