Search

Due to activation of fibroblast into cancer-associated fibroblasts, there is often an increased deposition of extracellular matrix and fibrillar collagens, e.g. type III collagen, in the tumor microenvironment (TME) that leads to tumor fibrosis (desmoplasia). Tumor fibrosis is closely associated with treatment response and poor prognosis for patients with solid tumors. To assure that the best possible treatment option is provided for patients, there is medical need for identifying patients with high (or low) fibrotic activity in the TME. Measuring unique collagen fragments such as the pro-peptides released into the bloodstream during fibrillar collagen deposition in the TME can provide a non-invasive measure of the fibrotic activity. Based on data from 8 previously published cohorts, this review provides insight into the prognostic value of quantifying tumor fibrosis by measuring the pro-peptide of type III collagen in serum of a total of 1692 patients with different solid tumor types and discusses the importance of tumor fibrosis for understanding prognosis and for potentially guiding future drug development efforts that aim at overcoming the poor outcome associated with a fibrotic TME.

Several FDA/EMA-approved nanomedicines have demonstrated improved pharmacokinetics and toxicity profiles compared to their conventional chemotherapeutic counterparts. The next step to increase therapeutic efficacy depends on tumor accumulation, which can be highly heterogeneous. A clinical tool for patient stratification is urgently awaited. Therefore, a docetaxel-entrapping polymeric nanoparticle (89Zr-CPC634) is radiolabeled, and positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging is performed in seven patients with solid tumors with two different doses of CPC634: an on-treatment (containing 60 mg m−2 docetaxel) and a diagnostic (1–2 mg docetaxel) dose (NCT03712423). Pharmacokinetic half-life for 89Zr-CPC634 is mean 97.0 ± 14.4 h on-treatment, and 62.4 ± 12.9 h for the diagnostic dose (p = 0.003). At these doses accumulation is observed in 46% and 41% of tumor lesions with a median accumulation in positive lesions 96 h post-injection of 4.94 and 4.45%IA kg−1 (p = 0.91), respectively. In conclusion, PET/CT imaging with a diagnostic dose of 89Zr-CPC634 accurately reflects on-treatment tumor accumulation and thus opens the possibility for patient stratification in cancer nanomedicine with polymeric nanoparticles.

Retrospective data suggest that gastric acid reduction by proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) impairs the dissolution and subsequent absorption of capecitabine, and thus potentially reduces the capecitabine exposure. Therefore, we examined prospectively the effect of esomeprazole on the pharmacokinetics of capecitabine. In this randomized crossover study, patients with cancer were assigned to 2 sequence groups, each consisting of 3 phases: capecitabine with esomeprazole administration 3 hours before (phase A), capecitabine alone (phase B), and capecitabine concomitant with cola and esomeprazole co-administration 3 hours before (phase C). The primary end point was the relative difference (RD) in exposure to capecitabine assessed by the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-inf) and analyzed by a linear mixed effect model. Twenty-two evaluable patients were included in the analysis. After esomeprazole, there was a 18.9% increase in AUC0-inf of capecitabine (95% confidence interval (CI) −10.0% to 57.0%, P = 0.36). In addition, capecitabine half-life was significantly longer after esomeprazole (median 0.63 hours vs. 0.46 hours, P = 0.005). Concomitant cola did not completely reverse the effects observed after esomeprazole (RD 3.3% (95% CI −16.3 to 27.4%, P = 1.00). Capecitabine exposure is not negatively influenced by esomeprazole cotreatment. Therefore, altered capecitabine pharmacokinetics do not explain the assumed worse clinical outcome of PPI-cotreated patients with cancer.

Background: The survival of glioblastoma patients is poor. Median survival after diagnosis is 15 months, despite treatment involving surgical resection, radiotherapy, and/or temozolomide chemotherapy. Identification of novel targets and stratification strategies of glioblastoma patients to improve patient survival is urgently needed. Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is the most comprehensive means to identify such DNA-level targets. We report a unique set of WGS samples along with comprehensive analyses of the glioblastoma genome and potential clinical impact of WGS. Methods: Our cohort consisted of 42 glioblastoma tumor tissue and matched whole-blood samples, which were whole-genome sequenced as part of the CPCT-02 study. Somatic single-nucleotide variants, small insertions/deletions, multi-nucleotide variants, copy-number alterations (CNAs), and structural variants were analyzed. These aberrations were harnessed to investigate driver genes, enrichments in CNAs, mutational signatures, fusion genes, and potential targeted therapies. Results: Tumor mutational burden (TMB) was similar to other WGS efforts (1-342 mutations per megabase pair). Mutational analysis in low TMB samples showed that the age-related CpG demethylation signature was dominant, while hyper-and ultramutated tumors had additional defective DNA mismatch repair signatures and showed microsatellite instability in their genomes. We detected chromothripsis in 24% of our cohort, recurrently on chromosomes 1 and 12. Recurrent noncoding regions only resulted in TERT promoter variants. Finally, we found biomarkers and potentially druggable changes in all but one of our tumor samples. Conclusions: With high-quality WGS data and comprehensive methods, we identified the landscape of driver gene events and druggable targets in glioblastoma patients.

Introduction Malignant peritoneal mesothelioma (MPM) is a rare, aggressive tumour arising primarily from the peritoneum. The only potentially curative treatment is cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC). However, the majority of patients are not eligible to undergo this treatment. The benefit of systemic treatment for these patients is limited at the cost of considerable morbidity. Hence, there is a need for appropriate palliative treatment options for patients with MPM. As MPM rarely disseminates outside the abdominal cavity, these patients might benefit from local treatment. A higher, more effective dose of chemotherapy can directly be delivered at the site of the disease. Systemic uptake will be limited, likely resulting in less toxicity. The aim of the INTERACT MESO trial is to determine the maximum tolerable dose of intraperitoneal paclitaxel monotherapy in patients with MPM. Secondary endpoints are to assess safety and toxicity, feasibility and the pharmacokinetic profile of this treatment. Methods and analysis The INTERACT MESO trial is a prospective, open-label, single-centre, phase I study with a classic three-plus-three dose escalation design. The study population consists of adult patients with primary MPM, without extra-abdominal disease, who are not eligible to undergo CRS-HIPEC. According to standard of care work-up for CRS-HIPEC, patients will undergo diagnostic laparoscopy to determine the feasibility of CRS-HIPEC. In case CRS-HIPEC is not considered feasible, a peritoneal port-a-cath (PAC) system will be placed. Through this PAC, 8-16 weekly cycles of intraperitoneal chemotherapy will be administered. Ethics and dissemination The Central Committee on Research Involving Human Subjects (CCMO, The Hague, The Netherlands) and the Medical Research Ethics Committee (METC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands) have granted permission to carry out this study protocol. The results of this trial will be submitted for publi

In clinical practice, 25–30% of the patients treated with fluoropyrimidines experience severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity. Extensively clinically validated DPYD genotyping tests are available to identify patients at risk of severe toxicity due to decreased activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), the rate limiting enzyme in fluoropyrimidine metabolism. In April 2020, the European Medicines Agency recommended that, as an alternative for DPYD genotype-based testing for DPD deficiency, also phenotype testing based on pretreatment plasma uracil levels is a suitable method to identify patients with DPD deficiency. Although the evidence for genotype-directed dosing of fluoropyrimidines is substantial, the level of evidence supporting plasma uracil levels to predict DPD activity in clinical practice is limited. Notwithstanding this, uracil-based phenotyping is now used in clinical practice in various countries in Europe. We aimed to determine the value of pretreatment uracil levels in predicting DPD deficiency and severe treatment-related toxicity. To this end, we determined pretreatment uracil levels in 955 patients with cancer, and assessed the correlation with DPD activity in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and fluoropyrimidine-related severe toxicity. We identified substantial issues concerning the use of pretreatment uracil in clinical practice, including large between-center study differences in measured pretreatment uracil levels, most likely as a result of pre-analytical factors. Importantly, we were not able to correlate pretreatment uracil levels with DPD activity nor were uracil levels predictive of severe treatment-related toxicity. We urge that robust clinical validation should first be performed before pretreatment plasma uracil levels are used in clinical practice as part of a dosing strategy for fluoropyrimidines.

Introduction: Endoxifen—the principal metabolite of tamoxifen—is subject to a high inter-individual variability in serum concentration. Numerous attempts have been made to explain this, but thus far only with limited success. By applying predictive modeling, we aimed to identify factors that determine the inter-individual variability. Our purpose was to develop a prediction model for endoxifen concentrations, as a strategy to individualize tamoxifen treatment by model-informed dosing in order to prevent subtherapeutic exposure (endoxifen < 16 nmol/L) and thus potential failure of therapy. Methods: Tamoxifen pharmacokinetics with demographic and pharmacogenetic data of 303 participants of the prospective TOTAM study were used. The inter-individual variability in endoxifen was analyzed according to multiple regression techniques in combination with multiple imputations to adjust for missing data and bootstrapping to adjust for the over-optimism of parameter estimates used for internal model validation. Results: Key predictors of endoxifen concentration were CYP2D6 genotype, age and weight, explaining altogether an average-based optimism corrected 57% (95% CI 0.49–0.64) of the inter-individual variability. CYP2D6 genotype explained 54% of the variability. The remaining 3% could be explained by age and weight. Predictors of risk for subtherapeutic endoxifen (< 16 nmol/L) were CYP2D6 genotype and age. The model showed an optimism-corrected discrimination of 90% (95% CI 0.86–0.95) and sensitivity and specificity of 66% and 98%, respectively. Consecutively, there is a high probability of misclassifying patients with subtherapeutic endoxifen concentrations based on the prediction rule. Conclusion: The inter-individual variability of endoxifen concentration could largely be explained by CYP2D6 genotype and for a small proportion by age and weight. The model showed a sensitivity and specificity of 66 and 98%, respectively, indicating a high probability of (misclassif

Tamoxifen is a commonly prescribed drug in both early and metastatic breast cancer. Prospective studies in Asian populations demonstrated that tamoxifen-related liver steatosis occurred in more than 30% of the patients within 2 years after start of treatment. No well-designed prospective studies on potential tamoxifen-related liver steatosis have been conducted in Caucasian patients so far. Therefore, our prospective study aimed to assess the incidence of tamoxifen-related liver steatosis for a period of 2 years in a population of Caucasian breast cancer patients treated with tamoxifen. Patients with an indication for adjuvant treatment with tamoxifen were included in this study. Data were collected at 3 months (T1) and at 2 years (T2) after start of tamoxifen treatment (follow-up period of 21 months). For the quantification of liver steatosis, patients underwent liver stiffness measurement by transient elastography with simultaneous controlled attenuation parameter (CAP) determination using the FibroScan. A total of 95 Caucasian breast cancer patients were included in this evaluation. Liver steatosis was observed in 46 of 95 (48%) and 48 of 95 (51%) of the patients at T1 and T2, respectively. No clinically relevant increase in liver steatosis was observed during the treatment period of 2 years with tamoxifen (median CAP = 243 ± 49 dB/m (T1) and 253 ± 55 dB/m (T2), respectively; p = 0.038). Conclusion: In this prospective longitudinal study in Caucasian breast cancer patients, no clinically relevant alterations in liver steatosis in terms of CAP values and liver/lipid parameters were observed after 2 years of tamoxifen treatment. This study therefore demonstrates an absence of tamoxifen-related adverse events such as steatosis and (early) development of fibrosis or cirrhosis during a treatment period of at least 2 years.

Individual response to sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients is highly variable. Earlier, sunitinib outcome was related to single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in CYP3A5 and ABCB1. Our aim is to provide novel insights into biological mechanisms underlying sunitinib action. We included mRCC patients from the European EuroTARGET consortium (n = 550) and the RIKEN cohort in Japan (n = 204) which were analysed separately and in a meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies (GWAS). SNPs were tested for association with progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) using Cox regression. Summary statistics were combined using a fixed effect meta-analysis. SNP rs28520013 in PDLIM3 and the correlated SNPs rs2205096 and rs111356738 both in DSCAM, showed genome-wide significance (p < 5 × 10−8 ) with PFS and OS in the meta-analysis. The variant T-allele of rs28520013 associated with an inferior PFS of 5.1 months compared to 12.5 months in non-carriers (p = 4.02 × 10−10, HR = 7.26). T-allele carriers of rs28520013 showed an inferior OS of 6.9 months versus 30.2 months in non-carriers (p = 1.62 × 10−8, HR = 5.96). In this GWAS we identified novel genetic variants in PDLIM3 and DSCAM that impact PFS and OS in mRCC patients receiving sunitinib. The underlying link between the identified genes and the molecular mechanisms of sunitinib action needs to be elucidated.

Afatinib is an oral small-molecule kinase inhibitor (SMKI) approved for treatment of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with an epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) driver mutation. Although oral administration is convenient, most SMKIs experience pH-dependent solubility. A drug-drug interaction between afatinib and proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) has, however, never been studied in humans. Hence, we performed a randomized, three-period cross-over study. Afatinib (30 mg or 40 mg) was administered without PPI (period A), concomitantly with esomeprazole (period B) and three hours after esomeprazole intake (period C). Primary objective was the area under the curve (AUC0–24 h) comparing period A to period B and period A to period C. Secondary objectives were other pharmacokinetic parameters and toxicity. Linear mixed effect modelling was performed for differences in AUC0–24 h and Cmax between periods A and B and periods A and C. In 18 evaluable NSCLC patients, concomitant use of 40 mg esomeprazole decreased the steady-state afatinib AUC0–24 h with 10.2% (95% CI −29.2 to +14.0%; p = 0.564) compared to afatinib administration without PPI. Esomeprazole intake three hours prior to afatinib did not significantly influence afatinib AUC0–24 h (−0.6%; 95% CI −14.9 to +16.1%; p = 1.0). No differences in toxicity were observed. To conclude, esomeprazole did not change the exposure to afatinib in patients with NSCLC. Since there is no clinically relevant drug-drug interaction, esomeprazole can safely be co-administered with afatinib. This is important for clinical practice, because other EGFR-SMKIs (e.g. erlotinib and gefitinib) do experience clinically relevant drug-drug interactions with acid-suppressive agents.

Background: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients with positive AR-V7 expression in their circulating tumour cells (CTCs) rarely derive benefit from abiraterone and enzalutamide. Design: We performed a prospective, multicenter, single arm phase II clinical trial (CABA-V7) in mCRPC patients previously treated with docetaxel and androgen deprivation therapy. Objective: In this trial, we investigated whether cabazitaxel treatment resulted in clinically meaningful PSA response rates in patients with positive CTC-based AR-V7 expression and collected liquid biopsies for genomic profiling. Results: Cabazitaxel was found to be modestly effective, with only 12% of these patients obtaining a PSA response. Genomic profiling revealed that CTC-based AR-V7 expression was not associated with other known mCRPC-associated alterations. CTC-based AR-V7 status and dichotomised CTC counts were observed as independent prognostic markers at baseline. Conclusions: AR-V7 positivity predicted poor overall survival (OS). However, cabazitaxel-treated AR-V7 positive patients and those lacking AR-V7 positivity, who received cabazitaxel as standard of care, appeared to have similar OS. Therefore, despite the low response rate, cabazitaxel may still be an effective treatment in this poor prognosis, AR-V7 positive patient population.

Background: Endoxifen is the most important active metabolite of tamoxifen. Several retrospective studies have suggested a minimal or threshold endoxifen systemic concentration of 14–16 nM is required for a lower recurrence rate. The aim of this study was to investigate the feasibility of reaching a predefined endoxifen level of ≥ 16 nM (5.97 ng/mL) over time using therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Methods: This prospective open-label intervention study enrolled patients who started treatment with a standard dose of tamoxifen 20 mg once daily for early breast cancer. An outpatient visit was combined with a TDM sample at 3, 4.5, and 6 months after initiation of the tamoxifen treatment. The tamoxifen dose was escalated to a maximum of 40 mg if patients had an endoxifen concentration < 16 nM. The primary endpoint of the study was the percentage of patients with an endoxifen level ≥ 16 nM at 6 months after the start of therapy compared with historical data, in other words, 80% of patients with endoxifen levels ≥ 16 nM with standard therapy. Results: In total, 145 patients were included. After 6 months, 89% of the patients had endoxifen levels ≥ 16 nM, compared with a literature-based 80% of patients with endoxifen levels ≥ 16 nM at baseline (95% confidence interval 82–94; P = 0.007). In patients with an affected CYP2D6 allele, it was not always feasible to reach the predefined endoxifen level of ≥ 16 nM. No increase in tamoxifen-related adverse events was reported after dose escalation. Conclusion: This study demonstrated that it is feasible to increase the percentage of patients with endoxifen levels ≥ 16 nM using TDM. TDM is a safe strategy that offers the possibility of nearly halving the number of patients with endoxifen levels < 16 nM.

Introduction: In breast cancer patients treated with the anti-estrogen tamoxifen, low concentrations of the active metabolite endoxifen are associated with more disease recurrence. We hypothesized that we could increase endoxifen concentrations by induction of its formation and inhibition of its metabolism by co-administration of probenecid. Methods: We conducted a crossover study and measured endoxifen concentrations in patients on steady-state tamoxifen monotherapy and after 14 days of combination treatment with probenecid. Eleven evaluable patients were included. Results: Treatment with tamoxifen and probenecid resulted in a 26% increase of endoxifen area under the plasma concentration–time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0–24h) compared to tamoxifen monotherapy (95% confidence interval [CI]: 8–46%; p < 0.01), while the maximum observed endoxifen concentration increased with 24% (95% CI: 7–44%; p < 0.01). The metabolic ratio of endoxifen to tamoxifen increased with 110% (95% CI: 82–143%; p < 0.001) after the addition of probenecid. Conclusion: Probenecid resulted in a clinically relevant increase of endoxifen concentrations in breast cancer patients treated with adjuvant tamoxifen. This combination therapy could provide a solution for patients with a CYP2D6-poor metabolizer phenotype or endoxifen concentrations below the threshold despite earlier tamoxifen dose.

Pemetrexed is a cytotoxic drug for first-line treatment of lung cancer. It is often combined with other anticancer drugs such as cisplatin or carboplatin. In clinical practice, hyperhydration regimens are applied to overcome cisplatin-related nephrotoxicity. As pemetrexed is almost completely eliminated from the body by the kidneys, hyperhydration can result in augmented clearance. Furthermore, administration of large quantities of fluid may increase the volume of distribution of pemetrexed. Pharmacokinetics and, thus, efficacy and toxicity may be influenced by hyperhydration. This has not yet been properly studied. We performed a population pharmacokinetic analysis to assess hyperhydration as a covariate for pemetrexed clearance and for volume of distribution A relevant change was defined as >25% increase in clearance or volume of distribution. In our extensive dataset of 133 individuals, we found that hyperhydration did not significantly or relevantly explain variability in pemetrexed clearance (unchanged, P =.196) or volume of distribution (+7% change, P =.002), despite a power of >99% to detect a relevant change. Therefore, dose adjustments of pemetrexed are not required during hyperhydration with cisplatin.

Background and Objectives: Endoxifen is the active metabolite of tamoxifen, and a minimal plasma concentration of 16 nM has been suggested as a threshold above which it is effective in reducing the risk of breast cancer recurrence. The aim of the current analysis was to investigate the cost-effectiveness of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM)-guided tamoxifen dosing. Methods: A cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from a Dutch healthcare perspective, using a partitioned survival model and a lifetime horizon. The reduction in subtherapeutic treatment following TDM is modelled as improved rates of recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) in comparison to standard tamoxifen treatment. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis (PSA) and a series of scenario analyses were performed to assess the robustness of the results. Results: Base-case results estimated a total increase in life years and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) for TDM of 0.40 and 0.53, respectively. Total costs for TDM and standard tamoxifen treatment are €32,893 and €39,524, respectively. The TDM intervention results in both more QALYs and less healthcare costs, indicating a dominating effect for TDM. The PSA results indicate that the probability of TDM being cost-effective is 92% when using a willingness-to-pay threshold of €20,000. Conclusions: TDM-guided dose optimization of tamoxifen is estimated to save costs and increase QALYs for early breast cancer patients.

A substantial number of melanoma patients do not benefit from therapy with anti‐PD‐1. Therefore, we investigated the predictive value of single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes related to the PD‐1 axis in patients with metastatic melanoma. From 119 consecutive melanoma patients who were treated with pembrolizumab or nivolumab monotherapy, blood samples were genotyped for 11 SNPs in nine genes. Associations between SNPs and OS were tested using Cox regression analysis and internally validated by bootstrapping. For SNPs with a statistical significance, an expression quantitative trait loci (eQTL) analysis was performed. In a subset of patients, immunophenotyping was performed. Patients with a SNP in PDCD1 (804C > T; rs2227981) had a significantly poorer OS with a 3‐year OS rate of 51.8%, as compared to 71% in wild type patients (hazard ratio [HR] 2.37; 95% CI: 1.11–5.04; p = 0.026). eQTL analysis showed that this SNP was associated with decreased gene expression. In addition, PDCD1 804C > T carriers had a reduced fraction of peripheral PD‐1+CD4+ T cells. No other associations between SNPs and OS were found. PDCD1 804C > T is associated with poorer OS after anti‐PD‐1 monotherapy in patients with metastatic melanoma. This SNP may affect clinical benefit from ICIs by decreasing transcription initiation and expression of PD‐1 in T cells.

Background: Ranitidine, a histamine 2 blocker, is the standard of care to prevent hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) caused by paclitaxel infusion. However, the added value of ranitidine in this premedication regimen is controversial. Therefore, we compared the incidence of HSRs during paclitaxel treatment between a standard regimen including ranitidine and a regimen without ranitidine. Methods: This prospective, pre–post interventional, non-inferiority study compared the standard premedication regimen (N = 183) with dexamethasone, clemastine and ranitidine with a premedication regimen without ranitidine (N = 183). The primary outcome was the incidence of HSR grade ≥3. Non-inferiority was determined by checking whether the upper bound of the two-sided 90% confidence interval (CI) for the difference in HSR rates excluded the +6% non-inferiority margin. Results: In both the pre-intervention (with ranitidine) and post-intervention (without ranitidine) group 183 patients were included. The incidence of HSR grade ≥3 was 4.4% (N = 8) in the pre-intervention group and 1.6% (N = 3) in the post-intervention group: difference −2.7% (90% CI: −6.2 to 0.1). Conclusions: As the upper boundary of the 90% CI does not exceed the predefined non-inferiority margin of +6%, it can be concluded that a premedication regimen without ranitidine is non-inferior to a premedication regimen with ranitidine. Clinical Trial Registration: www.trialregister.nl; NL8173.

Cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) is the most important drug metabolizing enzyme in the liver, responsible for the oxidative metabolism of ∼50% of clinically prescribed drugs. Therefore, genetic variation in CYP3A4 could potentially affect the pharmacokinetics, toxicity and clinical outcome of drug treatment. Thus far, pharmacogenetics for CYP3A4 has not received much attention. However, the recent discovery of the intron 6 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs35599367C > T, encoding the CYP3A4∗22 allele, led to several studies into the pharmacogenetic effect of CYP3A4∗22 on different drugs. This allele has a relatively minor allele frequency of 3-5% and an effect on CYP3A4 enzymatic activity. Thus far, no review summarizing the data published on several drugs is available yet. This article therefore addresses the current knowledge on CYP3A4∗22. This information may help in deciding if, and for which drugs, CYP3A4∗22 genotype-based dosing could be helpful in improving drug therapy. CYP3A4∗22 was shown to significantly influence the pharmacokinetics of several drugs, with currently being most thoroughly investigated tacrolimus, cyclosporine, and statins. Additional studies, focusing on toxicity and clinical outcome, are warranted to demonstrate clinical utility of CYP3A4∗22 genotype-based dosing.