Implementation of upfront DPYD genotyping with a low-cost and high-throughput assay to guide fluoropyrimidine treatment in cancer patients.

OBJECTIVES: Genetic variants in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD ) gene are associated with reduced dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase enzyme activity and can cause severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity. We assessed the frequency of the four most common and well-established DPYD variants associated with fluoropyrimidine toxicity and implemented a relatively low-cost and high-throughput genotyping assay for their detection. METHODS: This study includes 457 patients that were genotyped for the DPYD c.1129-5923C>G, c.1679T>G, c.1905 + 1G>A and c.2846A>T variants, either by Sanger sequencing or kompetitive allele specific PCR (KASP) technology. Of these, 172 patients presented toxicity during treatment with fluoropyrimidines (post-treatment group), and 285 were tested before treatment (pretreatment group). RESULTS: Heterozygous DPYD variants were identified in 7.4% of the entire series of 457 patients, being the c.2846A>T the most frequent variant. In the post-treatment group, 15.7% of the patients presented DPYD variants, whereas only 2.5% of the patients in the pretreatment group presented a variant. The KASP assays designed in this study presented 100% genotype concordance with the results obtained by Sanger sequencing. CONCLUSIONS: The combined assessment of the four DPYD variants in our population increases the identification of patients at high risk for developing fluoropyrimidine toxicity, supporting the upfront routine implementation of DPYD variant genotyping. Furthermore, the KASP genotyping assay described in this study presents a rapid turnaround time and relatively low cost, making upfront DPYD screening feasible in clinical practice.

Upfront DPYD Genotype-Guided Treatment for Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy in Advanced and Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Fluoropyrimidines are the most widely used chemotherapy drugs for advanced and metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC). Individuals with certain DPYD gene variants are exposed to an increased risk of severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicities. This study aimed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of preemptive DPYD genotyping to guide fluoropyrimidine therapy in patients with advanced or metastatic CRC. METHODS: Overall survival of DPYD wild-type patients who received a standard dose and variant carriers treated with a reduced dose were analyzed by parametric survival models. A decision tree and a partitioned survival analysis model with a lifetime horizon were designed, taking the Iranian healthcare perspective. Input parameters were extracted from the literature or expert opinion. To address parameter uncertainty, scenario and sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Compared with no screening, the genotype-guided treatment strategy was cost-saving ($41.7). Nevertheless, due to a possible reduction in the survival of patients receiving reduced-dose regimens, it was associated with fewer quality-adjusted life-years (9.45 vs 9.28). In sensitivity analyses, the prevalence of DPYD variants had the most significant impact on the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. The genotyping strategy would remain cost-saving, as long as the genotyping cost is < $49 per test. In a scenario in which we assumed equal efficacy for the 2 strategies, genotyping was the dominant strategy, associated with less costs (∼$1) and more quality-adjusted life-years (0.1292). CONCLUSIONS: DPYD genotyping to guide fluoropyrimidine treatment in patients with advanced or metastatic CRC is cost-saving from the perspective of the Iranian health system.

Assessment of the Clinical Utility of Pretreatment DPYD Testing for Patients Receiving Fluoropyrimidine Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Patients who carry pathogenic variants in DPYD have higher systemic fluoropyrimidine (FP) concentrations and greater risk of severe and fatal FP toxicity. Pretreatment DPYD testing and DPYD-guided FP dosing to reduce toxicity and health care costs is recommended by European clinical oncology guidelines and has been adopted across Europe, but has not been recommended or adopted in the United States. The cochairs of the National Comprehensive Cancer Network Guidelines for colon cancer treatment explained their concerns with recommending pretreatment DPYD testing, particularly the risk that reduced FP doses in DPYD carriers may reduce treatment efficacy. METHODS: This special article uses previously published frameworks for assessing the clinical utility of cancer biomarker tests, including for germline indicators of toxicity risk, to assess the clinical utility of pretreatment DPYD testing, with a particular focus on the risk of reducing treatment efficacy. RESULTS: There is no direct evidence of efficacy reduction, and the available indirect evidence demonstrates that DPYD-guided FP dosing results in similar systemic FP exposure and toxicity compared with standard dosing in noncarriers, and is well calibrated to the maximum tolerated dose, strongly suggesting there is minimal risk of efficacy reduction. CONCLUSION: This article should serve as a call to action for clinicians and clinical guidelines committees in the United States to re-evaluate the clinical utility of pretreatment DPYD testing. If clinical utility has not been demonstrated, further dialogue is needed to clarify what additional evidence is needed and which of the available study designs, also described within this article, would be appropriate. Clinical guideline recommendations for pretreatment DPYD testing would increase clinical adoption and ensure that all patients receive maximally safe and effective FP treatment.

Introducing a simple and cost-effective RT-PCR protocol for detection of DPYD*2A polymorphism: the first study in Kurdish population.

PURPOSE: Fluoropyrimidines, the major chemotherapeutic agents in various malignancies treatment, are metabolized by dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). DPD deficiency can lead to severe and sometimes fatal toxicity. In the present study, we developed a simple protocol to detect the DPYD*2A variant. Common side effects in patients treated with these drugs were also evaluated in a Kurdish population. METHOD: We established a reverse-transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR) technique for detection of DPYD*2A. Sanger sequencing was used to confirm the results. 121 Kurdish patients receiving fluoropyrimidine derivatives were enrolled, and clinical information regarding the dosage and toxicity was analyzed. RESULTS: Our RT-PCR method was able to detect one patient with heterozygous state for DPYD*2A (0.8%). The most observed adverse drug reactions were tingling, nausea, and hair loss. The frequency of patients with the toxicity of grade 3 or worse was 6.6%. CONCLUSION: This was the first study that detect DPYD*2A polymorphism in the Kurdish population. Our method was successfully able to detect the DPYD*2A variant and, due to its simplicity and cost-effectiveness, it may be considered as an alternative to the current methods, especially in developing countries. Our detected polymorphism rate at 0.8% is comparable with other studies. Despite the low rate of DPYD*2A polymorphism, pharmacogenetics assessment before beginning the treatment process is highly recommended due to its association with a high risk of severe toxicity.

Cost-effectiveness of DPYD Genotyping Prior to Fluoropyrimidine-based Adjuvant Chemotherapy for Colon Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Adjuvant fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy substantially reduces recurrence and mortality after resection of stage 3 colon cancer. While standard doses of 5-fluorouracil and capecitabine are safe for most patients, the risk of severe toxicity is increased for the approximately 6% of patients with dihydropyimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency caused by pathogenic DPYD gene variants. Pre-treatment screening for pathogenic DPYD gene variants reduces severe toxicity but has not been widely adopted in the United States. METHODS: We conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis of DPYD genotyping prior to fluoropyrimidine-based adjuvant chemotherapy for stage 3 colon cancer, covering the c.1129-5923C>G (HapB3), c.1679T>G (*13), c.1905+1G>A (*2A), and c.2846A>T gene variants. We used a Markov model with a 5-year horizon, taking a United States healthcare perspective. Simulated patients with pathogenic DPYD gene variants received reduced-dose fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. The primary outcome was the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for DPYD genotyping. RESULTS: Compared with no screening for DPD deficiency, DPYD genotyping increased per-patient costs by $78 and improved survival by 0.0038 quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), leading to an ICER of $20,506/QALY. In 1-way sensitivity analyses, The ICER exceeded $50,000 per QALY when the cost of the DPYD genotyping assay was greater than $286. In probabilistic sensitivity analysis using a willingness-to-pay threshold of $50,000/QALY DPYD genotyping was preferred to no screening in 96.2% of iterations. CONCLUSION: Among patients receiving adjuvant chemotherapy for stage 3 colon cancer, screening for DPD deficiency with DPYD genotyping is a cost-effective strategy for preventing infrequent but severe and sometimes fatal toxicities of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy.

DPYD Genotyping in Patients Who Have Planned Cancer Treatment With Fluoropyrimidines: A Health Technology Assessment.

BACKGROUND: Fluoropyrimidine drugs (such as 5-fluorouracil and capecitabine) are used to treat different types of cancer. However, these drugs may cause severe toxicity in about 10% to 40% of patients. A deficiency in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) enzyme, encoded by the DPYD gene, increases the risk of severe toxicity. DPYD genotyping aims to identify variants that lead to DPD deficiency and may help to identify people who are at higher risk of developing severe toxicity, allowing their treatment to be modified before it begins. Recommendations for fluoropyrimidine treatment modification are available for four DPYD variants, which are the focus of this review: DPYD∗2A, DPYD∗13, c.2846A>T, and c.1236G>A. We conducted a health technology assessment of DPYD genotyping for patients who have planned cancer treatment with fluoropyrimidines, which included an evaluation of clinical validity, clinical utility, the effectiveness of treatment with a reduced fluoropyrimidine dose, cost-effectiveness, the budget impact of publicly funding DPYD genotyping, and patient preferences and values. METHODS: We performed a systematic literature search of the clinical evidence. We assessed the risk of bias of each included systematic review and primary study using the Risk of Bias in Systematic Reviews (ROBIS) tool and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, respectively, and we assessed the quality of the body of evidence according to the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) Working Group criteria. We performed a systematic economic literature review and conducted cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses with a half-year time horizon from a public payer perspective. We also analyzed the budget impact of publicly funding pre-treatment DPYD genotyping in patients with planned fluoropyrimidine treatment in Ontario. To contextualize the potential value of DPYD testing, we spoke with people who had planned cancer treatment with fluoropyrimidines. RESULTS: We included 29 observational studies in the clinical evidence review, 25 of which compared the risk of severe toxicity in carriers of a DPYD variant treated with a standard fluoropyrimidine dose with the risk in wild-type patients (i.e., non-carriers of the variants under assessment). Heterozygous carriers of a DPYD variant treated with a standard fluoropyrimidine dose may have a higher risk of severe toxicity, dose reduction, treatment discontinuation, and hospitalization compared to wild-type patients (GRADE: Low). Six studies evaluated the risk of severe toxicity in DPYD carriers treated with a genotype-guided reduced fluoropyrimidine dose versus the risk in wild-type patients; one study also included a second comparator group of DPYD carriers treated with a standard dose. The evidence was uncertain, because the results of most of these studies were imprecise (GRADE: Very low). The length of hospital stay was shorter in DPYD carriers treated with a reduced dose than in DPYD carriers treated with a standard dose, but the evidence was uncertain (GRADE: Very low). One study assessed the effectiveness of a genotype-guided reduced fluoropyrimidine dose in DPYD∗2A carriers versus wild-type patients, but the results were imprecise (GRADE: Very low).We found two cost-minimization analyses that compared the costs of the DPYD genotyping strategy with usual care (no testing) in the economic literature review. Both studies found that DPYD genotyping was cost-saving compared to usual care. Our primary economic evaluation, a cost-utility analysis, found that DPYD genotyping might be slightly more effective (incremental quality-adjusted life years of 0.0011) and less costly than usual care (a savings of $144.88 per patient), with some uncertainty. The probability of DPYD genotyping being cost-effective compared to usual care was 91% and 96% at the commonly used willingness-to-pay values of $50,000 and $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year gained, respectively. Assuming a slow uptake, we estimated that publicly funding pre-treatment DPYD genotyping in Ontario would lead to a savings of $714,963 over the next 5 years.The participants we spoke to had been diagnosed with cancer and treated with fluoropyrimidines. They reported on the negative side effects of their treatment, which affected their day-to-day activities, employment, and mental health. Participants viewed DPYD testing as a beneficial addition to their treatment journey; they noted the importance of having all available information possible so they could make informed decisions to avoid adverse reactions. Barriers to DPYD testing include lack of awareness of the test and the fact that the test is being offered in only one hospital in Ontario. CONCLUSIONS: Studies found that carriers of a DPYD variant who were treated with a standard fluoropyrimidine dose may have a higher risk of severe toxicity than wild-type patients treated with a standard dose. DPYD genotyping led to fluoropyrimidine treatment modifications. It is uncertain whether genotype-guided dose reduction in heterozygous DPYD carriers resulted in a risk of severe toxicity comparable to that of wild-type patients. It is also uncertain if the reduced dose resulted in a lower risk of severe toxicity compared to DPYD carriers treated with a standard dose. It is also uncertain whether the treatment effectiveness of a reduced dose in carriers was comparable to the effectiveness of a standard dose in wild-type patients.For patients with planned cancer treatment with fluoropyrimidines, DPYD genotyping is likely cost-effective compared to usual care. We estimate that publicly funding DPYD genotyping in Ontario may be cost-saving, with an estimated total of $714,963 over the next 5 years, provided that the implementation, service delivery, and program coordination costs do not exceed this amount.For people treated with fluoropyrimidines, cancer and treatment side effects had a substantial negative effect on their quality of life and mental health. Most saw the value of DPYD testing as a way of reducing the risk of serious adverse events. Barriers to receipt of DPYD genotyping included lack of awareness and limited access to DPYD testing.

[New recommendation on pharmacogenetic screening prior to 5-fluorouracil based cancer treatment - Swedish experience indicates less adverse effects and healthcare cost savings]. / Fördelaktigt med genetisk analys före behandling med 5-fluorouracil.

5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is still a cornerstone in drug treatment for cancer. Some patients starting standard dosed 5-FU will experience severe adverse events (SAEs). One mechanism behind SAEs is impaired dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) activity, resulting in an accumulation of cytotoxic metabolites. Pre-emptive testing of DPD enzyme activity or genetic variation in its gene, DPYD,  is recommended since 2020 in Sweden. We report experience from DPYD testing in 368 patients planned for 5-FU treatment. DPYD variants associated with reduced DPD activity were observed in 28 patients (8%), which is close to the expected frequency. These patients tolerated 5-FU treatment when doses were reduced according to guidelines. However, 4 out of 5 variant allele carriers starting 5-FU at standard dose due to late arrival of test results experienced SAEs. Pre-emptive testing was calculated to be cost saving and thus beneficial from a healthcare economy perspective.

Comparison of a thymine challenge test and endogenous uracil-dihydrouracil levels for assessment of fluoropyrimidine toxicity risk.

PURPOSE: Standard dosages of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy result in severe toxicity in a substantial proportion of patients, however, routine pre-therapeutic toxicity prediction remains uncommon. A thymine (THY) challenge test can discriminate risk of severe gastrointestinal toxicity in patients receiving fluoropyrimidine monotherapy. We aimed to measure endogenous plasma uracil (U) and its ratio to dihydrouracil (DHU), and assess the performance of these parameters compared with the THY challenge test to evaluate risk of severe toxicity. METHODS: Plasma samples, previously collected from 37 patients receiving 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or capecitabine monotherapy for a THY challenge test (ACTRN12615000586516; retrospectively registered), were assessed for endogenous plasma concentrations of U and DHU using a validated LC-MS/MS method. Renal function was estimated from blood creatinine, and patients with ≥ grade 3 toxicity (CTCAE v4.0) were classified as cases. RESULTS: There were no differences in median endogenous U plasma concentrations or U/DHU ratios between severe toxicity cases and non-cases. Significant differences between cases and non-cases were noted when these measures were normalised to the estimated renal function (CrCL), Unorm p = 0.0004; U/DHUnorm p = 0.0083. These two parameters had a sensitivity of 29%, compared with 57% for the THY challenge test in the same patients. Genotyping for clinically relevant DPYD variants was inferior to either of these pyrimidine phenotyping tests (sensitivity of 14%). CONCLUSIONS: The endogenous uracil-based parameters, adjusted to CrCL, were more predictive of increased risk of severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity than DPYD genotyping. However, endogenous U measurement detected fewer cases of severe toxicity than the THY challenge test.

Estimating the Effectiveness of DPYD Genotyping in Italian Individuals Suffering from Cancer Based on the Cost of Chemotherapy-Induced Toxicity.

Fluoropyrimidines (FLs) have been widely used for more than 60 years against a range of solid tumors and still remains the cornerstone for the treatment of colorectal, gastric, and breast cancer. Here, we performed an economic analysis to estimate the cost of DPYD-guided toxicity management and the clinical benefit expressed as quality adjusted life years (QALYs) in a large group of 571 individuals of Italian origin suffering from cancer and treated with a fluoropyrimidines-based chemotherapy. Individuals suffering from cancer with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of cancer, who received a fluoropyrimidines-based treatment, were retrospectively genotyped in the DPYD gene. Effectiveness was measured as survival of individuals from chemotherapy, while study data on safety and efficacy as well as on resource utilization associated with each adverse drug reaction were used to measure costs to treat these adverse drug reactions. A generalized linear regression model was used to estimate cost differences for both study groups. DPYD extensive metabolizers (528 individuals) had greater effectiveness and lesser cost, representing a cost-saving option over DPYD intermediate and poor metabolizers (43 individuals) with mean QALYs of 4.18 (95%CI: 3.16-5.55) versus 3.02 (95%CI: 1.94-4.25), respectively. Our economic analysis showed that there are some indications for differences in survival between the two groups (p > 0.05), while the cost of DPYD extensive metabolizers was significantly lower (p < 0.01) compared with those belonging to the group of intermediate/poor metabolizers. These findings suggest that DPYD-guided fluoropyrimidines treatment represent a cost-saving choice for individuals suffering from cancer in the Italian healthcare setting.

The Genotype for DPYD Risk Variants in Patients With Colorectal Cancer and the Related Toxicity Management Costs in Clinical Practice.

Lack of information on the clinical utility of preemptive DPYD screening before fluoropyrimidine treatment is a major barrier preventing its use in clinical practice. This study aimed to define the association between DPYD variants and fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity management costs. A cost analysis was conducted on the toxicities experienced by 550 patients with colorectal cancer treated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. Genotyping for DPYD*2A, DPYD*13, DPYDc. 2846A>T, DPYD-HapB3, and UGT1A1*28 was done retrospectively and did not affect patients' treatments. Carriers of at least one DPYD variant experienced higher toxicity management costs (€2,972; 95% confidence interval (CI), €2,456-€3,505) than noncarriers (€825; 95% CI, €785-€864) (P < 0.0001) and had a higher risk for toxicity requiring hospitalization (odds ratio, 4.14; 95% CI, 1.87-9.14). In patients receiving fluoropyrimidine/irinotecan, the incremental cost between DPYD variant and UGT1A1*28/*28 carriers and noncarriers was €2,975. This study suggests that the toxicity management costs during fluoropyrimidine-based therapy are associated with DPYD and UGT1A1*28 variants and supports the utility of genotyping.

A cost analysis of upfront DPYD genotype-guided dose individualisation in fluoropyrimidine-based anticancer therapy.

BACKGROUND: Fluoropyrimidine therapy including capecitabine or 5-fluorouracil can result in severe treatment-related toxicity in up to 30% of patients. Toxicity is often related to reduced activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase, the main metabolic fluoropyrimidine enzyme, primarily caused by genetic DPYD polymorphisms. In a large prospective study, it was concluded that upfront DPYD-guided dose individualisation is able to improve safety of fluoropyrimidine-based therapy. In our current analysis, we evaluated whether this strategy is cost saving. METHODS: A cost-minimisation analysis from a health-care payer perspective was performed as part of the prospective clinical trial (NCT02324452) in which patients prior to start of fluoropyrimidine-based therapy were screened for the DPYD variants DPYD*2A, c.2846A>T, c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A and received an initial dose reduction of 25% (c.2846A>T, c.1236G>A) or 50% (DPYD*2A, c.1679T>G). Data on treatment, toxicity, hospitalisation and other toxicity-related interventions were collected. The model compared prospective screening for these DPYD variants with no DPYD screening. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were also performed. RESULTS: Expected total costs of the screening strategy were €2599 per patient compared with €2650 for non-screening, resulting in a net cost saving of €51 per patient. Results of the probabilistic sensitivity and one-way sensitivity analysis demonstrated that the screening strategy was very likely to be cost saving or worst case cost-neutral. CONCLUSIONS: Upfront DPYD-guided dose individualisation, improving patient safety, is cost saving or cost-neutral but is not expected to yield additional costs. These results endorse implementing DPYD screening before start of fluoropyrimidine treatment as standard of care.

Prevention of 5-fluorouracil-induced early severe toxicity by pre-therapeutic dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency screening: Assessment of a multiparametric approach.

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU)-based treatments can lead to early-onset severe (4%-5%) even fatal (0.3%) toxicities in patients with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency. This multicenter prospective cohort study aimed to assess the clinical benefit of pretherapeutic screening for DPD deficiency using a multiparametric approach. Two parallel cohorts of patients treated with 5-FU-based chemotherapy for colorectal carcinoma were compared in a prospective nonrandomized study. In arm A, patients had DPD deficiency screening before treatment, whereas in arm B no pretherapy screening was performed. Dosing was based on 5-FU administration guidelines of each institution. DPD deficiency screening was performed using a combined multiparametric approach (5-FUODPM Tox). The frequency of early grade 4-5 toxic events potentially induced by 5-FU was compared in the two groups. At total of 1,142 patients (n = 1,116 evaluable) were enrolled. In arm A, out of 718 evaluable patients, nine grade 4 early toxicities potentially related to 5-FU were reported in nine patients (1.2%) with no toxic death despite one complete DPD deficiency and 24 partial deficiencies. The 24 patients with partial deficiency had safe pharmacokinetics (PK)-monitored 5-FU. In arm B, among 398 evaluable patients, 17 grade 4-5 toxic early events potentially related to 5-FU were reported in 12 patients (4.2%). The incidence of early severe toxicity was significantly higher in arm B (P = .0019), confirming the positive impact of pretherapeutic DPD assessment. The percent of patients with a toxicity grade 3 or higher observed in arm A was 10.8% (n = 78) compared to 17.55% (n = 69)  in arm B (P = .0497). The percentage of death was reduced from 2.5/1,000 in arm B to 0 in arm A. The time to occurrence of all grade ≥3 toxicities was determined in both arms and the difference between the two arms was significant (P = .047). Overall, one patient with complete DPD deficiency confirmed retrospectively died within 13 days from grade 5 multivisceral toxicity. Enrollment was prematurely closed after external experts' decision. In conclusion, multiparametric pretherapeutic DPD deficiency screening significantly lowered the risk of early severe toxicity and avoided an early toxic death. This approach should be used for safe administration of 5-FU-based treatments.

Cost-effectiveness of screening for DPYD polymorphisms to prevent neutropenia in cancer patients treated with fluoropyrimidines.

AIM: To compare the cost of screening for three mutations in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene and the costs of treating severe fluoropyrimidine-induced neutropenia. MATERIALS & METHODS: The polymorphisms rs3918290 (DPYD*2A), rs67376798 (DPYD 2846A>T) and rs55886062 (1679T>G, DPYD*13) were genotyped using real-time PCR, TaqMan probes and a rapid cell lysis to provide PCR-ready DNA. RESULTS: We found that genotyping 1000 patients in our center cost €6400 and that the mean cost of treating severe neutropenia was €3044. Therefore, if severe fluoropyrimidine-induced neutropenia is reduced by genotyping the three DPYD variations in at least 2.21 cases per 1000 treated patients, then DPYD genotyping will prove cost effective. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that real-time DPYD genotyping using TaqMan probes is cost effective in all fluoropyrimidine-based treatments.

Upfront Genotyping of DPYD*2A to Individualize Fluoropyrimidine Therapy: A Safety and Cost Analysis.

PURPOSE: Fluoropyrimidines are frequently prescribed anticancer drugs. A polymorphism in the fluoropyrimidine metabolizing enzyme dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD; ie, DPYD*2A) is strongly associated with fluoropyrimidine-induced severe and life-threatening toxicity. This study determined the feasibility, safety, and cost of DPYD*2A genotype-guided dosing. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients intended to be treated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy were prospectively genotyped for DPYD*2A before start of therapy. Variant allele carriers received an initial dose reduction of ≥ 50% followed by dose titration based on tolerance. Toxicity was the primary end point and was compared with historical controls (ie, DPYD*2A variant allele carriers receiving standard dose described in literature) and with DPYD*2A wild-type patients treated with the standard dose in this study. Secondary end points included a model-based cost analysis, as well as pharmacokinetic and DPD enzyme activity analyses. RESULTS: A total of 2,038 patients were prospectively screened for DPYD*2A, of whom 22 (1.1%) were heterozygous polymorphic. DPYD*2A variant allele carriers were treated with a median dose-intensity of 48% (range, 17% to 91%). The risk of grade ≥ 3 toxicity was thereby significantly reduced from 73% (95% CI, 58% to 85%) in historical controls (n = 48) to 28% (95% CI, 10% to 53%) by genotype-guided dosing (P < .001); drug-induced death was reduced from 10% to 0%. Adequate treatment of genotype-guided dosing was further demonstrated by a similar incidence of grade ≥ 3 toxicity compared with wild-type patients receiving the standard dose (23%; P = .64) and by similar systemic fluorouracil (active drug) exposure. Furthermore, average total treatment cost per patient was lower for screening (€2,772 [$3,767]) than for nonscreening (€2,817 [$3,828]), outweighing screening costs. CONCLUSION: DPYD*2A is strongly associated with fluoropyrimidine-induced severe and life-threatening toxicity. DPYD*2A genotype-guided dosing results in adequate systemic drug exposure and significantly improves safety of fluoropyrimidine therapy for the individual patient. On a population level, upfront genotyping seemed cost saving.

Prospective DPYD genotyping to reduce the risk of fluoropyrimidine-induced severe toxicity: Ready for prime time.

5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) and capecitabine (CAP) are among the most frequently prescribed anticancer drugs. They are inactivated in the liver by the enzyme dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). Up to 5% of the population is DPD deficient and these patients have a significantly increased risk of severe and potentially lethal toxicity when treated with regular doses of 5-FU or CAP. DPD is encoded by the gene DPYD and variants in DPYD can lead to a decreased DPD activity. Although prospective DPYD genotyping is a valuable tool to identify patients with DPD deficiency, and thus those at risk for severe and potential life-threatening toxicity, prospective genotyping has not yet been implemented in daily clinical care. Our goal was to present the available evidence in favour of prospective genotyping, including discussion of unjustified worries on cost-effectiveness, and potential underdosing. We conclude that there is convincing evidence to implement prospective DPYD genotyping with an upfront dose adjustment in DPD deficient patients. Immediate benefit in patient care can be expected through decreasing toxicity, while maintaining efficacy.

Validation of a fast and low-cost alkaline lysis method for gDNA extraction in a pharmacogenetic context.

PURPOSE: Translation of pharmacogenetic findings from the research laboratory to the clinical practice demands simple and efficient procedures. In this sense, we evaluated the suitability of a modified protocol for genomic DNA extraction based on alkaline lysis of cells. METHODS: Dried blood samples were obtained from 48 patients diagnosed with colorectal cancer. A total of 11 mutations in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene and related to 5-fluorouracil toxicity were searched by amplicon sequencing and real-time PCR with fluorescent probes. RESULTS: Genomic DNA extracted with the alkaline lysis method, both from dried blood samples and buccal swabs, fulfilled the quality requirements of the two genotyping methods assayed, which yielded 100 % concordant results for 11 genetic variants with relevance to cancer chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The assessed protocol has shown to be a very fast and economical approach to perform genetic analyses in the clinical laboratory for pharmacological purposes.

Indirect assessment of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity in cats.

Use of 5-fluoropyridimine antimetabolite drugs, specifically 5-fluorouracil (5-FU), has been discouraged in cats because of adverse events including neurotoxicity and death. Causes of toxicity have never been elucidated. In humans, toxicity has been associated with ineffective metabolism secondary to deficiencies in dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD). Direct assessment of DPD activity is challenging; determination of uracil:dihydrouracil (U:UH2 ) in plasma using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) has been reported as an indirect measurement. U:UH2 was measured in the plasma of 73 cats. Mean U:UH2 for all cats was 1.66 ± 0.11 (median 1.53, range 0.24-7.00). Seventeen (23%) cats had U:UH2 >2, a value associated with decreased DPD activity in humans. Spayed female cats had significantly lower U:UH2 as compared with intact females, and age and U:UH2 were weakly but significantly negatively correlated (r = -0.26). Studies correlating U:UH2 and 5-FU tolerability are required to further determine the validity and use of this test in cats.

Data-driven assessment of the association of polymorphisms in 5-Fluorouracil metabolism genes with outcome in adjuvant treatment of colorectal cancer.

A major challenge in the assessment of medicines, treatment options, etc., is to establish a framework for the comparison of risks and benefits of many different types and magnitudes, a framework that at the same time allows a clear distinction between the roles played by the statistical analyses of data and by judgements based on personal experience and expertise. The purpose of this study was to demonstrate how clinical data can be weighted, scored and presented by the use of an eight-step data-driven benefit-risk assessment method, where two genetic profiles are compared. Our aim was to present a comprehensive approach that is simple to apply, allows direct comparison of different types of risks and benefits, quantifies the clinical relevance of data and is tailored for the comparison of different options. We analysed a cohort of 302 patients with colorectal cancer treated with 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU). Endpoints were cure rate, survival rate, time-to-death (TTD), time-to-relapse (TTR) and main adverse drug reactions. Multifactor dimensionality reduction (MDR) was used to identify genetic interaction profiles associated with outcome. We have been able to demonstrate that a specific MDR-derived combination (the MDR-1 group) of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase and thymidylate synthase polymorphisms is associated with increased and clinically significant difference for cure and survival rates, TTD and probably also for TTR, which are seen as the most important endpoints. An inferior profile was observed for severe myocardial ischaemia. A probably inferior profile was seen for severe arthralgia/myalgia and severe infections. A clear superior profile was seen for severe mucositis/stomatitis. The proposed approach offers comprehensive, data-driven assessment that can facilitate decision processes, for example, in a clinical setting. It employs descriptive statistical methods to highlight the clinically relevant differences between options.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene variation and severe 5-fluorouracil toxicity: a haplotype assessment.

AIMS: The importance of polymorphisms in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene (DPYD) for the prediction of severe toxicity in 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)-based chemotherapy is still unclear. This study aims to assess the predictive value of DPYD variation with respect to previously described DPYD variants for 5-FU toxicity. It represents the first analysis of the gene at the haplotype level, also capturing potentially important genetic variation located outside the coding regions of DPYD. MATERIALS & METHODS: The entire coding sequence and exon-flanking intronic regions of DPYD were sequenced in 111 cancer patients receiving fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. DPYD haplotypes were inferred and their associations with severe 5-FU toxicity were assessed. RESULTS: None of the previously described deleterious variants (IVS14+1G>A, c.2846A>T and c.1679T>G) were detected in 24 patients who experienced severe 5-FU toxicity. A potential association was observed between a haplotype containing three novel intronic polymorphisms (IVS5+18G>A, IVS6+139G>A and IVS9-51T>G) and a synonymous mutation (c.1236G>A), which was observed five- out of eight-times in patients with severe adverse effects. CONCLUSION: The association of a haplotype containing no nonsynonymous or splice-site polymorphisms indicates that additional important genetic variation may be located in noncoding gene regions. Furthermore, a comparison with other studies suggests that the relative importance of particular DPYD mutations (IVS14+1G>A and c.2846A>T) for predicting severe 5-FU toxicity differs geographically across Europe.