Review of therapeutic drug monitoring of anticancer drugs part 1--cytotoxics.

Most anticancer drugs are characterised by a steep dose-response relationship and narrow therapeutic window. Inter-individual pharmacokinetic (PK) variability is often substantial. The most relevant PK parameter for cytotoxic drugs is the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC). Thus it is somewhat surprising that therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is still uncommon for the majority of agents. Goals of the review were to assess the rationale for more widely used TDM of cytotoxics in oncology. There are several reasons why TDM has never been fully implemented into daily oncology practice. These include difficulties in establishing appropriate concentration target ranges, common use of combination chemotherapies for many tumour types, analytical challenges with prodrugs, intracellular compounds, the paucity of published data from pharmacological trials and 'Day1 = Day21' administration schedules. There are some specific situations for which these limitations are overcome, including high dose methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil infusion, mitotane and some high dose chemotherapy regimens. TDM in paediatric oncology represents an important challenge. Established TDM approaches includes the widely used anticancer agents carboplatin, busulfan and methotrexate, with 13-cis-retinoic acid also recently of interest. Considerable effort should be made to better define concentration-effect relationships and to utilise tools such as population PK/PD models and comparative randomised trials of classic dosing versus pharmacokinetically guided adaptive dosing. There is an important heterogeneity among clinical practices and a strong need to promote TDM guidelines among the oncological community.

Novel azolyl-(phenylmethyl)]aryl/heteroarylamines: potent CYP26 inhibitors and enhancers of all-trans retinoic acid activity in neuroblastoma cells.

The synthesis and potent inhibitory activity of novel 4-[(imidazol-1-yl and triazol-1-yl)(phenyl)methyl]aryl-and heteroaryl amines versus a MCF-7 CYP26A1 cell assay is described. Biaryl imidazole ([4-(imidazol-1-yl-phenyl-methyl)-phenyl]-naphthalen-2-yl-amine (8), IC(50)=0.5 microM; [4-(imidazol-1-yl-phenyl-methyl)-phenyl]-indan-5-yl-amine (9), IC(50)=1.0 microM) and heteroaryl imidazole derivatives ((1H-benzoimidazol-2-yl)-{4-[(5H-imidazol-1-yl)-phenyl-methyl]-phenyl}-amine (15), IC(50)=2.5 microM; benzooxazol-2-yl-{4-[(5H-imidazol-1-yl)-phenyl-methyl]-phenyl}-amine (16), IC(50)=0.9 microM; benzothiazol-2-yl-{4-[(5H-imidazol-1-yl)-phenyl-methyl]-phenyl}-amine (17), IC(50)=1.5 microM) were the most potent CYP26 inhibitors. Using a CYP26A1 homology model differences in activity were investigated. Incubation of SH-SY5Y human neuroblastoma cells with the imidazole aryl derivative 8, and the imidazole heteroaryl derivatives 16 and 17 potentiated the atRA-induced expression of CYP26B1. These data suggest that further structure-function studies leading to clinical development are warranted.

Pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenetics of 13-cis-retinoic acid in the treatment of neuroblastoma.

There are a number of factors relating to the clinical pharmacology of 13-cis-Retinoic Acid (13-cisRA) which, taken together, provide a strong case for the potential benefit of a therapeutic monitoring approach to ensure that uniform plasma concentrations of 13-cisRA are achieved in all patients. Firstly, low dose, continuous use of 13-cisRA has been shown to provide limited or no clinical benefit in neuroblastoma patients, whereas a high-dose, intermittent regimen resulted in a significant improvement in event-free survival. This suggests that dose levels and therefore plasma concentrations of drug are important determinants of 13-cisRA efficacy. Secondly, the currently used 13-cisRA dosing regimen of 160 mg/m(2)/day results in a >10-fold variation in plasma concentrations, with plasma concentrations observed in a significant percentage of patients below those required for activity in neuroblastoma cells in vitro. Importantly, there would appear to be limited intra-patient variation in 13-cisRA plasma concentrations, i.e. those patients with lower 13-cisRA plasma concentrations following a single dose of 13-cisRA are likely to have similarly low concentrations following all doses of 13-cisRA on subsequent courses. As 13-cisRA is given as chronic treatment, those patients experiencing lower plasma concentrations on the current dosing regimen will potentially be exposed to sub-therapeutic concentrations of drug for the entire 6 month treatment period. While this type of pharmacokinetic monitoring approach may prove to be beneficial in the short term, an increased knowledge of pharmacogenetic factors influencing to the metabolism of 13-cisRA may ultimately allow us to identify patients who may be less likely to benefit from treatment due to an increased rate of parent drug metabolism. In this respect, pharmacogenetic studies assessing the relative expression levels or mutations in enzymes such as cytochrome P450 (CYP) and particularly CYP26 are needed to assess any potential association with rate of metabolism in vivo.