Dihydropyrimidine accumulation is required for the epithelial-mesenchymal transition.

It is increasingly appreciated that oncogenic transformation alters cellular metabolism to facilitate cell proliferation, but less is known about the metabolic changes that promote cancer cell aggressiveness. Here, we analyzed metabolic gene expression in cancer cell lines and found that a set of high-grade carcinoma lines expressing mesenchymal markers share a unique 44 gene signature, designated the "mesenchymal metabolic signature" (MMS). A FACS-based shRNA screen identified several MMS genes as essential for the epithelial-mesenchymal transition (EMT), but not for cell proliferation. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD), a pyrimidine-degrading enzyme, was highly expressed upon EMT induction and was necessary for cells to acquire mesenchymal characteristics in vitro and for tumorigenic cells to extravasate into the mouse lung. This role of DPYD was mediated through its catalytic activity and enzymatic products, the dihydropyrimidines. Thus, we identify metabolic processes essential for the EMT, a program associated with the acquisition of metastatic and aggressive cancer cell traits.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase gene variants for predicting grade 4-5 fluoropyrimidine-induced toxicity: FUSAFE individual patient data meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency is the main known cause of life-threatening fluoropyrimidine (FP)-induced toxicities. We conducted a meta-analysis on individual patient data to assess the contribution of deleterious DPYD variants *2A/D949V/*13/HapB3 (recommended by EMA) and clinical factors, for predicting G4-5 toxicity. METHODS: Study eligibility criteria included recruitment of Caucasian patients without DPD-based FP-dose adjustment. Main endpoint was 12-week haematological or digestive G4-5 toxicity. The value of DPYD variants *2A/p.D949V/*13 merged, HapB3, and MIR27A rs895819 was evaluated using multivariable logistic models (AUC). RESULTS: Among 25 eligible studies, complete clinical variables and primary endpoint were available in 15 studies (8733 patients). Twelve-week G4-5 toxicity prevalence was 7.3% (641 events). The clinical model included age, sex, body mass index, schedule of FP-administration, concomitant anticancer drugs. Adding *2A/p.D949V/*13 variants (at least one allele, prevalence 2.2%, OR 9.5 [95%CI 6.7-13.5]) significantly improved the model (p < 0.0001). The addition of HapB3 (prevalence 4.0%, 98.6% heterozygous), in spite of significant association with toxicity (OR 1.8 [95%CI 1.2-2.7]), did not improve the model. MIR27A rs895819 was not associated with toxicity, irrespective of DPYD variants. CONCLUSIONS: FUSAFE meta-analysis highlights the major relevance of DPYD *2A/p.D949V/*13 combined with clinical variables to identify patients at risk of very severe FP-related toxicity.

Common dihydropyrimidinase ( DPYS ) genetic variations do not predict fluoropyrimidine-related chemotherapy toxicity in a Canadian cohort.

Known genetic variations in dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (gene name DPYD ) do not fully predict patients at risk for severe fluoropyrimidine-associated chemotherapy toxicity. Dihydropyrimidinase (gene name DPYS ), the second catabolic enzyme in fluoropyrimidine metabolism, has been noted as a potential determinant of variation in fluoropyrimidine metabolism and response. In this study, we genotyped for DPYS c.-1T>C (rs2959023), c.265-58T>C (rs2669429) and c.541C>T (rs36027551) in a Canadian cohort of 248 patients who were wild type for Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium recommended DPYD variants and had received a standard dose of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy. None of our patients were found to carry the DPYS c.541C>T variant, while the minor allele frequencies were 63% and 54% for c.-1T>C and c.265-58T>C, respectively. There was no association between DPYS c.-1T>C wild type and heterozygote [odds ratio (OR) (95% confidence interval, CI) = 1.10 (0.51-2.40)] or homozygote variant carriers [OR (95% CI) = 1.22 (0.55-2.70)], or between DPYS c.265-58T>C wild-type patients and heterozygote [OR (95% CI) = 0.93 (0.48-1.80)] or homozygote variant carriers [OR (95% CI) = 0.76 (0.37-1.55)] in terms of fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. Therefore, in our cohort of mostly Caucasian Canadians, genetic variations in DPYS do not appear to be a significant contributor to severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity.

Diversity of oncopharmacogenetic profile within Spanish population.

Consensus guidelines for genotype-guided fluoropyrimidine dosing based on variation in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) gene before treatment have been firmly established. The prior pharmacogenetic report avoids the serious toxicity that inevitably occurred in a non-negligible percentage of the treated patients. The precise description of the allelic distribution of the variants of interest in our reference populations is information of great interest for the management of the prescription of these antineoplastic drugs. We characterized the allelic distribution of the UGT1A1*28 variant (rs3064744), as well as the DPYD*2A (rs3918290) variant, c.1679T>G (rs55886062), c.2846A>T (rs67376798) and c.1129-5923C>G (rs75017182; HapB3) in series of 5251 patients who are going to receive treatment with irinotecan and fluoropyrimidines, representative of Valencian, Aragonese and Western Andalusian populations.

Integrating rare genetic variants into DPYD pharmacogenetic testing may help preventing fluoropyrimidine-induced toxicity.

Variability in genes involved in drug pharmacokinetics or drug response can be responsible for suboptimal treatment efficacy or predispose to adverse drug reactions. In addition to common genetic variations, large-scale sequencing studies have uncovered multiple rare genetic variants predicted to cause functional alterations in genes encoding proteins implicated in drug metabolism, transport and response. To understand the functional importance of rare genetic variants in DPYD, a pharmacogene whose alterations can cause severe toxicity in patients exposed to fluoropyrimidine-based regimens, massively parallel sequencing of the exonic regions and flanking splice junctions of the DPYD gene was performed in a series of nearly 3000 patients categorized according to pre-emptive DPD enzyme activity using the dihydrouracil/uracil ([UH2]/[U]) plasma ratio as a surrogate marker of DPD activity. Our results underscore the importance of integrating next-generation sequencing-based pharmacogenomic interpretation into clinical decision making to minimize fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy toxicity without altering treatment efficacy.

The burden of rare variants in DPYS gene is a novel predictor of the risk of developing severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity.

BACKGROUND: Despite a growing number of publications highlighting the potential impact on the therapy outcome, rare genetic variants (minor allele frequency < 1%) in genes associated to drug adsorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination are poorly studied. Previously, rare germline DPYD missense variants were shown to identify a subset of fluoropyrimidine-treated patients at high risk for severe toxicity. Here, we investigate the impact of rare genetic variants in a panel of 54 other fluoropyrimidine-related genes on the risk of severe toxicity. METHODS: The coding sequence and untranslated regions of 54 genes related to fluoropyrimidine pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics were analyzed by next-generation sequencing in 120 patients developing grade 3-5 toxicity (NCI-CTC vs3.0) and 104 matched controls. Sequence Kernel Association Test (SKAT) analysis was used to select genes with a burden of genetic variants significantly associated with risk of severe toxicity. The statistical association of common and rare genetic variants in selected genes was further investigated. The functional impact of genetic variants was assessed using two different in silico prediction tools (Predict2SNP; ADME Prediction Framework). RESULTS: SKAT analysis highlighted DPYS and PPARD as genes with a genetic mutational burden significantly associated with risk of severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity (Bonferroni adjusted P = 0.024 and P = 0.039, respectively). Looking more closely at allele frequency, the burden of rare DPYS variants was significantly higher in patients with toxicity compared with controls (P = 0.047, Mann-Whitney test). Carrying at least one rare DPYS variant was associated with an approximately fourfold higher risk of severe cumulative (OR = 4.08, P = 0.030) and acute (OR = 4.21, P = 0.082) toxicity. The burden of PPARD rare genetic variants was not significantly related to toxicity. Some common variants with predictive value in DPYS and PPARD were also identified: DPYS rs143004875-T and PPARD rs2016520-T variants predicted an increased risk of severe cumulative (P = 0.002 and P = 0.001, respectively) and acute (P = 0.005 and P = 0.0001, respectively) toxicity. CONCLUSION: This work demonstrated that the rare mutational burden of DPYS, a gene strictly cooperating with DPYD in the catabolic pathway of fluoropyrimidines, is a promising pharmacogenetic marker for precision dosing of fluoropyrimidines. Additionally, some common genetic polymorphisms in DPYS and PPARD were identified as promising predictive markers that warrant further investigation.

Unveiling Discrepant and Rare Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase (DPYD) Results Using an In-House Genotyping Test: A Case Series.

Fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy is a primary component of many solid tumor treatment regimens, particularly those for gastrointestinal malignancies. Approximately one-third of patients receiving fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapies experience serious adverse effects. This risk is substantially higher in patients carrying DPYD genetic variants, which cause reduced fluoropyrimidine metabolism and inactivation (ie, dihydropyridine dehydrogenase [DPD] deficiency). Despite the known relationship between DPD deficiency and severe toxicity risk, including drug-related fatalities, pretreatment DPYD testing is not standard of care in the United States. We developed an in-house DPYD genotyping test that detects 5 clinically actionable variants associated with DPD deficiency, and genotyped 827 patients receiving fluoropyrimidines, of which 49 (6%) were identified as heterozygous carriers. We highlight 3 unique cases: (1) a patient with a false-negative result from a commercial laboratory that only tested for the c.1905 + 1G>A (*2A) variant, (2) a White patient in whom the c.557A>G variant (typically observed in people of African ancestry) was detected, and (3) a patient with the rare c.1679T>G (*13) variant. Lastly, we evaluated which DPYD variants are detected by commercial laboratories offering DPYD genotyping in the United States and found 6 of 13 (46%) did not test for all 5 variants included on our panel. We estimated that 20.4% to 81.6% of DPYD heterozygous carriers identified on our panel would have had a false-negative result if tested by 1 of these 6 laboratories. The sensitivity and negative predictive value of the diagnostic tests from these laboratories ranged from 18.4% to 79.6% and 95.1% to 98.7%, respectively. These cases underscore the importance of comprehensive DPYD genotyping to accurately identify patients with DPD deficiency who may require lower fluoropyrimidine doses to mitigate severe toxicities and hospitalizations. Clinicians should be aware of test limitations and variability in variant detection by commercial laboratories, and seek assistance by pharmacogenetic experts or available resources for test selection and result interpretation.

Pharmacogenetics testing (DPYD and UGT1A1) for fluoropyrimidine and irinotecan in routine clinical care: Perspectives of medical oncologists and oncology pharmacists.

BACKGROUND: Despite robust evidence and international guidelines, to support routine pharmacogenetic (PGx) testing, integration in practice has been limited. This study explored clinicians' views and experiences of pre-treatment DPYD and UGT1A1 gene testing and barriers to and enablers of routine clinical implementation. METHODS: A study-specific 17-question survey was emailed (01 February-12 April 2022) to clinicians from the Medical Oncology Group of Australia (MOGA), the Clinical Oncology Society of Australia (COSA) and International Society of Oncology Pharmacy Practitioners (ISOPP). Data were analysed and reported using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Responses were collected from 156 clinicians (78% medical oncologists, 22% pharmacists). Median response rate of 8% (ranged from 6% to 24%) across all organisations. Only 21% routinely test for DPYD and 1% for UGT1A1. For patients undergoing curative/palliative intent treatments, clinicians reported intent to implement genotype-guided dosing by reducing FP dose for DPYD intermediate metabolisers (79%/94%), avoiding FP for DPYD poor metabolisers (68%/90%), and reducing irinotecan dose for UGT1A1 poor metabolisers (84%, palliative setting only). Barriers to implementation included: lack of financial reimbursements (82%) and perceived lengthy test turnaround time (76%). Most Clinicians identified a dedicated program coordinator, i.e., PGx pharmacist (74%) and availability of resources for education/training (74%) as enablers to implementation. CONCLUSION: PGx testing is not routinely practised despite robust evidence for its impact on clinical decision making in curative and palliative settings. Research data, education and implementation studies may overcome clinicians' hesitancy to follow guidelines, especially for curative intent treatments, and may overcome other identified barriers to routine clinical implementation.

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.

Allelic Frequency of DPYD Genetic Variants in Patients With Cancer in Spain: The PhotoDPYD Study.

INTRODUCTION: Identifying polymorphisms in the dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) gene is gaining importance to be able to predict fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. The aim of this project was to describe the frequency of the DPYD variants DPYD*2A (rs3918290); c.1679T>G (rs55886062); c.2846A>T (rs67376798) and c.1129-5923C>G (rs75017182; HapB3) in the Spanish oncological patients. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Cross-sectional and multicentric study (PhotoDPYD study) conducted in hospitals located in Spain designed to register the frequency of the most relevant DPYD genetic variants in oncological patients. All oncological patients with DPYD genotype were recruited in the participant hospitals. The measures determined where the presence or not of the 4 DPYD previously described variants. RESULTS: Blood samples from 8054 patients with cancer from 40 different hospitals were used to determine the prevalence of the 4 variants located in the DPYD gene. The frequency of carriers of one defective DPYD variant was 4.9%. The most frequently identified variant was c.1129-5923C>G (rs75017182) (HapB3), in 2.9%, followed by c.2846A>T (rs67376798) in 1.4%, c.1905 + 1G>A (rs3918290, DPYD*2A) in 0.7% and c.1679T>G (rs55886062) in 0.2% of the patients. Only 7 patients (0.08%) were carrying the c.1129-5923C>G (rs75017182) (HapB3) variant, 3 (0.04%) the c.1905 + 1G>A (rs3918290, DPYD*2A) and one (0.01%) the DPYD c.2846A>T (rs67376798, p.D949V) variant in homozygosis. Moreover, 0.07% were compound heterozygous patients, 3 carrying the DPYD variants DPYD*2A + c.2846A>T, 2 the DPYD c.1129-5923C>G + c.2846A>T and one the DPYD*2A + c.1129-5923C>G variants. CONCLUSIONS: Our results demonstrate the relatively high frequency of DPYD genetic variants in the Spanish patient with cancer population, which highlights the relevance of their determination before initiating a fluoropirimidine-containing regimen.

Mammalian dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase: Added mechanistic details from transient-state analysis of charge transfer complexes.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is a flavin dependent enzyme that catalyzes the reduction of the 5,6-vinylic bond of pyrimidines uracil and thymine with electrons from NADPH. DPD has two active sites that are separated by ∼60 Å. At one site NADPH binds adjacent to an FAD cofactor and at the other pyrimidine binds proximal to an FMN. Four Fe4S4 centers span the distance between these active sites. It has recently been established that the enzyme undergoes reductive activation prior to reducing the pyrimidine. In this initial process NADPH is oxidized at the FAD site and electrons are transmitted to the FMN via the Fe4S4 centers to yield the active state with a cofactor set of FAD•4(Fe4S4)•FMNH2. The catalytic chemistry of DPD can be studied in transient-state by observation of either NADPH consumption or charge transfer absorption associated with complexation of NADPH adjacent to the FAD. Here we have utilized both sets of absorption transitions to find evidence for specific additional aspects of the DPD mechanism. Competition for binding with NADP+ indicates that the two charge transfer species observed in activation/single turnover reactions arise from NADPH populating the FAD site before and after reductive activation. An additional charge transfer species is observed to accumulate at longer times when high NADPH concentrations are mixed with the enzyme•pyrimidine complex and this data can be modelled based on asymmetry in the homodimer. It was also shown that, like pyrimidines, dihydropyrimidines induce rapid reductive activation indicating that the reduced pyrimidine formed in turnover can stimulate the reinstatement of the active state of the enzyme. Investigation of the reverse reaction revealed that dihydropyrimidines alone can reductively activate the enzyme, albeit inefficiently. In the presence of dihydropyrimidine and NADP+ DPD will form NADPH but apparently without measurable reductive activation. Pyrimidines that have 5-substituent halogens were utilized to probe both reductive activation and turnover. The linearity of the Hammett plot based on the rate of hydride transfer to the pyrimidine establishes that, at least to the radius of an iodo-group, the 5-substituent volume does not have influence on the observed kinetics of pyrimidine reduction.

Dihydropyrmidine dehydrogenase from Escherichia coli: Transient state analysis reveals both reductive activation prior to turnover and diminished substrate effector roles relative to the mammalian form.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is an enzyme that uses an elaborate architecture to catalyze a simple net reaction: the reduction of the vinylic bond of uracil and thymine. Known DPDs have two active sites separated by approximately 60 Å. One active site has an FAD cofactor and binds NAD(P) and the other has an FMN cofactor and binds pyrimidines. The intervening distance is spanned by four Fe4S4 centers that act as an electron conduit. Recent advancements with porcine DPD have revealed unexpected chemical sequences where the enzyme undergoes reductive activation by transferring two electrons from NADPH to the FMN via the FAD such that the active form has the cofactor set FAD•4(Fe4S4)•FMNH2. Here we describe the first comprehensive kinetic investigation of a bacterial form of DPD. Using primarily transient state methods, DPD from E. coli (EcDPD) was shown to have a similar mechanism to that observed with the mammalian form in that EcDPD is observed to undergo reductive activation before pyrimidine reduction and displays half-of-sites activity. However, two distinct aspects of the EcDPD reaction relative to the mammalian enzyme were observed that relate to the effector roles for substrates: (i) the enzyme will rapidly take up electrons from NADH, reducing a flavin in the absence of pyrimidine substrate, and (ii) the activated form of the enzyme can become fully oxidized by transferring electrons to pyrimidine substrates in the absence of NADH.

Impact of pharmacogenomic DPYD variant guided dosing on toxicity in patients receiving fluoropyrimidines for gastrointestinal cancers in a high-volume tertiary centre.

BACKGROUND: Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) is a key enzyme in the metabolism of fluoropyrimidines. Variations in the encoding DPYD gene are associated with severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity and up-front dose reductions are recommended. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the impact of implementing DPYD variant testing for patients with gastrointestinal cancers in routine clinical practice in a high volume cancer centre in London, United Kingdom. METHODS: Patients receiving fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy for gastrointestinal cancer prior to, and following the implementation of DPYD testing were identified retrospectively. After November 2018, patients were tested for DPYD variants c.1905+1G>A (DPYD*2A), c.2846A>T (DPYD rs67376798), c.1679T>G (DPYD*13), c.1236G>A (DPYD rs56038477), c.1601G>A (DPYD*4) prior to commencing fluoropyrimidines alone or in combination with other cytotoxics and/or radiotherapy. Patients with a DPYD heterozygous variant received an initial dose reduction of 25-50%. Toxicity by CTCAE v4.03 criteria was compared between DPYD heterozygous variant and wild type carriers. RESULTS: Between 1st December 2018 and 31st July 2019, 370 patients who were fluoropyrimidine naïve underwent a DPYD genotyping test prior to receiving a capecitabine (n = 236, 63.8%) or 5FU (n = 134, 36.2%) containing chemotherapy regimen. 33 patients (8.8%) were heterozygous DPYD variant carriers and 337 (91.2%) were wild type. The most prevalent variants were c.1601G > A (n = 16) and c.1236G > A (n = 9). Mean relative dose intensity for the first dose was 54.2% (range 37.5-75%) for DPYD heterozygous carriers and 93.2% (42.9-100%) for DPYD wild type carriers. Overall grade 3 or worse toxicity was similar in DPYD variant carriers (4/33, 12.1%) as compared to wild-type carriers (89/337, 25.7%; P = 0.0924). CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates successful routine DPYD mutation testing prior to the initiation of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy with high uptake. In patients with DPYD heterozygous variants with pre-emptive dose reductions, high incidence of severe toxicity was not observed. Our data supports routine DPYD genotype testing prior to commencement of fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy.

Discrepancies between dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase phenotyping and genotyping: What are the explanatory factors?

AIM: Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency can be detected by phenotyping (measurement of plasma uracil [U], with U ≥ 16 µg/L defining a partial deficiency) and/or by genotyping (screening for the four most frequent DPYD variants). We aimed to determine the proportion of discrepancies between phenotypic and genotypic approaches and to identify possible explanatory factors. METHODS: Data from patients who underwent both phenotyping and genotyping were retrospectively collected. Complementary genetic analyses (genotyping of the variant c.557A>G and DPYD sequencing) were performed for patients with U ≥ 16 µg/L without any common variants. The characteristics of patients classified according to the congruence of the phenotyping and genotyping approaches were compared (Kruskal-Wallis test), and determinants of U levels were studied in the whole cohort (linear model). RESULTS: Among the 712 included patients, phenotyping and genotyping were discordant for 12.5%, with 63 (8.8%) having U ≥ 16 µg/L in the absence of a common variant. Complementary genetic investigations marginally reduced the percentage of discrepancies to 12.1%: Among the nine additional identified variants, only the c.557A>G variant, carried by three patients, had been previously reported to be associated with DPD deficiency. Liver dysfunction could explain certain discordances, as ASAT, ALP, GGT and bilirubin levels were significantly elevated, with more frequent liver metastases in patients with U ≥ 16 µg/L and the absence of a DPYD variant. The impact of cytolysis was confirmed, as ASAT levels were independently associated with increased U (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The frequent discordances between DPD phenotyping and genotyping approaches highlight the need to perform these two approaches to screen for all DPD deficiencies.

Quantitative impact of pre-analytical process on plasma uracil when testing for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency.

AIMS: Determining dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) activity by measuring patient's uracil (U) plasma concentration is mandatory before fluoropyrimidine (FP) administration in France. In this study, we aimed to refine the pre-analytical recommendations for determining U and dihydrouracil (UH2 ) concentrations, as they are essential in reliable DPD-deficiency testing. METHODS: U and UH2 concentrations were collected from 14 hospital laboratories. Stability in whole blood and plasma after centrifugation, the type of anticoagulant and long-term plasma storage were evaluated. The variation induced by time and temperature was calculated and compared to an acceptability range of ±20%. Inter-occasion variability (IOV) of U and UH2 was assessed in 573 patients double sampled for DPD-deficiency testing. RESULTS: Storage of blood samples before centrifugation at room temperature (RT) should not exceed 1 h, whereas cold (+4°C) storage maintains the stability of uracil after 5 hours. For patients correctly double sampled, IOV of U reached 22.4% for U (SD = 17.9%, range = 0-99%). Notably, 17% of them were assigned with a different phenotype (normal or DPD-deficient) based on the analysis of their two samples. For those having at least one non-compliant sample, this percentage increased up to 33.8%. The moment of blood collection did not affect the DPD phenotyping result. CONCLUSION: Caution should be taken when interpreting U concentrations if the time before centrifugation exceeds 1 hour at RT, since it rises significantly afterwards. Not respecting the pre-analytical conditions for DPD phenotyping increases the risk of DPD status misclassification.

Short-term biological variation of plasma uracil in a Caucasian healthy population.

OBJECTIVES: Plasma uracil is a new biomarker to assess the activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase before cancer treatment with fluoropyrimidine drugs. Knowledge on the biological variation of plasma uracil is important to assess the applicability of plasma uracil as a biomarker of drug tolerance and efficacy. METHODS: A total of 33 apparently healthy individuals were submitted to sequential blood draws for three days. On the second day, blood draws were performed every third hour for 12 h. Plasma uracil was quantified by LC-MS/MS. The within-subject (CVI) and between-subject (CVG) biological variation estimates were calculated using linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: The overall median value of plasma uracil was 10.6 ng/mL (range 5.6-23.1 ng/mL). The CVI and CVG were 13.5 and 22.1%, respectively. Plasma uracil remained stable during the day, and there was no day-to-day variation observed. No differences in biological variation components were found between sex and no correlation to age was found. Four samples were calculated to be required to estimate the homeostatic set-point ±15% with 95% confidence. CONCLUSIONS: Plasma uracil is subject to tight homeostatic regulation without semidiurnal and day-to-day variation, however between-subject variation exists. This emphasizes plasma uracil as a well-suited biomarker for evaluation of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity, but four samples are required to establish the homeostatic set-point in a patient.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase phenotype in peripheral blood mononuclear cells is related to adverse events of fluoropyrimidine-therapy.

PURPOSE: The primary objective of this study was to determine if dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) activity measured in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) is related to adverse events during fluoropyrimidine therapy. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted. The study population included 481 patients who received fluoropyrimidine treatment and for whom relevant patient characteristics were known and adverse events were noted in the electronic health records. Factors besides DPD phenotype that could affect the incidence of adverse events were corrected for using log regression. These log regression models were used to identify an association between the DPD phenotype measured in PBMCs and adverse events. RESULTS: Patients with a decreased DPD activity measured in PBMCs suffered more adverse events. Results from log regression data show that this effect remains significant after correcting for dosage, chemotherapy regimen and relevant patient characteristics. CONCLUSION: A significant correlation was found between reduced DPD enzyme activity in PBMCs and adverse events. The findings in this paper support further exploring DPD phenotyping as a method for preventing fluoropyrimidine-related adverse events. Further assessment of DPD phenotyping will require clinical validation in a prospective study.

Design, synthesis, and evaluation of JTE-013 derivatives as novel potent S1PR2 antagonists for recovering the sensitivity of colorectal cancer to 5-fluorouracil.

Targeting sphingosine-1-phosphate receptor 2 (S1PR2) has been proved as a promising strategy to reverse 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) resistance. Here, we report the discovery of the novel JTE-013 derivative compound 37 h as a more effective S1PR2 antagonist to reverse 5-FU resistance in SW620/5-FU and HCT116DPD cells than JTE-013 and previously reported compound 5. Compound 37 h could effectively bind S1PR2 and reduce its expression, thus leading to decreased expression of JMJD3 and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), while also increasing the level of H3K27me3 to decrease the degradation of 5-FU and thereby increase its intracellular concentration in SW620/5-FU, HCT116DPD, and L02 cells. Furthermore, compound 37 h showed good selectivity to other S1PRs and normal colon cell line NCM460. Western blot analysis demonstrated that compound 37 h could abrogate the FBAL-stimulated upregulation of DPD expression by S1PR2. Importantly, compound 37 h also showed favorable metabolic stability with a long half-life (t1/2) of 7.9 h. Moreover, compound 37 h significantly enhanced the antitumor efficacy of 5-FU in the SW620/5-FU animal model. Thus, the JTE-013-based derivative compound 37 h represents a promising lead compound for the development of novel 5-FU sensitizers for colorectal cancer (CRC) therapy.

Potential added value of combined DPYD/DPD genotyping and phenotyping to prevent severe toxicity in patients with a DPYD variant and decreased dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase enzyme activity.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate if dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase phenotyping has added value when combined with DPYD genotyping in predicting fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity. METHODS: Retrospective cohort study in which treatment and toxicity data were collected of 228 patients genotyped for four DPYD variants and phenotyped using an ex vivo peripheral blood mononuclear cell assay. RESULTS: Severe toxicity occurred in 25% of patients with a variant and normal dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity, in 21% of patients without a variant and with decreased dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity, and in 29% of patients without a variant and with normal dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity (controls). The majority of patients with a variant or a decreased dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity received an initial dose reduction (68% and 53% vs 19% in controls) and had a lower mean dose intensity (75% and 81% vs 91% in controls). Fifty percent of patients with a variant and decreased enzyme activity experienced severe toxicity, despite the lowest initial dose and whole treatment dose intensity. They also experienced more grade 4/5 toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Our results indicate that a combined genotype-phenotype approach could be useful to identify patients at increased risk for fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity (e.g. patients with a variant and decreased dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity). Because the group sizes are too small to demonstrate statistically significant differences, this warrants further research in a prospective study in a larger cohort.

Genetic Variation in miR-27a Is Associated with Fluoropyrimidine-Associated Toxicity in Patients with Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Variants after Genotype-Guided Dose Reduction.

Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPYD) is the rate-limiting enzyme involved in the metabolism of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. However, single-nucleotide variants (SNVs) in DPYD only partially explain fluoropyrimidine-induced toxicity. The expression of DPYD has previously been shown to be regulated by microRNA-27a (miR-27a) and a common miR-27a SNV (rs895819) has been associated with an increased risk of toxicity in patients harboring a DPYD variant who received standard fluoropyrimidine dosing. We investigated if the miR-27a rs895819 SNV was associated with toxicity in DPYD wildtype patients and carriers of DPYD variants who received a reduced dose. The regulation of DPYD using miR-27a was investigated in HepG2 cells utilizing a miR-27a mimic. miR-27a overexpression decreased DPYD mRNA expression compared to control cells (p < 0.0001). In a cohort of patients that received pre-emptive DPYD genotyping, 45 patients had a DPYD variant and 180 were wildtype. Patients heterozygous for rs895819 had an increased risk of toxicity, which was seen in both patients who were wildtype for DPYD variants (OR (95%CI) = 1.99 (1.00-3.99)) and DPYD variant carriers (OR (95%CI) = 8.10 (1.16-86.21)). Therefore, miR-27a rs895819 may be a clinically relevant predictor of fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicities. Furthermore, toxicity was more profound in DPYD variant carriers, even after DPYD genotype-guided dose reduction. This suggests that patients may benefit from miR-27a genotyping to guide fluoropyrimidine dosing.