A rapid and sensitive LC-MS/MS method for quantifying oxycodone, noroxycodone, oxymorphone and noroxymorphone in human plasma to support pharmacokinetic drug interaction studies of oxycodone.

A sensitive and reliable LC-MS/MS method was developed and validated for the quantification of oxycodone and metabolites in human plasma. The method has a runtime of 6 min and a sensitivity of 0.1 µg/L for all analytes. Sample preparation consisted of protein precipitation. Separation was performed on a Kinetix biphenyl column (2.1 × 100 mm, 1.7 µm), using ammonium formate 5 mm in 0.1% aqueous formic acid and methanol LC-MS grade 100% in gradient elution at a flow rate of 0.4 ml/min. Detection was performed in multiple reaction monitoring mode using positive electrospray ionization. The method was linear over the calibration range of 0.1-25.0 µg/L for oxycodone, noroxycodone and noroxymorphone and 0.1-5.0 µg/L for oxymorphone. The method demonstrated good performance in terms of intra- and interday accuracy (86.5-110.3%) and precision (CV 1.7-9.3%). The criteria for the matrix effect were met (CV < 15%) except for noroxymorphone, for which an additional method was applied to compensate for the matrix effect. Whole blood samples were stable for 4 h at room temperature. Plasma samples were stable for 24 h at room temperature and 3 months at -20°C. Furthermore, the method was successfully applied in a pharmacokinetic drug interaction study of oxycodone and enzalutamide in patients with prostate cancer.

A Systematic Evaluation of Cost-Saving Dosing Regimens for Therapeutic Antibodies and Antibody-Drug Conjugates for the Treatment of Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Expensive novel anticancer drugs put a serious strain on healthcare budgets, and the associated drug expenses limit access to life-saving treatments worldwide. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop alternative dosing regimens to reduce drug expenses. METHODS: We developed alternative dosing regimens for the following monoclonal antibodies used for the treatment of lung cancer: amivantamab, atezolizumab, bevacizumab, durvalumab, ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and ramucirumab; and for the antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan. The alternative dosing regimens were developed by means of modeling and simulation based on the population pharmacokinetic models developed by the license holders. They were based on weight bands and the administration of complete vials to limit drug wastage. The resulting dosing regimens were developed to comply with criteria used by regulatory authorities for in silico dose development. RESULTS: We found that alternative dosing regimens could result in cost savings that range from 11 to 28%, and lead to equivalent pharmacokinetic exposure with no relevant increases in variability in exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Dosing regimens based on weight bands and the use of complete vials to reduce drug wastage result in less expenses while maintaining equivalent exposure. The level of evidence of our proposal is the same as accepted by regulatory authorities for the approval of alternative dosing regimens of other monoclonal antibodies in oncology. The proposed alternative dosing regimens can, therefore, be directly implemented in clinical practice.

Effectiveness of a vitamin D regimen in deficient multiple myeloma patients and its effect on peripheral neuropathy.

PURPOSE: Peripheral neuropathy (PN) is common in multiple myeloma (MM) patients. More insight has been gained concerning the role of vitamin D in preventing PN. However, studies evaluating the effects of vitamin D3 supplementation on PN are lacking. The aims of this study are to (1) evaluate the effectiveness of a vitamin D3 regimen on achieving adequate vitamin D levels in deficient MM patients and to (2) exploratively evaluate the effect of vitamin D3 supplementation on PN. METHODS: Thirty-nine MM patients with inadequate (< 75 nmol/L [= 30 ng/mL]) 25-hydroxyvitamin D (25(OH)D) levels were included in this multicenter, prospective, single-arm study, of whom 35 patients completed the study. They received oral vitamin D3 for 6 months according to a dose escalation regimen that consisted of one or two loading doses of 200,000 international units (IU), and maintenance doses of 800, 1600, or 3200 IU/day depending on the 25(OH)D level. A validated questionnaire was used to measure PN. RESULTS: Median 25(OH)D increased from 38 (IQR 32-52) nmol/L at baseline to 77 (IQR 72-87) nmol/L after 6 months (P < 0.001). Adequate 25(OH)D levels were achieved by 66% of the subjects, and 34% were within the range of 50-75 nmol/L. Furthermore, in 37% of the participants, PN severity decreased (P = 0.007). CONCLUSION: The use of substantially higher vitamin D3 doses than recommended in current guidelines resulted in a significant increase in vitamin D levels in MM patients. Furthermore, evaluation of PN showed a significant decrease in PN grading. However, this exploratory evaluation needs further confirmatory research.

Lean Body Mass and Total Body Weight Versus Body Surface Area as a Determinant of Docetaxel Pharmacokinetics and Toxicity.

AIM: This study examined whether anthropometric and body composition parameters such as body surface area (BSA), lean body mass (LBM), and total body weight (TBW) are correlated with docetaxel clearance and exposure by analyzing area under the curve. In addition, LBM, TBW, and a fixed dose were compared with BSA as dosing parameters for dose individualization of docetaxel. METHODS: Thirty-six patients receiving docetaxel chemotherapy for breast or metastatic castration-resistant prostate carcinoma were included. Before treatment, LBM was measured using a dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry scanner. Blood samples were collected up to 180 minutes after dosing to analyze docetaxel concentrations and determine individual pharmacokinetic parameters. RESULTS: No significant correlations were found between docetaxel clearance and the anthropometric and body composition variables (BSA, LBM, and TBW). The area under the curve was significantly but poorly correlated with BSA [r = 0.452 ( P = 0.016)] and TBW [r = 0.476 ( P = 0.011)]. The mean absolute percentage error and mean error of simulated dosing based on LBM and fixed dosing were not significantly different from those of BSA. For TBW, only mean absolute percentage error was significantly higher compared with dosing based on BSA (24.1 versus 17.1, P = 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: There was no clinically relevant correlation between docetaxel pharmacokinetics and the anthropometric and body composition variables BSA, LBM, and TBW. Therefore, dose individualization of docetaxel based on LBM, TBW, or fixed dosing cannot be recommended over BSA-based dosing.

Differences in Evidentiary Requirements Between European Medicines Agency and European Health Technology Assessment of Oncology Drugs-Can Alignment Be Enhanced?

OBJECTIVES: National health technology assessments (HTAs) across Europe show differences in evidentiary requirements from assessments by the European Medicines Agency (EMA), affecting time to patient access for drugs after marketing authorization. This article analyzes the differences between EMA and HTA bodies' evidentiary requirements for oncology drugs and provides recommendations on potential further alignment to minimize and optimally manage the remaining differences. METHODS: Interviews were performed with representatives and drug assessment experts from EMA and HTA bodies to identify evidentiary requirements for several subdomains and collect recommendations for potentially more efficiently addressing differences. A comparative analysis of acceptability of the evidence by EMA and the HTA bodies and for potential further alignment between both authorities was conducted. RESULTS: Acceptability of available evidence was higher for EMA than HTA bodies. HTA bodies and EMA were aligned on evidentiary requirements in most cases. The subdomains showing notable differences concerned the acceptance of limitation of the target population and extrapolation of target populations, progression-free survival and (other) surrogate endpoints as outcomes, cross-over designs, short trial duration, and clinical relevance of the effect size. Recommendations for reducing or optimally managing differences included joint early dialogues, joint relative effectiveness assessments, and the use of managed entry agreements. CONCLUSIONS: Differences between assessments of EMA and HTA bodies were identified in important areas of evidentiary requirements. Increased alignment between EMA and HTA bodies is suggested and recommendations for realization are discussed.

Evidence- and consensus-based guidelines for drug-drug interactions with anticancer drugs; A practical and universal tool for management.

Drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with anticancer drugs are common and can significantly affect efficacy and toxicity of treatment. Therefore, a Dutch Multidisciplinary Expert group is assessing the clinical significance of DDIs in oncology and provides recommendations for the management of these DDIs. We present an overview of methodology and outcome of an evidence- and consensus-based assessment of DDIs between anticancer drugs and non-anticancer drugs. A literature search was performed through PubMed and EMA and FDA assessment reports, to identify potential DDI's involving anticancer drugs. For each potential DDI a concept report for risk analysis and practical advice for management was created. Subsequently, this risk analysis and the corresponding advice were assessed and weighed. A total of 290 potential DDIs have been identified in the literature thus far. Of these 290 potential DDIs, the Expert Group has identified 94 (32%) DDIs as clinically relevant, with a need for an automated alert and a suggested intervention. Furthermore, 110 DDIs have been identified as clinically not relevant. For 86 potential DDIs evidence supporting a relevant DDI was insufficient and in these cases neither an alert nor advice regarding a suggested intervention were formulated. A transparent risk analysis is presented for identification of clinically relevant DDIs with anticancer drugs. Integration of DDI guidelines into the national electronic prescribing system is essential to achieve optimal efficacy and minimal toxicity in patients receiving anticancer therapy. A clear overview of clinically relevant DDIs with anticancer therapy provides clinicians with a structured, evidence-based and consensus-built tool for anticancer therapy surveillance.

Clinical implications of germline variations for treatment outcome and drug resistance for small molecule kinase inhibitors in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Small-molecule kinase inhibitors (SMKIs) represent the cornerstone in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients harboring genetic driver mutations. Because of the introduction of SMKIs in the last decades, treatment outcomes have drastically improved. Their treatment efficacy, the development of drug resistance as well as untoward toxicity, all suffer from large patient variability. This variability can be explained, at least in part, by their oral route of administration, which leads to a large inter- and intra-patient variation in bioavailability based on differences in absorption. Additionally, drug-drug and food-drug interactions are frequently reported. These interactions could modulate SMKI efficacy and/or untoward toxicity. Furthermore, the large patient variability could be explained by the presence of germline variations in target receptor domains, metabolizing enzymes, and drug efflux transporters. Knowledge about these predictor variations is crucial for handling SMKIs in clinical practice, and for selecting the most optimal therapy. In the current review, the literature search included all SMKIs registered for locally-advanced and metastatic NSCLC by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or European Medicines Agency (EMA) until March 24th, 2022. The BIM deletion showed a significantly decreased PFS and OS for East-Asian patients treated with gefitinib, and has the potential to be clinically relevant for other SMKIs as well. Furthermore, we expect most relevance from the ABCG2 34 G>A and CYP1A1 variations during erlotinib and gefitinib treatment. Pre-emptive CYP2D6 testing before starting gefitinib treatment can also be considered to prevent severe drug-related toxicity. These and other germline variations are summarized and discussed, in order to provide clear recommendations for clinical practice.

The performance of COBRA, a decision rule to predict the need for intensive care interventions in intentional drug overdose.

BACKGROUND: COBRA was developed as a decision rule to predict which patients visiting the emergency department (ED) following intentional drug overdose will not require intensive care unit (ICU) interventions. COBRA uses parameters from five vital systems (cardiac conduction, oxygenation, blood pressure, respiration, and awareness) that are readily available in the ED. COBRA recommends against ICU admission when all these parameters are normal. OBJECTIVE: The primary aim of this study was to determine the negative predictive value (NPV) of COBRA in predicting ICU interventions. Secondary outcomes were the sensitivity, specificity and positive predictive value (PPV), and the observation time required for a reliable prediction. DESIGN: Observational cohort study. SETTINGS AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients with a reported intentional overdose with drugs having potential acute effects on neurological, circulatory or ventilatory function were included, and data necessary to complete the decision rule was collected. The attending physician in the ED made the actual admission decision, on the basis of clinical judgement. COBRA was measured 0, 3 and 6 h after arrival at the ED. OUTCOME MEASURES: Need for ICU interventions (treatment of convulsion; defibrillation; mechanical or noninvasive ventilation; intravenous administration of vasopressive agents, antiarrhythmics, atropine, calcium, magnesium or sedation; continuous hemofiltration or administration of antagonist/antidote and fluid resuscitation). MAIN RESULTS: Of 230 new cases (144 unique patients), 59 were immediately referred to the psychiatric services and/or sent home by the attending physician, 27 went to a regular ward, and 144 were admitted to the ICU. Of these 144 cases, 40 required one or more ICU interventions. By the time the first parameters were collected, the NPV of COBRA was 95.6%. After 3 h of observation, NPV was 100%, while sensitivity, specificity and PPV were 100, 61.1 and 35.1%, respectively. None of these values improved by prolonging the observation time to 6 h. CONCLUSION: In patients with a reported intentional overdose with drugs having potential acute effects on neurological, circulatory or ventilatory function, the COBRA decision rule showed good performances in predicting the need for intensive care interventions, with a NPV of 100% after 3 h of observation.

Exposure-toxicity relationship of cabozantinib in patients with renal cell cancer and salivary gland cancer.

Cabozantinib is registered in fixed 60 mg dose. However, 46% to 62% of patients in the registration studies needed a dose reduction due to toxicity. Improved clinical efficacy has been observed in renal cell carcinoma patients (RCC) with a cabozantinib exposure greater than 750 µg/L. In our study we explored the cabozantinib exposure in patients with different tumour types. We included RCC patients from routine care and salivary gland carcinoma (SGC) patients from a phase II study with ≥1 measured Cmin at steady-state. The geometric mean (GM) Cmin at the starting dose, at 40 mg and at best tolerated dose (BTD) were compared between both tumour types. Forty-seven patients were included. All SGC patients (n = 22) started with 60 mg, while 52% of RCC patients started with 40 mg. GM Cmin at the start dose was 1456 µg/L (95% CI: 1185-1789) vs 682 µg/L (95% CI: 572-812) (P < .001) for SGC and RCC patients, respectively. When dose-normalised to 40 mg, SGC patients had a significantly higher cabozantinib exposure compared to RCC patients (Cmin 971 µg/L [95% CI: 790-1193] vs 669 µg/L [95% CI: 568-788]) (P = .005). Dose reductions due to toxicity were needed in 91% and 60% of SGC and RCC patients, respectively. Median BTD was between 20 to 30 mg for SGC and 40 mg for RCC patients. GM Cmin at BTD were comparable between the SGC and the RCC group, 694 µg/L (95% CI: 584-824) vs 583 µg/L (95% CI: 496-671) (P = .1). The observed cabozantinib exposure at BTD of approximately 600 µg/L is below the previously proposed target. Surprisingly, a comparable exposure at BTD was reached at different dosages of cabozantinib for SGC patients compared to RCC patients Further research is warranted to identify the optimal exposure and starting dose to balance efficacy and toxicity.

Binding interactions with sevelamer and polystyrene sulfonate in vitro.

This study explored the binding of 28 drugs, which were selected based on frequency of concomitant use and chemical properties, to sevelamer and polystyrene sulfonate in vitro. The relative binding was determined by dissolving the investigated drugs alone (=control), together with 800 mg of sevelamer and 15 g of polystyrene sulfonate at different pH levels (1.5, 5.5, and 7.4), respectively. After incubation at 37℃ and shaking for 60 min, the solutions were diluted and centrifuged, and the drug concentrations were quantified with validated analytical assays. The binding assays were performed in threefold. The mean relative binding (MRB) at each pH level was calculated, with a MRB >20% for at least one pH level to be considered as relevant binding. Fourteen and 23 potentially new binding interactions were identified with sevelamer and polystyrene sulfonate, respectively. These potentially new binding interactions have to be studied in vivo to assess their clinical relevance.

The impact of a 1-hour time interval between pazopanib and subsequent intake of gastric acid suppressants on pazopanib exposure.

Co-treatment with gastric acid suppressants (GAS) in patients taking anticancer drugs that exhibit pH-dependant absorption may lead to decreased drug exposure and may hamper drug efficacy. In our study, we investigated whether a 1-hour time interval between subsequent intake of pazopanib and GAS could mitigate this negative effect on drug exposure. We performed an observational study in which we collected the first steady-state pazopanib trough concentration (Cmin ) levels from patients treated with pazopanib 800 mg once daily (OD) taken fasted or pazopanib 600 mg OD taken with food. All patients were advised to take GAS 1 hour after pazopanib. Patients were grouped based on the use of GAS and the geometric (GM) Cmin levels were compared between groups for each dose regimen. Additionally, the percentage of patients with exposure below the target threshold of 20.5 mg/L and the effect of the type of PPI was explored. The GM Cmin levels were lower in GAS users vs non-GAS users for both the 800 and 600 mg cohorts (23.7 mg/L [95% confidence interval [CI]: 21.1-26.7] vs 28.2 mg/L [95% CI: 25.9-30.5], P = .015 and 26.0 mg/L [95% CI: 22.4-30.3] vs 33.5 mg/L [95% CI: 30.3-37.1], P = .006). Subtherapeutic exposure was more prevalent in GAS users vs non-GAS users (33.3% vs 19.5% and 29.6% vs 14%). Sub-analysis showed lower GM pazopanib Cmin in patients who received omeprazole, while minimal difference was observed in those receiving pantoprazole compared to non-users. Our research showed that a 1-hour time interval between intake of pazopanib and GAS did not mitigate the negative effect of GAS on pazopanib exposure and may hamper pazopanib efficacy.

Prevalence and follow-up of potentially inappropriate medication and potentially omitted medication in older patients with cancer - The PIM POM study.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the prevalence of Potentially Inappropriate Medication (PIMs) and Potentially Omitted Medication (POMs) in older patients with cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In this prospective observational study (hospital) pharmacists conducted comprehensive medication reviews in older patients with cancer (aged ≥65 years) receiving parenteral chemotherapy and/or immunotherapy at the Deventer Hospital. PIMs and POMs were identified using the Screening Tool of Older Persons' potentially inappropriate Prescriptions (STOPP), the Screening Tool to Alert doctors to the Right Treatment (START), and pharmacists' expert opinion. Recommendations regarding PIMs and POMs were communicated to the patient's oncologist/haematologist and follow-up was measured. Associations between covariates and the prevalence of PIMs and POMs were statistically analysed. RESULTS: For the 150 patients included, 180 PIMs and 86 POMs were identified with a prevalence of 78%. Using pharmacists' expert opinion in addition to only STOPP/START criteria contributed to 49% of the PIMs and 23% of the POMs. A follow-up action was required in 73% of the 266 PIMs and POMs. Number of medicines and Charlson Comorbidity Index score were both associated with having at least one PIM and/or POM (p = .031 and p = .016, respectively). CONCLUSION: The prevalence of PIMs and POMs and subsequent follow-up in older patients with cancer is high. A pharmacist-led comprehensive medication review is a good instrument to identify these PIMs and POMs and to optimize patients' treatment. A complete approach, including pharmacists' expert opinion, is recommended to identify all PIMs and POMs in clinical practice.

Clinical implications of food-drug interactions with small-molecule kinase inhibitors.

During the past two decades, small-molecule kinase inhibitors have proven to be valuable in the treatment of solid and haematological tumours. However, because of their oral administration, the intrapatient and interpatient exposure to small-molecule kinase inhibitors (SMKIs) is highly variable and is affected by many factors, such as concomitant use of food and herbs. Food-drug interactions are capable of altering the systemic bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of these drugs. The most important mechanisms underlying food-drug interactions are gastrointestinal drug absorption and hepatic metabolism through cytochrome P450 isoenzymes. As food-drug interactions can lead to therapy failure or severe toxicity, knowledge of these interactions is essential. This Review provides a comprehensive overview of published studies involving food-drug interactions and herb-drug interactions for all registered SMKIs up to Oct 1, 2019. We critically discuss US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and European Medicines Agency (EMA) guidelines concerning food-drug interactions and offer clear recommendations for their management in clinical practice.

Pharmacist-led medication reviews in pre-dialysis and dialysis patients.

BACKGROUND: Pre-dialysis and dialysis patients are at risk for drug related problems (DRPs) due to a high incidence of comorbidities. Pharmacist-led medication reviews might reduce the number of DRPs. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate pharmacist-led medication reviews in pre-dialysis and dialysis patients by determining the number and type of DRPs, nephrologist acceptance of pharmacist interventions and time investment. METHODS: From September 2017 until December 2018, pharmacist-led medication reviews were performed on pre-dialysis and dialysis patients. DRPs (medication discrepancies, prescribing issues related to drug and dose selection, drug use problems) were identified using the pharmacists' expert opinion and the STOPP/START criteria. Number and type of accepted pharmacist interventions, sustainability of interventions after at least 1 month and time investment were determined. Practical barriers in the process were appraised. RESULTS: One-hundred twenty five patients were reviewed: 37 pre-dialysis and 88 dialysis patients. In 100 (80%) patients 277 medication discrepancies were identified of which 224 (81%) were accepted by the nephrologist. Pharmacists suggested 422 interventions concerning drug or dose selection for 115 patients; 106 interventions were accepted by the nephrologist, which resulted in 60 patients having medication changed. Ninety percent of those changes remained implemented on follow-up after at least 1 month. In 46 (37%) patients, the clinical pharmacist detected DRPs concerning the drug use process and performed patient counseling. The average time investment was 85 min per patient for the clinical pharmacist and 15 min for the nephrologist. Besides time investment, unclear responsibility for medication management due to multiple prescribers was an important barrier in the process and the main reason for nephrologists to reject pharmacist interventions. CONCLUSION: Pharmacist-led medication reviews in pre-dialysis and dialysis patients led to medication changes in half of the patients. However, efficiency should be improved before adopting pharmacist-led medication reviews into clinical practice.

Extracorporeal treatment of metforminassociated lactic acidosis in clinical practice: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: To assess whether extracorporeal treatment (ECTR) improves outcome of patients with metformin-associated lactic acidosis (MALA) and to evaluate the clinical applicability of the Extracorporeal Treatments in Poisoning Workgroup (EXTRIP) criteria for starting ECTR in metformin poisoning. METHODS: Patients with metformin serum concentrations above 2 mg/l who were admitted in the Deventer Teaching Hospital between January 2000 and July 2019 and complied with the definition of MALA (pH < 7.35 and lactate concentration > 5 mmol/l) were included. Mortality and clinical parameters of patients treated with ECTR or not were compared. In addition, treatment of MALA in clinical practice was verified against the criteria of EXTRIP. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were included. Lactate (13.8 versus 10.5 mmol/l, p = 0.01), creatinine (575 versus 254 umol/l, p < 0.01)), metformin (29.4 versus 8.6 mg/l, p < 0.01) concentrations, and vasopressor requirement (72% versus 23%, p < 0.01) were significantly higher in the ECTR-group. Blood pH (7.05 versus 7.19, p = 0.03) and bicarbonate (6 versus 11 mmol/l, p < 0.01) were significantly lower. Mortality, length of hospital stay, and mechanical ventilation requirement were not statistically different. In 83% of patients, treatment of MALA was in accordance with the EXTRIP criteria. CONCLUSIONS: Although there was no statistical benefit in mortality shown from ECTR, ECTR might be lifesaving in MALA, considering the ECTR-group was significantly sicker than the non-ECTR-group. The majority of patients were treated in line with the EXTRIP criteria. Severity of lactic acidosis and renal impairment were the main indications for initiating ECTR.

Quantification of cobimetinib, cabozantinib, dabrafenib, niraparib, olaparib, vemurafenib, regorafenib and its metabolite regorafenib M2 in human plasma by UPLC-MS/MS.

A sensitive and selective ultra-high performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS) method for the simultaneous determination of seven oral oncolytics (two PARP inhibitors, i.e. olaparib and niraparib, and five tyrosine kinase inhibitors, i.e. cobimetinib, cabozantinib, dabrafenib, vemurafenib and regorafenib, plus its active metabolite regorafenib M2) in EDTA plasma was developed and validated. Stable isotope-labelled internal standards were used for each analyte. A simple protein precipitation method was performed with acetonitrile. The LC-MS/MS system consisted of an Acquity H-Class UPLC system, coupled to a Xevo TQ-S micro tandem mass spectrometer. The compounds were separated on a Waters CORTECS UPLC C18 column (2.1 × 50 mm, 1.6 µm particle size) and eluted with a gradient elution system. The ions were detected in the multiple reaction monitoring mode. The method was validated for cobimetinib, cabozantinib, dabrafenib, niraparib, olaparib, vemurafenib, regorafenib and regorafenib M2 over the ranges 6-1000, 100-5000, 10-4000, 200-2000, 200-20,000, 5000-100,000, 500-10,000 and 500-10,000 µg/L, respectively. Within-day accuracy values for all analytes ranged from 86.8 to 115.0% with a precision of <10.4%. Between-day accuracy values ranged between 89.7 and 111.9% with a between-day precision of <7.4%. The developed method was successfully used for guiding therapy with therapeutic drug monitoring in cancer patients and clinical research programs in our laboratory.

The Effect of Using Pazopanib With Food vs. Fasted on Pharmacokinetics, Patient Safety, and Preference (DIET Study).

Pazopanib is taken fasted in a fixed oral daily dose of 800 mg. We hypothesized that ingesting pazopanib with food may improve patients' comfort and reduce gastrointestinal (GI) adverse events. Therefore, we investigated the bioequivalent dose of pazopanib when taken with food compared with 800 mg pazopanib taken fasted. In addition, we investigated the differences in GI toxicity, patient satisfaction, and patient's preference for either intake. The intake of 600 mg pazopanib with food resulted in a bioequivalent exposure and was preferred over a standard pazopanib dose without food. No differences were seen in GI toxicities under both intake regimens. Patients seem to be more positive about their feelings about side effects and satisfaction with their therapy when pazopanib was taken with food. Forty-one of the patients (68%) preferred the intake with a continental breakfast.

Dose recommendations for anticancer drugs in patients with renal or hepatic impairment.

Renal or hepatic impairment is a common comorbidity for patients with cancer either because of the disease itself, toxicity of previous anticancer treatments, or because of other factors affecting organ function, such as increased age. Because renal and hepatic function are among the main determinants of drug exposure, the pharmacokinetic profile might be altered for patients with cancer who have renal or hepatic impairment, necessitating dose adjustments. Most anticancer drugs are dosed near their maximum tolerated dose and are characterised by a narrow therapeutic index. Consequently, selecting an adequate dose for patients who have either hepatic or renal impairment, or both, is challenging and definitive recommendations on dose adjustments are scarce. In this Review, we discuss the effect of renal and hepatic impairment on the pharmacokinetics of anticancer drugs. To guide clinicians in selecting appropriate dose adjustments, information from available drug labels and from the published literature were combined to provide a practical set of recommendations for dose adjustments of 160 anticancer drugs for patients with hepatic and renal impairment.

Clinically relevant drug interactions with multikinase inhibitors: a review.

Multikinase inhibitors (MKIs), including the tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), have rapidly become an established factor in daily (hemato)-oncology practice. Although the oral route of administration offers improved flexibility and convenience for the patient, challenges arise in the use of MKIs. As MKIs are prescribed extensively, patients are at increased risk for (severe) drug-drug interactions (DDIs). As a result of these DDIs, plasma pharmacokinetics of MKIs may vary significantly, thereby leading to high interpatient variability and subsequent risk for increased toxicity or a diminished therapeutic outcome. Most clinically relevant DDIs with MKIs concern altered absorption and metabolism. The absorption of MKIs may be decreased by concomitant use of gastric acid-suppressive agents (e.g. proton pump inhibitors) as many kinase inhibitors show pH-dependent solubility. In addition, DDIs concerning drug (uptake and efflux) transporters may be of significant clinical relevance during MKI therapy. Furthermore, since many MKIs are substrates for cytochrome P450 isoenzymes (CYPs), induction or inhibition with strong CYP inhibitors or inducers may lead to significant alterations in MKI exposure. In conclusion, DDIs are of major concern during MKI therapy and need to be monitored closely in clinical practice. Based on the current knowledge and available literature, practical recommendations for management of these DDIs in clinical practice are presented in this review.