Comparison of two primer-probe sets of Fusobacterium nucleatum using droplet digital polymerase chain reaction for the detection of colorectal neoplasia from faecal samples.

BACKGROUND: Although faecal DNA testing of Fusobacterium nucleatum (Fn) is expected to be useful for colorectal neoplasia detection, there is no standardized quantification method of Fn. We performed this study to establish a possible standardized method. METHODS: In this study, 322 participants including 71 subjects without colorectal neoplasia (control group), 31 patients with non-advanced colorectal adenoma, 93 patients with advanced colorectal adenoma, and 127 patients with colorectal cancer were enrolled. Faecal Fn were quantified by droplet digital PCR (ddPCR) using two PCR primer-probe sets reported previously that are tentatively named Fn1 and Fn2. Fn1 has been used in ddPCR by us and Fn2 has been widely used in quantitative real-time PCR. RESULTS: The Fn copy number using Fn1 was five times higher than that using Fn2, with a linear relationship shown between them. Receiver operating characteristic curve analysis showed the area under the curve (AUC) to be almost the same between Fn1 and Fn2 in discriminating between the control group and the colorectal cancer group (AUC = 0.81 and 0.81, respectively), and between the control/non-advanced colorectal adenoma group and the advanced colorectal adenoma/colorectal cancer group (AUC = 0.74 and 0.74, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: As the diagnostic performance was quite similar between Fn1 and Fn2, ddPCR-based Fn testing using Fn1 and Fn2 could be a possible standardized method for a colorectal neoplasia screening test, considering that Fn levels quantified by Fn1 are about five times higher than those by Fn2.

Population pharmacokinetic analysis of diurnal and seasonal variations of plasma concentrations of cilostazol in healthy volunteers.

BACKGROUND: The background of this study was (1) to examine factors influencing cilostazol pharmacokinetics by developing a population model incorporating diurnal variation and other covariate effects and (2) to assess the feasibility of applying the developed model to determine the optimal dosing times. METHODS: Data obtained from a cilostazol pharmacokinetic study consisting of 2 clinical trials (a single twice-a-day (BID) dosing trial in winter and a multiple BID dosing trial in summer) conducted in healthy Korean subjects were used for model building. A basic model was built, followed by a diurnal variation model, and then a final model was built incorporating covariates, including a seasonal difference. The optimal morning and evening dosing times were determined from simulations. RESULTS: Diurnal variation in cilostazol pharmacokinetics was explained by the morning absorption rate constant being faster than in the evening, yielding values of 0.278 versus 0.234/h in summer, when 24- and 12-hour circadian rhythms were included in the model. The seasonal variation was explained by a 26.9% and a 31.8% decrease in the absorption rate constant and clearance, respectively, in winter compared with summer. Based on twice-a-day (BID) dosing, dosing times of 9 AM and 5 PM in summer and 10 AM and 7 PM in winter were expected to produce the smallest peak-to-peak fluctuations in cilostazol concentration, possibly minimizing unwanted effects of the drug. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the intraday and interseasonal time-varying nature of cilostazol pharmacokinetics using a population modeling approach and developed a strategy for optimizing dosing times. It is suggested that these methods can be similarly applied to analyses and controls of other drugs that exhibit characteristics of time-varying pharmacokinetics.