Search

Aims: Pregnancy after kidney transplantation is realistic but immunosuppressants should be continued to prevent rejection. Tacrolimus is safe during pregnancy and is routinely dosed based on whole-blood predose concentrations. However, maintaining these concentrations is complicated as physiological changes during pregnancy affect tacrolimus pharmacokinetics. The aim of this study was to describe tacrolimus pharmacokinetics throughout pregnancy and explain the changes by investigating covariates in a population pharmacokinetic model. Methods: Data of pregnant women using a twice-daily tacrolimus formulation following kidney transplantation were retrospectively collected from 6 months before conception, throughout gestation and up to 6 months postpartum. Pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using nonlinear mixed effects modelling. Demographic, clinical and genetic parameters were evaluated as covariates. The final model was evaluated using goodness-of-fit plots, visual predictive checks and a bootstrap analysis. Results: A total of 260 whole-blood tacrolimus predose concentrations from 14 pregnant kidney transplant recipients were included. Clearance increased during pregnancy from 34.5 to 41.7 L/h, by 15, 19 and 21% in the first, second and third trimester, respectively, compared to prior to pregnancy. This indicates a required increase in the tacrolimus dose by the same percentage to maintain the prepregnancy concentration. Haematocrit and gestational age were negatively correlated with tacrolimus clearance (P ≤ 0.01), explaining 18% of interindividual and 85% of interoccasion variability in oral clearance.Conclusions: Tacrolimus clearance increases during pregnancy, resulting in decreased exposure to tacrolimus, which is explained by gestational age and haematocrit. To maintain prepregnancy target whole-blood tacrolimus predose concentrations during pregnancy, increasing the dose is

Pharmacogenetics (PGx) can explain/predict drug therapy outcomes. There is, however, unclarity about the use and usefulness of PGx in primary care. In this study, we investigated PGx tests ordered by general practitioners (GPs) in 2021 at Dept. Clinical Chemistry, Erasmus MC, and analyzed the gene tests ordered, drugs/drug groups, reasons for testing and single-gene versus panel testing. Additionally, a survey was sent to 90 GPs asking about their experiences and barriers to implementing PGx. In total, 1206 patients and 6300 PGx tests were requested by GPs. CYP2C19 was requested most frequently (17%), and clopidogrel was the most commonly indicated drug (23%). Regarding drug groups, antidepressants (51%) were the main driver for requesting PGx, followed by antihypertensives (26%). Side effects (79%) and non-response (27%) were the main indicators. Panel testing was preferred over single-gene testing. The survey revealed knowledge on when and how to use PGx as one of the main barriers. In conclusion, PGx is currently used by GPs in clinical practice in the Netherlands. Side effects are the main reason for testing, which mostly involves antidepressants. Lack of knowledge is indicated as a major barrier, indicating the need for more education on PGx for GPs.

Background and objective: Side effects of irinotecan treatment can be dose limiting and may impair quality of life. In this study, we investigated the correlation between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes encoding enzymes involved in the irinotecan metabolism and transport, outside UGT1A1, and irinotecan-related toxicity. We focused on carboxylesterases, which are involved in formation of the active metabolite SN-38 and on drug transporters. Methods: Patients who provided written informed consent at the Erasmus Medical Center Cancer Institute to the Code Geno study (local protocol: MEC02-1002) or the IRI28-study (NTR-6612) were enrolled in the study and were genotyped for 15 SNPs in the genes CES1, CES2, SLCO1B1, ABCB1, ABCC2, and ABCG2. Results: From 299 evaluable patients, 86 patients (28.8%) developed severe irinotecan-related toxicity. A significantly higher risk of toxicity was seen in ABCG2 c.421C>A variant allele carriers (P = 0.030, OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.06–3.34). Higher age was associated with all grade diarrhea (P = 0.041, OR 1.03, 95% CI 1.00–1.06). In addition, CES1 c.1165-41C>T and CES1 n.95346T>C variant allele carriers had a lower risk of all-grade thrombocytopenia (P = 0.024, OR 0.42, 95% CI 0.20–0.90 and P = 0.018, OR 0.23, 95% CI 0.08–0.79, respectively). Conclusion: Our study indicates that ABCG2 and CES1 SNPs might be used as predictive markers for irinotecan-induced toxicity.

Introduction: A genetic variant explaining a part of the exposure of many kinase inhibitors (KIs) is the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) CYP3A4*22, resulting in less CYP3A4 enzyme activity. The primary aim of this study was to investigate if the systemic exposure is non-inferior after a dose reduction of KIs metabolized by CYP3A4 in CYP3A4*22 carriers compared to patients without this SNP (i.e., wildtype patients) receiving the standard dose. Methods: In this multicenter, prospective, non-inferiority study, patients were screened for the presence of CYP3A4*22. Patients with the CYP3A4*22 SNP received a 20–33% dose reduction. At steady state, a pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed and compared to the PK results from wildtype patients treated with the registered dose using a two-stage individual patient data meta-analysis approach. Results: In total, 207 patients were included in the final analysis. The CYP3A4*22 SNP was found in 16% of the patients in the final analysis (n = 34). Most of the included patients received imatinib (37%) or pazopanib (22%) treatment. The overall geometric mean ratio (GMR) comparing the exposure of the CYP3A4*22 carriers to the exposure of the wildtype CYP3A4 patients was 0.89 (90% confidence interval: 0.77–1.03). Conclusion: Non-inferiority could not be proven for dose reduction of KIs metabolized by CYP3A4 in CYP3A4*22 carriers compared to the registered dose in wildtype patients. Therefore, an up-front dose reduction based upon the CYP3A4*22 SNP for all KIs does not seem an eligible new way of personalized therapy. Trial Registration: International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal; number NL7514; registered 11/02/2019.

Background: In heart transplant recipients, donor-derived cell-free DNA (ddcfDNA) is a potential biomarker for acute rejection (AR), in that increased values may indicate rejection. For the assessment of ddcfDNA as new biomarker for rejection, blood plasma sampling around the endomyocardial biopsy (EMB) seems a practical approach. To evaluate the effect of the EMB procedure on ddcfDNA values, ddcfDNA values before the EMB were pairwise compared to ddcfDNA values after the EMB. We aimed at evaluating whether it matters whether the ddcfDNA sampling is done before or after the EMB-procedure. Methods: Plasma samples from heart transplant recipients were obtained pre-EMB and post-EMB. A droplet digital PCR method was used for measuring ddcfDNA, making use of single-nucleotide polymorphisms that allowed both relative quantification, as well as absolute quantification of ddcfDNA. Results: Pairwise comparison of ddcfDNA values pre-EMB with post-EMB samples (n = 113) showed significantly increased ddcfDNA concentrations and ddcfDNA% in post-EMB samples: an average 1.28-fold increase in ddcfDNA concentrations and a 1.31-fold increase in ddcfDNA% was observed (p = 0.007 and p = 0.03, respectively). Conclusion: The EMB procedure causes iatrogenic injury to the allograft that results in an increase in ddcfDNA% and ddcfDNA concentrations. For the assessment of ddcfDNA as marker for AR, collection of plasma samples before the EMB procedure is therefore essential.

Cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) is the most important drug metabolizing enzyme in the liver, responsible for the oxidative metabolism of ∼50% of clinically prescribed drugs. Therefore, genetic variation in CYP3A4 could potentially affect the pharmacokinetics, toxicity and clinical outcome of drug treatment. Thus far, pharmacogenetics for CYP3A4 has not received much attention. However, the recent discovery of the intron 6 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs35599367C > T, encoding the CYP3A4∗22 allele, led to several studies into the pharmacogenetic effect of CYP3A4∗22 on different drugs. This allele has a relatively minor allele frequency of 3-5% and an effect on CYP3A4 enzymatic activity. Thus far, no review summarizing the data published on several drugs is available yet. This article therefore addresses the current knowledge on CYP3A4∗22. This information may help in deciding if, and for which drugs, CYP3A4∗22 genotype-based dosing could be helpful in improving drug therapy. CYP3A4∗22 was shown to significantly influence the pharmacokinetics of several drugs, with currently being most thoroughly investigated tacrolimus, cyclosporine, and statins. Additional studies, focusing on toxicity and clinical outcome, are warranted to demonstrate clinical utility of CYP3A4∗22 genotype-based dosing.

Cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) is the most important drug metabolizing enzyme in the liver, responsible for the oxidative metabolism of ∼50% of clinically prescribed drugs. Therefore, genetic variation in CYP3A4 could potentially affect the pharmacokinetics, toxicity and clinical outcome of drug treatment. Thus far, pharmacogenetics for CYP3A4 has not received much attention. However, the recent discovery of the intron 6 single-nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) rs35599367C > T, encoding the CYP3A4∗22 allele, led to several studies into the pharmacogenetic effect of CYP3A4∗22 on different drugs. This allele has a relatively minor allele frequency of 3-5% and an effect on CYP3A4 enzymatic activity. Thus far, no review summarizing the data published on several drugs is available yet. This article therefore addresses the current knowledge on CYP3A4∗22. This information may help in deciding if, and for which drugs, CYP3A4∗22 genotype-based dosing could be helpful in improving drug therapy. CYP3A4∗22 was shown to significantly influence the pharmacokinetics of several drugs, with currently being most thoroughly investigated tacrolimus, cyclosporine, and statins. Additional studies, focusing on toxicity and clinical outcome, are warranted to demonstrate clinical utility of CYP3A4∗22 genotype-based dosing.

BACKGROUND: Oral and subcutaneous morphine is widely used for the treatment of cancer-related pain; however, solid pharmacokinetic data on this practice are lacking. Furthermore, it is largely unknown which factors contribute to the variability in clearances of morphine and its metabolites and whether morphine clearance is related to treatment outcome. METHODS: Blood samples from 49 cancer patients treated with oral and/or subcutaneous morphine were prospectively collected and were used to develop a population pharmacokinetic model for morphine, morphine-3-glucuronide (M3G) and morphine-6-glucuronide (M6G). The influence of age, gender, renal function and several polymorphisms possibly related to the pharmacokinetics of the three compounds was investigated. In addition, the relation between treatment failure and morphine and metabolite clearances was explored. RESULTS: A one-compartment model including an extensive first-pass effect adequately described the data of morphine and its metabolites. Estimated mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) ratios following oral versus subcutaneous administration were: M3G/morphine 29.7:1 vs. 11.1:1; M6G/morphine 5.26:1 vs. 1.95:1; and M3G/M6G 5.65:1 vs. 5.70:1. Renal function was significantly correlated with clearance of the metabolites, which increased 0.602 L/h per every 10 mL/min/1.73 m(2) increase of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), reaching a plateau for eGFR >90 mL/min/1.73 m(2). The clearance of morphine or its metabolites was not found to be correlated with treatment failure. CONCLUSION: The influence of age-, gender- and pharmacokinetic-related polymorphisms was not identified on the pharmacokinetics of morphine. Clearance of morphine or its metabolites was not found to explain treatment outcome; however, large variations in plasma concentrations of morphine, M3G and M6G support further studies on the relation between plasma concentrations and treatment outcome. Dutch Trial Register ID, De två första författarna delar förstaförfattarskapet.