Search

Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) holds promise as a biomarker for guiding adjuvant treatment decisions in solid tumors. This review systematically assembles ongoing and published trials investigating ctDNA-directed adjuvant treatment strategies. A total of 57 phase II/III trials focusing on ctDNA in minimal residual disease (MRD) detection were identified, with a notable increase in initiation over recent years. Most trials target stage II or III colon/colorectal cancer, followed by breast cancer and non-small cell lung cancer. Trial methodologies vary, with some randomizing ctDNA-positive patients between standard-of-care (SoC) treatment and intensified regimens, while others aim to de-escalate therapy in ctDNA-negative patients. Challenges in trial design include the need for randomized controlled trials to establish clinical utility for ctDNA, ensuring adherence to standard treatment in control arms, and addressing the ethical dilemma of withholding treatment in high-risk ctDNA-positive patients. Longitudinal ctDNA surveillance emerges as a strategy to improve sensitivity for recurrence, particularly in less proliferative tumor types. However, ctDNA as longitudinal marker is often not validated yet. Ultimately, designing effective ctDNA interventional trials requires careful consideration of feasibility, meaningful outcomes, and potential impact on patient care.

Background and Objectives: Trifluridine/tipiracil, registered for the treatment of patients with metastatic gastric and colorectal cancer, is a substrate and inhibitor for the organic cation transporter 2 (OCT2) and the multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (MATE1), which raises the potential for drug–drug interactions with other OCT2/MATE1 modulators. Therefore, we prospectively examined the effect of an OCT2/MATE1 inhibitor (cimetidine) and substrate (metformin) on the pharmacokinetics of trifluridine. Methods: In this three-phase crossover study, patients with metastatic colorectal or gastric cancer were sequentially treated with trifluridine/tipiracil alone (phase A), trifluridine/tipiracil concomitant with metformin (phase B) and trifluridine/tipiracil concomitant with cimetidine (phase C). The primary endpoint was the relative difference in exposure of trifluridine assessed by the area under the curve from timepoint zero to infinity. A > 30% change in exposure was considered clinically relevant. A p-value of < 0.025 was considered significant because of a Bonferroni correction. Results: Eighteen patients were included in the analysis. Metformin did not significantly alter the exposure to trifluridine (− 12.6%; 97.5% confidence interval − 25.0, 1.8; p = 0.045). Cimetidine did alter the exposure to trifluridine significantly (+ 18.0%; 97.5% confidence interval 4.5, 33.3; p = 0.004), but this increase did not meet our threshold for clinical relevance. Metformin trough concentrations were not influenced by trifluridine/tipiracil. Conclusions: Our result suggests that the OCT2/MATE1 modulators cimetidine and metformin can be co-administered with trifluridine/tipiracil without clinically relevant effects on drug exposure. Clinical Trial Registration: NL8067 (registered 04-10-2019).

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.

Multiple prognostic biomarkers, including circulating tumour cell (CTC) counts, exist in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients, but none of them have been implemented into daily clinical care. The modified fast aneuploidy screening test-sequencing system (mFast-SeqS), which yields a genome-wide aneuploidy score, is able to reflect the fraction of cell-free tumour DNA (ctDNA) within cell-free DNA (cfDNA) and may be a promising biomarker in mCRPC. In this study, we investigated the prognostic value of dichotomized aneuploidy scores (< 5 vs. ≥ 5) as well as CTC counts (< 5 vs. ≥ 5) in 131 mCRPC patients prior to treatment with cabazitaxel. We validated our findings in an independent cohort of 50 similarly treated mCRPC patients. We observed that, similar to the dichotomized CTC count [HR: 2.92; 95% confidence interval (CI);1.84–4.62], dichotomized aneuploidy scores (HR: 3.24; CI: 2.12–4.94) significantly correlated with overall survival in mCRPC patients. We conclude that a dichotomized aneuploidy score from cfDNA is a prognostic marker for survival in mCRPC patients within our discovery cohort and in an independent mCRPC validation cohort. Therefore, this easy and robust minimally-invasive assay can be readily implemented as a prognostic marker in mCRPC. A dichotomized aneuploidy score might also be used as a stratification factor in clinical studies to account for tumour load.

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.

Polypharmacy is becoming increasingly prevalent in society. Patients with polypharmacy are at greater risk for drug-drug interactions, which can influence the efficacy of treatment. Especially, in oncology this is a concern since neoplasms are increasing prevalent with age, as well as polypharmacy is. Besides drug-drug interactions, also herb-drug and food-drug interactions could be present. Knowledge of these interactions is of great importance for safe and effective anti-cancer treatment, because the therapeutic window of most of these oncologic drugs are small. To study pharmacokinetic interaction effects, a cross-over pharmacokinetic study is a widely used, efficient and scientifically robust design. Yet, several aspects need to be considered when carrying out an interaction study. This includes the knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages of a cross-over design. Furthermore, determination of the end point and research question of interest, calculation of the required sample size, analysis of the generated data with a robust statistical plan and consideration of the logtransformation for some pharmacokinetic parameters are important aspects to consider. Even though some guidelines exist regarding these key issues, no clear overview exists. In this article an overview of these aspects is provided and their effect is discussed.

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) metastases are present in approximately 40% of patients with metastatic epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated (EGFRm+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor osimertinib is a substrate of transporters ABCB1 and ABCG2 and metabolized by CYP3A4. We investigated relationships between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) ABCB1 3435C>T, ABCG2 421C>A and 34G>A, and CYP3A4∗22 and CNS treatment efficacy of osimertinib in EGFRm+ NSCLC patients. Methods: Patients who started treatment with osimertinib for EGFRm+ NSCLC between November 2014 and June 2021 were included in this retrospective observational multicentre cohort study. For patients with baseline CNS metastases, the primary endpoint was CNS progression-free survival (CNS-PFS; time from osimertinib start until CNS disease progression or death). For patients with no or unknown baseline CNS metastases, the primary endpoint was CNS disease-free survival (CNS-DFS; time from osimertinib start until occurrence of new CNS metastases). Relationships between SNPs and baseline characteristics with CNS-PFS and CNS-DFS were studied with competing-risks survival analysis. Secondary endpoints were relationships between SNPs and PFS, overall survival, severe toxicity, and osimertinib pharmacokinetics. Findings: From 572 included patients, 201 had baseline CNS metastases. No SNP was associated with CNS-PFS. Genotype ABCG2 34GA/AA and/or ABCB1 3435CC --present in 35% of patients-- was significantly associated with decreased CNS-DFS (hazard ratio 0.28; 95% CI 0.11–0.73; p = 0.009) in the multivariate analysis. This remained significant after applying a Bonferroni correction and internal validation through bootstrapping. ABCG2 421CA/AA was related to more severe toxicity (27.0% versus 16.5%; p = 0.010). Interpretation: ABCG2 34G>A and ABCB1 3435C>T are predictors for developing new CNS metastases during osimertinib treatment, probably because

BACKGROUND: Melanoma brain metastasis (MBM) is associated with poor outcome, but targeted therapies (TTs) and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have revolutionized treatment over the past decade. We assessed the impact of these treatments in a real-world setting.METHODS: A single-center cohort study was performed at a large, tertiary referral center for melanoma (Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, the Netherlands). Overall survival (OS) was assessed before and after 2015, after which TTs and ICIs were increasingly prescribed.RESULTS: There were 430 patients with MBM included; 152 pre-2015 and 278 post-2015. Median OS improved from 4.4 to 6.9 months (HR 0.67, p < 0.001) after 2015. TTs and ICIs prior to MBM diagnosis were associated with poorer median OS as compared to no prior systemic treatment (TTs: 2.0 vs. 10.9 and ICIs: 4.2 vs. 7.9 months, p < 0.001). ICIs directly after MBM diagnosis were associated with improved median OS as compared to no direct ICIs (21.5 vs. 4.2 months, p < 0.001). Stereotactic radiotherapy (SRT; HR 0.49, p = 0.013) and ICIs (HR 0.32, p < 0.001) were independently associated with improved OS. CONCLUSION: After 2015, OS significantly improved for patients with MBM, especially with SRT and ICIs. Demonstrating a large survival benefit, ICIs should be considered first after MBM diagnosis, if clinically feasible.

Aim of the study: Occurrence of hand-foot syndrome (HFS) during capecitabine treatment often results in treatment interruptions (26 %) or treatment discontinuation (17 %), and can severely decrease quality of life. In this study, we investigated whether single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) in genes involved in capecitabine metabolism – other than DPYD – are associated with an increased risk for capecitabine-induced HFS. Methods: Patients treated with capecitabine according to standard of care were enrolled after providing written informed consent for genotyping purposes. Prospectively collected blood samples were used to extract genomic DNA, which was subsequently genotyped for SNPs in CES1, CES2 and CDA. SNPs and clinical baseline factors that were univariably associated with HFS with P ≤ 0.10, were tested in a multivariable model using logistic regression. Results: Of the 446 patients eligible for analysis, 146 (32.7 %) developed HFS, of whom 77 patients (17.3 %) experienced HFS ≥ grade 2. In the multivariable model, CES1 1165–33 C>A (rs2244613, minor allele frequency 19 %) and CDA 266 + 242 A>G (rs10916825, minor allele frequency 35 %) variant allele carriers were at higher risk of HFS ≥ grade 2 (OR 1.888; 95 %CI 1.075–3.315; P = 0.027 and OR 1.865; 95 %CI 1.087–3.200; P = 0.024, respectively). Conclusions: We showed that CES1 1165–33 C>A and CDA 266 + 242 A>G are significantly associated with HFS grade 2 and grade 3 in patients treated with capecitabine. Prospective studies should assess whether this increased risk can be mitigated in carriers of these SNPs, when pre-emptive genotyping is being followed by dose adjustment or by alternative treatment by a fluoropyrimidine that is not substrate to CES1, such as S1.

BACKGROUND: Anti-cancer vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors (VEGFI) frequently induce a rise in blood pressure (BP). The most effective treatment of this BP rise is currently unknown, and risk factors and its association with survival remain inconclusive. METHODS AND RESULTS: Baseline characteristics and BP readings were retrospectively collected from oncology patients who received oral VEGFI treatment (sorafenib, sunitinib, pazopanib, regorafenib, lenvatinib, or cabozantinib). Risk factors for a clinically relevant BP rise (increase of ≥20 mm Hg in systolic BP or ≥10 mm Hg in diastolic BP) were investigated via logistic regression (relative), efficacy of antihypertensives via unpaired t-tests, and association of BP rise with survival via Cox regression analysis. In total, 162 (47%) of 343 included patients developed a clinically relevant BP rise ≥7 days after VEGFI treatment initiation. Both calcium channel blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors effectively reduced systolic BP (−24.1 and −18.2 mm Hg, respectively) and diastolic BP (−12.0 and −11.0 mm Hg, respectively). Pazopanib therapy (odds ratio, 2.71 [95% CI, 1.35– 5.42; P=0.005], compared with sorafenib) and estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min per 1.73 m2 (OR, 1.75 [95% CI, 0.99– 3.18, P=0.054]) were risk factors for a BP rise, whereas a baseline BP ≥140/90 mm Hg associated with a lower risk (OR, 0.39 [95% CI, 0.25– 0.62, P<0.001]). Only for renal cell carcinoma, BP rise was associated with a substantially improved median overall survival compared with no BP rise: 45.4 versus 20.3 months, respectively, P=0.003. CONCLUSIONS: The type of VEGFI, baseline BP, and baseline estimated glomerular filtration rate determine the VEGFI-induced BP rise. Both calcium channel blockers and renin-angiotensin system inhibitors are effective antihypertensive treatments. Particularly in patients with renal cell carcinoma, a BP rise is associated with improved overall survival.