E Chatelut

Institut Claudius Regaud, Tolosa de Llenguadoc, Midi-Pyrénées, France

Are you E Chatelut?

Claim your profile

Publications (168)665.59 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background In the clinical development of oncology drugs, the recommended dose is usually determined using a 3 + 3 dose-escalation study design. However, this phase I design does not always adequately describe dose-toxicity relationships. Methods 125 patients, with either solid tumours or lymphoma, were included in the study and 1217 platelet counts were available over three treatment cycles. The data was used to build a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PKPD) model using a sequential modeling approach. Model-derived Recommended Doses (MDRD) of abexinostat (a Histone Deacetylase Inhibitor) were determined from simulations of different administration schedules, and the higher bound for the probability of reaching these MDRD with a 3 + 3 design were obtained. Results The PKPD model developed adequately described platelet kinetics in both patient populations with the inclusion of two platelet baseline counts and a disease progression component for patients with lymphoma. Simulation results demonstrated that abexinostat administration during the first 4 days of each week in a 3-week cycle led to a higher MDRD compared to the other administration schedules tested, with a maximum probability of 40 % of reaching these MDRDs using a 3 + 3 design. Conclusions The PKPD model was able to predict thrombocytopenia following abexinostat administration in both patient populations. A model-based approach to determine the recommended dose in phase I trials is preferable due to the imprecision of the 3 + 3 design.
    Investigational New Drugs 05/2014; · 3.50 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Most anticancer drugs are characterised by a steep dose-response relationship and narrow therapeutic window. Inter-individual pharmacokinetic (PK) variability is often substantial. The most relevant PK parameter for cytotoxic drugs is the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC). Thus it is somewhat surprising that therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is still uncommon for the majority of agents. Goals of the review were to assess the rationale for more widely used TDM of cytotoxics in oncology. There are several reasons why TDM has never been fully implemented into daily oncology practice. These include difficulties in establishing appropriate concentration target ranges, common use of combination chemotherapies for many tumour types, analytical challenges with prodrugs, intracellular compounds, the paucity of published data from pharmacological trials and 'Day1=Day21' administration schedules. There are some specific situations for which these limitations are overcome, including high dose methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil infusion, mitotane and some high dose chemotherapy regimens. TDM in paediatric oncology represents an important challenge. Established TDM approaches includes the widely used anticancer agents carboplatin, busulfan and methotrexate, with 13-cis-retinoic acid also recently of interest. Considerable effort should be made to better define concentration-effect relationships and to utilise tools such as population PK/PD models and comparative randomised trials of classic dosing versus pharmacokinetically guided adaptive dosing. There is an important heterogeneity among clinical practices and a strong need to promote TDM guidelines among the oncological community.
    European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 05/2014; · 4.12 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) can be defined as the measurement of drug in biological samples to individualise treatment by adapting drug dose to improve efficacy and/or reduce toxicity. The cytotoxic drugs are characterised by steep dose-response relationships and narrow therapeutic windows. Inter-individual pharmacokinetic (PK) variability is often substantial. There are, however, a multitude of reasons why TDM has never been fully implemented in daily oncology practice. These include difficulties in establishing appropriate concentration target, common use of combination chemotherapies and the paucity of published data from pharmacological trials. The situation is different with targeted therapies. The large interindividual PK variability is influenced by the pharmacogenetic background of the patient (e.g. cytochrome P450 and ABC transporters polymorphisms), patient characteristics such as adherence to treatment and environmental factors (drug-drug interactions). Retrospective studies have shown that targeted drug exposure correlates with treatment response in various cancers. Evidence for imatinib currently exists, others are emerging for compounds including nilotinib, dasatinib, erlotinib, sunitinib, sorafenib and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors. Applications for TDM during oral targeted therapies may best be reserved for particular situations including lack of therapeutic response, severe or unexpected toxicities, anticipated drug-drug interactions and concerns over adherence treatment. There are still few data with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in favour of TDM approaches, even if data showed encouraging results with rituximab and cetuximab. TDM of mAbs is not yet supported by scientific evidence. Considerable effort should be made for targeted therapies to better define concentration-effect relationships and to perform comparative randomised trials of classic dosing versus pharmacokinetically-guided adaptive dosing.
    European journal of cancer (Oxford, England: 1990) 05/2014; · 4.12 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Voriconazole (VOR) is a triazole antifungal used in the curative treatment of invasive fungal infections (IFI) and the prophylactic treatment of opportunistic fungal infections in immunocompromised patients. It is a drug for which therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is highly recommended. In order to determine the best TDM marker, the pharmacologically active form of the drug, represented by the unbound plasma concentration (Cu) and fraction (fu), has been studied using a method based on ultrafiltration and ultra performance liquid chromatography. As albumin is a likely factor inducing fluctuations in fu, the correlation between albumin levels and fu was carried out. Similarly, correlations between trough plasma concentrations (total concentration (Ct) and Cu) and both efficacy and safety markers were determined. Efficacy evaluation was based on monitoring fungal antigens and cultures, while safety was monitored by measuring bilirubin levels. In vitro, using blank human plasma, the mean fu was determined at 32.3 ± 5.5% while in patients' plasmas treated with VOR, the median (5-95 percentiles) of the unbound VOR fraction was 22.95 % (14.95 - 38.42 %). A high correlation was found (rho=0.956, p<0.001) between Ct and Cu, though there was no correlation between serum albumin levels and fu, except for some patients with severe hypoalbuminemia (< 25 g/L). Based on efficacy/safety correlations, a therapeutic window has been defined ranging from 4.5 to 6.5 mg/L and 1.5 and 2.0 mg/L for trough Ct and Cu, respectively. For the first time, the relevance of new pharmacokinetic parameters such as Cu and fu have been explored and discussed, and our results support the current TDM protocol for VOR.
    Therapeutic drug monitoring 05/2014; · 2.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A combination of monoclonal antibody that binds and inhibits effects induced by vascular endothelial growth factor and tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor represents a promising concept to block pathological angiogenesis completely. A phase I study combining daily oral pazopanib and bevacizumab (given iv every 2 weeks) was performed in order to determine the maximum tolerated dose of the two drugs in combination. Pazopanib pharmacokinetics were evaluated to compare pharmacokinetic parameters given alone and those observed on the day of the bevacizumab administration. Plasma pazopanib concentrations were obtained in 25 patients treated at two dose levels (400 or 600 mg) at Day 1 (given alone) and Day 15 (the day of the 7.5 mg/kg bevacizumab infusion), and analyzed using the NONMEM program. The apparent oral clearance (CL/F, mean value of 0.60 L/h) presented an inter-individual variability of 40 %, and an inter-occasion of 27 %. A modest but statistically significant decrease in CL/F was observed from Day 1 to Day 15 (-16.4, 95 % confidence interval of -8.5 to -27.2 %). However, trough pazopanib concentrations observed at Day 16 (24 h after the bevacizumab iv infusion) were not significantly higher than those observed just before the beginning of the bevacizumab iv infusion, suggesting that the pharmacokinetic change between Day 1 and Day 15 was not due to an interaction of bevacizumab. Overall, the mean observed concentrations at the maximum tolerated pazopanib dose (600 mg) at both Day 1 and Day 15 were higher than those observed at 800 mg once daily level (corresponding to the recommended dose when given alone) during the first-in-man phase 1 study of pazopanib in monochemotherapy. This first population pharmacokinetic analysis of pazopanib shows that inter-individual and inter-study pharmacokinetic variability emphasize the need for further evaluation of therapeutic drug monitoring for pazopanib as suggested for other tyrosine kinase inhibitors.
    Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology 04/2014; · 2.80 Impact Factor
  • E Chatelut, F Puisset
    Clinical Pharmacology &#38 Therapeutics 04/2014; 95(4):359-61. · 6.85 Impact Factor
  • Florent Puisset, Antonin Schmitt, Etienne Chatelut
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Platinum compounds represent a pharmacological class essential for the treatment of certain types of cancer. Cisplatin, carboplatin, and oxaliplatin, share some physiochemical and pharmacological properties, in particular the ability to form DNA adducts. Carboplatin may be considered as an analog of cisplatin, but its pharmacokinetic properties, side-effects, and intrinsic activity are significantly different from those of cisplatin. The choice of one of these two compounds may be made rationally based on the individual patient's characteristics.
    Anticancer research 01/2014; 34(1):465-470. · 1.71 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Most anticancer drugs are characterised by a steep dose–response relationship and narrow therapeutic window. Inter-individual pharmacokinetic (PK) variability is often substantial. The most relevant PK parameter for cytotoxic drugs is the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC). Thus it is somewhat surprising that therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) is still uncommon for the majority of agents. Goals of the review were to assess the rationale for more widely used TDM of cytotoxics in oncology. There are several reasons why TDM has never been fully implemented into daily oncology practice. These include difficulties in establishing appropriate concentration target ranges, common use of combination chemotherapies for many tumour types, analytical challenges with prodrugs, intracellular compounds, the paucity of published data from pharmacological trials and ‘Day1 = Day21’ administration schedules. There are some specific situations for which these limitations are overcome, including high dose methotrexate, 5-fluorouracil infusion, mitotane and some high dose chemotherapy regimens. TDM in paediatric oncology represents an important challenge. Established TDM approaches includes the widely used anticancer agents carboplatin, busulfan and methotrexate, with 13-cis-retinoic acid also recently of interest. Considerable effort should be made to better define concentration–effect relationships and to utilise tools such as population PK/PD models and comparative randomised trials of classic dosing versus pharmacokinetically guided adaptive dosing. There is an important heterogeneity among clinical practices and a strong need to promote TDM guidelines among the oncological community.
    European Journal of Cancer. 01/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Most of oral targeted therapies are tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs). Oral administration generates a complex step in the pharmacokinetics (PK) of these drugs. Inter-individual PK variability is often large and variability observed in response is influenced not only by the genetic heterogeneity of drug targets, but also by the pharmacogenetic background of the patient (e.g. cytochome P450 and ABC transporter polymorphisms), patient characteristics such as adherence to treatment and environmental factors (drug–drug interactions). Retrospective studies have shown that targeted drug exposure, reflected in the area under the plasma concentration–time curve (AUC) correlates with treatment response (efficacy/toxicity) in various cancers. Nevertheless levels of evidence for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) are however heterogeneous among these agents and TDM is still uncommon for the majority of them. Evidence for imatinib currently exists, others are emerging for compounds including nilotinib, dasatinib, erlotinib, sunitinib, sorafenib and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors. Applications for TDM during oral targeted therapies may best be reserved for particular situations including lack of therapeutic response, severe or unexpected toxicities, anticipated drug–drug interactions and/or concerns over adherence treatment. Interpatient PK variability observed with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) is comparable or slightly lower to that observed with TKIs. There are still few data with these agents in favour of TDM approaches, even if data showed encouraging results with rituximab, cetuximab and bevacizumab. At this time, TDM of mAbs is not yet supported by scientific evidence. Considerable effort should be made for targeted therapies to better define concentration–effect relationships and to perform comparative randomised trials of classic dosing versus pharmacokinetically-guided adaptive dosing.
    European Journal of Cancer. 01/2014;
  • M. Paludetto, E. Chatelut
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: L’irinotécan et le cisplatine sont deux médicaments anticancéreux dont les effets indésirables fréquents et sévères — toxicité hématologique et digestive pour l’irinotécan, ototoxicité pour le cisplatine — présentent une importante variabilité interindividuelle d’origine en partie génétique. Différentes études ont été mises en place pour identifier les déterminants génétiques de ces toxicités afin de prédire le risque de survenue d’effets indésirables et adapter le traitement en fonction du niveau de risque. Pour l’irinotécan, des recommandations de dose commencent à émerger des nombreux travaux réalisés sur les polymorphismes de l’UDP-glucuronosyl-transférase 1A1 (UGT1A1), principale enzyme impliquée dans la détoxification du métabolite actif de l’irinotécan, le SN-38. La découverte récente du rôle d’autres enzymes (notamment de la même sous-famille UGT1A) et transporteurs (en particulier de la superfamille ABC, ATP Binding Cassette) intervenant dans la pharmacocinétique de l’irinotécan risque de complexifier l’élaboration de telles recommandations. Pour le cisplatine, la détermination des gènes d’intérêt est encore en cours, car les résultats des différentes études restent controversés. Plusieurs gènes impliqués dans les processus intracellulaires de l’ototoxicité ont été évoqués, tels que les gènes des glutathions Stransférases (GST), de la mégaline, de la thiopurine méthyltransférase (TPMT), de la catéchol O-méthyltransférase (COMT) et du transporteur ABCC3, ces trois derniers ayant été intégrés dans un modèle de prédiction de l’ototoxicité. Pour l’irinotécan comme pour le cisplatine, des études complémentaires sont donc encore nécessaires pour atteindre une individualisation complète du traitement.
    Oncologie 01/2014; 16. · 0.10 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) can be defined as the measurement of drug in biological samples to individualise treatment by adapting drug dose to improve efficacy and/or reduce toxicity. The cytotoxic drugs are characterised by steep dose–response relationships and narrow therapeutic windows. Inter-individual pharmacokinetic (PK) variability is often substantial. There are, however, a multitude of reasons why TDM has never been fully implemented in daily oncology practice. These include difficulties in establishing appropriate concentration target, common use of combination chemotherapies and the paucity of published data from pharmacological trials. The situation is different with targeted therapies. The large interindividual PK variability is influenced by the pharmacogenetic background of the patient (e.g. cytochrome P450 and ABC transporters polymorphisms), patient characteristics such as adherence to treatment and environmental factors (drug–drug interactions). Retrospective studies have shown that targeted drug exposure correlates with treatment response in various cancers. Evidence for imatinib currently exists, others are emerging for compounds including nilotinib, dasatinib, erlotinib, sunitinib, sorafenib and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors. Applications for TDM during oral targeted therapies may best be reserved for particular situations including lack of therapeutic response, severe or unexpected toxicities, anticipated drug–drug interactions and concerns over adherence treatment. There are still few data with monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) in favour of TDM approaches, even if data showed encouraging results with rituximab and cetuximab. TDM of mAbs is not yet supported by scientific evidence. Considerable effort should be made for targeted therapies to better define concentration–effect relationships and to perform comparative randomised trials of classic dosing versus pharmacokinetically-guided adaptive dosing.
    European Journal of Cancer. 01/2014;
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We describe here the case of a 60-year old male patient treated for an extensive local progression of a pleiomorphic sarcoma on the right tibial crest with second-line trabectedin. Two cycles were administrated before a major liver toxicity was retrieved, with both cytolytic and cholestatic hepatitis quickly associated with irreversible jaundice. The radiological, histological, chemistry and pharmacogenetic investigations led us to diagnose chronic hepatobiliary toxicity with portal fibrosis, cholangiolitis damages and chronic hepatopathy. The patient had a deficient variant genotype of ABCC2 (c.-24TT, c.4488CT and c.4544GA), which has been suggested to play a role in excretion of toxic metabolites of trabectedin. This case report is, to our knowledge, the first description of trabectedin's irreversible liver toxicity in a human patient. Supported by a thorough review of the literature, this hepatitis is thought to have resulted from a multihit process involving genetic variants of ABC proteins and comedication.
    Pharmacogenomics 09/2013; 14(12):1389-96. · 3.86 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) is often used in cancer patients receiving cytotoxic drugs to prevent or reduce high grade neutropenia. We propose a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model to describe myelotoxicity in both G-CSF treated and non-treated patients that shall increase our understanding of G-CSF effects. The model was built from absolute neutrophil counts (ANC) obtained in 375 carboplatin-treated patients, 47 of whom received G-CSF. It includes some prior information on G-CSF taken from the literature. Simulations were performed to understand differences in G-CSF effects and explore the impact of G-CSF formulation. Our model well described the data in all patients. Model simulations showed that G-CSF was not as beneficial as expected in some patients. Furthermore, a longer and stronger effect was observed for the pegylated formulation in comparison with the daily standard formulation even if the latter was given for 11 consecutive days. The proposed model allows a mechanistic interpretation of G-CSF effects on ANC and raises the question of a systematic beneficial effect of G-CSF treatment. Other studies are needed to confirm these findings and help identifying patients for whom G-CSF is beneficial.
    Pharmaceutical Research 06/2013; · 4.74 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: A population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) model was developed to describe the thrombocytopenia (dose-limiting toxicity) of abexinostat, a new histone deacetylase inhibitor. An optimal administration schedule of the drug was determined using a simulation-based approach. METHODS: Early PK and PK/PD data were analysed using a sequential population modeling approach (NONMEM 7), allowing for the description of a PK profile and platelet-count decrease after abexinostat administration with various administration schedules. Simulations of platelet count with several administration schedules over 3-week treatment cycles (ASC) and over a day (ASD) were computed to define the optimal schedule that limits the depth of thrombocytopenia. RESULTS: An intermediate PK/PD model accurately described the data. The administration of abexinostat during the first 4 days of each week in a 3-week cycle resulted in fewer adverse events (with no influence of ASD on platelet count profiles), and corresponded to the optimal treatment schedule. This administration schedule was clinically evaluated in a phase I clinical trial and allowed for the definition of a new maximum tolerated dose (MTD), leading to a nearly 30% higher dose-intensity than that of another previously tested schedule. Lastly, a final model was built using all of the available data. CONCLUSIONS: The final model, characterizing the dose-effect and the dose-toxicity relationships, provides a useful modeling tool for clinical drug development.
    Pharmaceutical Research 06/2013; · 4.74 Impact Factor
  • Clinical Cancer Research 02/2013; · 7.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSE: The European Society for Medical Oncology recommends therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) for imatinib, based on total plasma concentrations in cases of sub-optimal response, failure, or adverse events. Imatinib is highly bound to alpha-1 acid glycoprotein (AGP) in the plasma. We determined the unbound plasma fraction of both imatinib and its main active metabolite (N-desmethyl-imatinib) in plasma from 44 patients. The objective was to quantify the inter-individual variability of the protein binding of imatinib in order to discuss the potential benefits and limits of TDM of free plasma concentrations. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The quantification of unbound fraction of imatinib and N-desmethyl-imatinib was performed using plasma ultrafiltration coupled with LC-MS/MS measurement. 60 pre-dose plasma samples were obtained at steady state within TDM in 44 chronic myeloid leukemia patients. RESULTS: The mean unbound fractions of imatinib and N-desmethyl-imatinib were 2.94 and 5.10 %, respectively, with inter-individual variability (CV in %) of 57 % for imatinib and 71 % for the metabolite. For 11 patients, repeated blood sampling gave a mean intra-individual variability of 28 % for imatinib and 34 % for N-desmethyl-imatinib. No correlation was observed between these measured individual imatinib unbound fraction values and those obtained using an equation based on AGP levels previously proposed by Widmer et al. The mean N-desmethyl-imatinib/imatinib ratio was determined for both total (0.69) and unbound (1.10) concentrations, with inter-individual variabilities of 71 and 86 %, respectively. CONCLUSION: The large inter-individual variability for the unbound fraction of both imatinib and N-desmethyl-imatinib warrants further evaluation of the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationship as a potential relevant marker of imatinib therapeutic outcomes.
    Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology 11/2012; · 2.80 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background:Dose banding is a recently suggested dosing method that uses predefined ranges (bands) of body surface area (BSA) to calculate each patient's dose by using a single BSA-value per band. Thus, drugs with sufficient long-term stability can be prepared in advance. The main advantages of dose banding are to reduce patient waiting time and improve pharmacy capacity planning; additional benefits include reduced medication errors, reduced drug wastage, and prospective quality control. This study compares dose banding with individual BSA dosing and fixed dose according to pharmacokinetic criteria.Methods:Three BSA bands were defined: BSA<1.7 m(2), 1.7 m(2)BSA<1.9 m(2), BSA1.9 m(2) and each patient dose was calculated based on a unique BSA-value per band (1.55, 1.80, and 2.05 m(2), respectively). By using individual clearance values of six drugs (cisplatin, docetaxel, paclitaxel, doxorubicin, irinotecan, and topotecan) from 1012 adult cancer patients in total, the AUCs corresponding to three dosing methods (BSA dosing, dose banding, and fixed dose) were compared with a target AUC for each drug.Results:For all six drugs, the per cent variation in individual dose obtained with dose banding compared with BSA dosing ranged between -14% and +22%, and distribution of AUC values was very similar with both dosing methods. In terms of reaching the target AUC, there was no significant difference in precision between dose banding and BSA dosing, except for paclitaxel (32.0% vs 30.7%, respectively; P<0.05). However, precision was significantly better for BSA dosing compared with fixed dose for four out of six drugs.Conclusion:For the studied drugs, implementation of dose banding should be considered as it entails no significant increase in interindividual plasma exposure.
    British Journal of Cancer 08/2012; 107(7):1100-6. · 5.08 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To examine the predictive value of gene polymorphisms potentially linked to toxicity, clinical response, time to progression and overall survival, following cetuximab-tegafur-uracil (UFT)-irinotecan therapy. Fifty-two patients with advanced colorectal cancer were enrolled in an ancillary pharmacogenetic study of the phase II CETUFTIRI trial. Treatment consisted of 21 day cycles of cetuximab (day 1-day 8-day 15, 250 mg m(-2) week(-1) following a 400 mg m(-2) initial dose) together with irinotecan (day 1, 250 mg m(-2)) and UFT-folinic acid (days 1-14, 250 mg m(-2) day(-1) UFT, 90 mg day(-1) folinic acid). Analysed gene polymorphisms (blood DNA) were as follows: EGFR (CA repeats in intron 1, -216G>T, -191C>A), EGF (61A>G), FCGR2A (131Arg>His), FCGR3A (158Phe>Val), UDP-glycosyltransferase1-polypeptide A1 (TA repeats), TYMS (28 bp repeats, including the G>C mutation on the 3R allele, 6 bp deletion in 3' UTR) and MTHFR (677C>T, 1298A>C). Maximum toxicity grade was linked to EGFR-191C>A polymorphism, with 71.1% grade 3-4 toxicity in CC patients vs. 28.6% in other patients (P= 0.010). A tendency to a better response was observed in patients bearing the TYMS 3RG allele (P= 0.029) and those bearing the FCGR3A 158Val genotype (P= 0.020). The greater the score of favourable TYMS and FCGR3A genotypes, the better the response rate (P= 0.009) and the longer the overall survival (P= 0.007). In multivariate analysis, the score of favourable genotypes was a stronger survival predictor than the performance status. Present data suggest the importance of FCGR3A 158Phe>Val and TYMS 5' UTR polymorphisms in responsiveness and survival of patients receiving cetuximab-fluoropyrimidine-based therapy.
    British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology 05/2012; 73(5):776-85. · 3.58 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This study was a multi-centre, dose-escalation trial in patients with advanced cancers. Primary objective was to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of vorinostat, a competitive inhibitor of histone deacetylase (HDAC), in combination with vinorelbine. Secondary aims were to determine (1) corresponding pharmacokinetics, (2) safety of this regimen, and (3) impact of UGT1A1 and 2B17 polymorphisms on vorinostat pharmacokinetics. Starting dose of once daily oral vorinostat was 200 mg for 7 days every 21 days in combination with a 20-min intraveinous weekly infusion of vinorelbine 25 mg/m2, starting 4 hours after the first vorinostat dose. During cycle 1, blood samples were collected at day 1 for vorinostat and at days 1 and 8 for vinorelbine for pharmacokinetic evaluation. Seven patients were included. Most of adverse events observed were mild (grades 0-2) and reversible after treatment discontinuation (hemotological toxicity, asthenia, diarrhea, dyspnea, fever, hyperglycemia and nausea). Two patients had a dose limiting toxicity at the first dose level that consisted of grade 3 hyperglycemia and vinorelbine administration was delayed. The first dose-level was considered as the MDT and therefore dose escalation was stopped. Mean vorinostat plasma AUC was higher than reported previously at a similar dose when used as single agent or in combination with other cytotoxics. There was no obvious vinorelbine-vorinostat interaction nor any correlation with UGT1A1 or 2B17 polymorphisms. MDT of the combination was 200 mg oral vorinostat for 7 days in combination with 25 mg/m2 weekly vinorelbine. Severity of hyperglycemia was most likely related to unexpected high vorinostat exposures.
    Current clinical pharmacology. 11/2011; 6(4):274-9.
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The aim of this pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PK-PD) analysis was to evaluate the pharmacologic characteristics of erlotinib and its main metabolite (OSI-420) in pediatric patients compared with those in adult patients. Plasma concentrations of erlotinib and OSI-420 of 46 children with malignant brain tumors included in a phase I study and 42 adults with head and neck carcinoma were analyzed by a population-pharmacokinetic method (NONMEM). The effect of several covariates and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNP) in ABCB1, ABCG2, and CYP3A5 on pharmacokinetic parameters was evaluated. PK/PD relationships between plasma drug exposure Area Under the Curve (AUC) at day 1 and skin toxicity were studied in children and compared with the relationship observed in adults. A significant difference in erlotinib clearance (P = 0.0001), when expressed in L·h(-1)·kg(-1), was observed between children and adults with mean values of 0.146 and 0.095, respectively (mean difference = 0.051 L·h(-1)·kg(-1), SD = 0.0594). However, a common covariate model was obtained describing erlotinib clearance according to body weight, alanine aminotransferase, ABCB1, and CYP3A5 polymorphisms (2677G > T/A and 6986G > A) for both children and adult patients. The PK-PD relationship was very consistent between the children and adult groups with risk of skin toxicity rising with increasing erlotinib AUC. The nonlinear population approach applied to pharmacokinetic data combined with a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic analysis revealed that the higher recommended dose in children (125 mg/m(2)/day) compared with adults (90 mg/m(2)/day) is mainly due to pharmacokinetic rather than pharmacodynamic particularities.
    Clinical Cancer Research 06/2011; 17(14):4862-71. · 7.84 Impact Factor

Publication Stats

2k Citations
665.59 Total Impact Points

Institutions

  • 1990–2014
    • Institut Claudius Regaud
      Tolosa de Llenguadoc, Midi-Pyrénées, France
  • 2013
    • University Hospital of Lausanne
      Lausanne, Vaud, Switzerland
  • 2008–2013
    • University of Toulouse
      Tolosa de Llenguadoc, Midi-Pyrénées, France
  • 1989–2011
    • Paul Sabatier University - Toulouse III
      • Groupe de Pharmacologie clinique et expérimentale des médicaments anticancéreux - EA 3035
      Tolosa de Llenguadoc, Midi-Pyrénées, France
  • 2010
    • Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Toulouse
      Tolosa de Llenguadoc, Midi-Pyrénées, France
  • 2009–2010
    • University of Tours
      Tours, Centre, France
    • Institut de Cancérologie Gustave Roussy
      • • Department of Radiotherapy
      • • Department of Paediatrics
      Île-de-France, France
  • 1998–2003
    • Centre Antoine-Lacassagne
      Nice, Provence-Alpes-Côte d'Azur, France
    • French National Centre for Scientific Research
      Lutetia Parisorum, Île-de-France, France
  • 1993–1994
    • University of California, San Diego
      • Department of Medicine
      San Diego, CA, United States