Immune check-point inhibitors are drugs that are markedly different from other anticancer drugs because of their indirect mechanisms of antitumoral action and their apparently random effect in terms of efficacy and toxicity. This marked pharmacodynamics variability in patients calls for reconsidering to what extent approved dosing used in clinical practice are optimal or whether they should require efforts for customization in outlier patients. To better understand whether or not dosing could be an actionable item in oncology, in this review, preclinical and clinical development of immune checkpoint inhibitors are described, particularly from the angle of dose finding studies. Other issues in connection with dosing issues are developed, such as the flat dosing alternative, the putative role therapeutic drug monitoring could play, the rise of combinatorial strategies, and pharmaco-economic aspects.

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) are small heterocyclic molecules targeting transmembrane and cytoplasmic tyrosine kinases that have met with considerable success in clinical oncology. TKI are associated with toxicities including liver injury that may be serious and even life‐threatening. Many of them require warnings in drug labeling against liver injury, and five of them have Black Box Warning (BBW) labels. Although drug‐induced liver injury is a matter of clinical and industrial concern, little is known about the underlying mechanisms that likely involve reactive metabolites (RM). RM are electrophiles or radicals originating from the metabolic activation of particular functional groups, known as structural alerts or toxicophores. RM are able to covalently bind to proteins and macromolecules, causing cellular damage and even cell death. If the adducted protein is the enzyme involved in RM formation, time‐dependent inhibition of the enzyme—also called mechanism‐based inhibition (MBI) or inactivation—can occur and lead to pharmacokinetic drug‐drug interactions. To mitigate RM liabilities, common practice in drug development includes avoiding structural alerts and assessing RM formation via RM trapping screens with soft and hard nucleophiles (glutathione, potassium cyanide, and methoxylamine) in liver microsomes. RM‐positive derivatives are further optimized to afford drug candidates with blocked or minimized bioactivation potential. However, different structural alerts are still commonly used scaffolds in drug design, including in TKI structures. This review focuses on the current state of knowledge of the relations among TKI structures, bioactivation pathways, RM characterization, and hepatotoxicity and cytochrome P450 MBI in vitro.

Variations in clinical response to tamoxifen (TAM) may be related to polymorphic cytochromes P450 (CYPs) involved in forming its active metabolite endoxifen (ENDO). We developed a population pharmacokinetic (PopPK) model for tamoxifen and six metabolites to determine clinically relevant factors of ENDO exposure. Concentration‐time data for TAM and 6 metabolites come from a prospective, multicenter, 3‐year follow‐up study of adjuvant TAM (20 mg/day) in patients with breast cancer, with plasma samples drawn every 6 months, and genotypes for 63 genetic polymorphisms (PHACS study, NCT01127295). Concentration data for TAM and 6 metabolites from 928 patients (n = 27,433 concentrations) were analyzed simultaneously with a 7‐compartment PopPK model. CYP2D6 phenotype (poor metabolizer (PM), intermediate metabolizer (IM), normal metabolizer (NM), and ultra‐rapid metabolizer (UM)), CYP3A4*22, CYP2C19*2, and CYP2B6*6 genotypes, concomitant CYP2D6 inhibitors, age, and body weight had a significant impact on TAM metabolism. Formation of ENDO from N‐desmethyltamoxifen was decreased by 84% (relative standard error (RSE) = 14%) in PM patients and by 47% (RSE = 9%) in IM patients and increased in UM patients by 27% (RSE = 12%) compared with NM patients. Dose‐adjustment simulations support an increase from 20 mg/day to 40 and 80 mg/day in IM patients and PM patients, respectively, to reach ENDO levels similar to those in NM patients. However, when considering Antiestrogenic Activity Score (AAS), a dose increase to 60 mg/day in PM patients seems sufficient. This PopPK model can be used as a tool to predict ENDO levels or AAS according to the patient’s CYP2D6 phenotype for TAM dose adaptation.

In addition to the effect of cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2D6 genetic polymorphisms, the metabolism of tamoxifen may be impacted by other factors with possible consequences on therapeutic outcome (efficacy and toxicity). This analysis focused on the pharmacokinetic (PK)‐pharmacogenetic evaluation of tamoxifen in 730 patients with adjuvant breast cancer included in a prospective multicenter study. Plasma concentrations of tamoxifen and six major metabolites, the genotype for 63 single‐nucleotide polymorphisms, and comedications were obtained 6 months after treatment initiation. Plasma concentrations of endoxifen were significantly associated with CYP2D6 diplotype (P < 0.0001), CYP3A4*22 genotype (P = 0.0003), and concomitant intake of potent CYP2D6 inhibitors (P < 0.001). Comparison of endoxifen levels showed that the CYP2D6 phenotype classification could be improved by grouping intermediate metabolizer (IM)/IM and IM/poor metabolizer diplotype into IM phenotype for future use in tamoxifen therapy optimization. Finally, the multivariable regression analysis showed that formation of tamoxifen metabolites was independently impacted by CYP2D6 diplotype and CYP3A4*22, CYP2C19*2, and CYP2B6*6 genetic polymorphisms.

Involvement of pazopanib and sunitinib aldehyde reactive metabolites in toxicity and drug-drug interactions in vitro and in patient samples

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract