PurposeEverolimus treatment is seriously hampered by its toxicity profile. As a relationship between everolimus exposure and effectiveness and toxicity has been established, early and ongoing concentration measurement can be key to individualize the dose and optimize treatment outcomes. Dried blood spot (DBS) facilitates sampling at a patients’ home and thereby eases dose individualization. The aim of this study is to determine the agreement and predictive performance of DBS compared to whole blood (WB) to measure everolimus concentrations in cancer patients.MethodsPaired DBS and WB samples were collected in 22 cancer patients treated with everolimus and analyzed using UPLC-MS/MS. Bland-Altman and Passing-Bablok analysis were used to determine method agreement. Limits of clinical relevance were set at a difference of ± 25%, as this would lead to a different dosing advice. Using DBS concentration and Passing-Bablok regression analysis, WB concentrations were predicted.ResultsSamples of 20 patients were suitable for analysis. Bland-Altman analysis showed a mean ratio of everolimus WB to DBS concentrations of 0.90, with 95% of data points within limits of clinical relevance. Passing-Bablok regression of DBS compared to WB revealed no constant bias (intercept 0.02; 95% CI 0.93–1.35) and a small proportional bias (slope 0.89; 95% CI 0.76–0.99). Predicted concentrations showed low bias and imprecision and 90% of samples had an absolute percentage prediction error of < 20%.ConclusionsDBS is a valid method to determine everolimus concentrations in cancer patients. This can especially be of value for early recognition of over- or underexposure to enable dose adaptations.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1007/s00228-017-2394-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The extent of the exposure to PLD was correlated with more adverse events and longer PFS. This has important clinical implications, since dose reductions or interruptions might thus negatively affect treatment outcomes. More attention should be paid to preventive and supportive measures of adverse events of PLD to keep the exposure to PLD as high as possible.
In this prospective study, we examined the pharmacokinetics of 1 and 2 mg/kg liposomal amphotericin B in 16 morbidly obese individuals (104–177 kg). Body size had no effect on clearance. We recommend a fixed dose in patients ≥100 kg (ie, 300 or 500 mg rather than the current dose of 3 and 5 mg/kg, respectively).
Clinical Trials Registration NCT02320604.
A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was developed and validated to quantify the small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs) brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib, which are used in patients with oncogenic-driven non-small cell lung cancer. Chromatographic separation was performed on a HyPURITY ® C 18 analytical column with a gradient elution using ammonium acetate in water and in methanol, both acidified with formic acid 0,1%. Detection and quantification were performed using a triple quad mass spectrometer with an electrospray ionization interface. The assay was validated over a linear range of 50-2,500 ng/ml for brigatinib, 25-1,000 ng/ml for lorlatinib, 100-10,000 ng/ml for pralsetinib and 50-5,-000 ng/ml for selpercatinib. All four SMIs were stable for at least 7 days under cool conditions (2-8 C), and at least 24 h at room temperature (15-25 C) in K2-EDTA plasma. Under freezing conditions (À20 C), all SMIs were stable for at least 30 days, except for the lowest quality control (QC LOW ) of pralsetinib. The QC LOW of pralsetinib was stable for at least 7 days at À20 C. This method provides an efficient and simple way to quantify four SMIs with a single assay in clinical practice.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.