Prolonged Pharmacokinetic Interaction Between Capecitabine and a CYP2C9 Substrate, Celecoxib.

This study investigated the time course and magnitude of the pharmacokinetic interaction between capecitabine and the cytochrome P450 (CYP) 2C9 substrate celecoxib, with implications for coadministration of fluoropyrimidines with CYP2C9 substrates such as warfarin. Patients received celecoxib 200 mg orally twice daily continuously, with capecitabine (1000 mg/m2 orally twice daily for 14 days every 21 days) starting 7 days later. Assessment of the drug-drug interaction (DDI) potential was performed using equivalence testing, which assumes that there is no clinically relevant DDI when the calculated 90% confidence intervals (CIs) of the drug exposure ratios fall within the range of 0.80 to 1.25. Comparison of steady-state pharmacokinetic parameters of celecoxib between day 7 (cycle 0, celecoxib only) and day 14 (cycle 1, celecoxib + capecitabine) showed geometric mean ratios of 1.24 (90%CI, 1.04-1.49), 1.30 (1.11-1.53) and 1.28 (1.11-1.47) for maximum plasma concentration, minimum plasma concentration, and area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to 8 hours, respectively. Comparison of day 7 vs day 21 (cycle 1, after 1 week washout of capecitabine) showed a further increase in the geometric mean ratio of maximum plasma concentration (1.39; 90%CI, 1.16-1.66), minimum plasma concentration (1.53; 1.10-2.12) and area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to 8 hours (1.41; 1.19-1.68). Because the 90%CIs fell outside the prespecified equivalence margin, we conclude that coadministration results in a DDI (increased celecoxib exposure) that persists for at least 7 days after capecitabine discontinuation. Close monitoring should be undertaken when administering fluoropyrimidines with CYP2C9 substrates with narrow therapeutic indexes while also weighing the benefits and risks for individual patients.

A pharmacodynamic study of sirolimus and metformin in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Sirolimus is a mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor. Metformin may potentiate mTOR inhibition by sirolimus while mitigating its adverse effects. We conducted a pilot study to test this hypothesis. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumor were treated with sirolimus for 7 days followed by randomization to either sirolimus with metformin (Arm A) or sirolimus (Arm B) until day 21. From day 22 onwards, all patients received sirolimus and metformin. The primary aim was to compare the change in phospho-p70S6K (pp70S6K) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) from day 8 to day 22 using a two-sample t test. Secondary aims were objective response rate, toxicity, and other serum pharmacodynamic biomarkers (e.g., fasting glucose, triglycerides, insulin, C-peptide, IGF-1, IGF-1R, IGF-BP, and leptin). RESULTS: 24 patients were enrolled, with 18 evaluable for the primary endpoint. There was no significant difference in mean change in pp70S6K in arm A vs. arm B (- 0.12 vs. - 0.16; P = 0.64). Similarly, there were no significant differences in other serum pharmacodynamic biomarkers. There were no partial responses. There were no dose-limiting or unexpected toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Adding metformin to sirolimus, although well tolerated, was not associated with significant changes in pp70S6K in PBMC or other serum pharmacodynamic biomarkers. IMPACT: Combining metformin with sirolimus did not improve mTOR inhibition.

Dose-finding and pharmacokinetic study to optimize the dosing of irinotecan according to the UGT1A1 genotype of patients with cancer.

PURPOSE: The risk of severe neutropenia from treatment with irinotecan is related in part to UGT1A1*28, a variant that reduces the elimination of SN-38, the active metabolite of irinotecan. We aimed to identify the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of irinotecan in patients with advanced solid tumors stratified by the *1/*1, *1/*28, and *28/*28 genotypes. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-eight patients received an intravenous flat dose of irinotecan every 3 weeks. Forty-six percent of the patients had the *1/*1 genotype, 41% had the *1/*28 genotype, and 13% had the *28/*28 genotype. The starting dose of irinotecan was 700 mg in patients with the *1/*1 and *1/*28 genotypes and 500 mg in patients with the *28/*28 genotype. Pharmacokinetic evaluation was performed at cycle 1. RESULTS: In patients with the *1/*1 genotype, the MTD was 850 mg (four DLTs per 16 patients), and 1,000 mg was not tolerated (two DLTs per six patients). In patients with the *1/*28 genotype, the MTD was 700 mg (five DLTs per 22 patients), and 850 mg was not tolerated (four DLTs per six patients). In patients with the *28/*28 genotype, the MTD was 400 mg (one DLT per six patients), and 500 mg was not tolerated (three DLTs per three patients). The DLTs were mainly myelosuppression and diarrhea. Irinotecan clearance followed linear kinetics. At the MTD for each genotype, dosing by genotype resulted in similar SN-38 areas under the curve (AUCs; r(2) = 0.0003; P = .97), but the irinotecan AUC was correlated with the actual dose (r(2) = 0.39; P < .001). Four of 48 patients with disease known to be responsive to irinotecan achieved partial response. CONCLUSION: The UGT1A1*28 genotype can be used to individualize dosing of irinotecan. Additional studies should evaluate the effect of genotype-guided dosing on efficacy in patients receiving irinotecan.

Evaluation of food effect on pharmacokinetics of vismodegib in advanced solid tumor patients.

PURPOSE: Vismodegib, an orally bioavailable small-molecule Smoothened inhibitor, is approved for treatment of advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC). We conducted a pharmacokinetic study of vismodegib in patients with advanced solid tumors to explore the effects of food on drug exposure. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In part I, patients were randomized to fasting overnight (FO), a high fat meal (HF), or a low fat meal (LF) before a single dose of vismodegib 150 mg. Plasma concentrations of vismodegib were determined by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay. Primary endpoints were C(max) and area under the curve (AUC(0-168)). In part II, patients randomized to FO or HF in part I took vismodegib 150 mg daily after fasting; those randomized to LF took it after a meal. Primary endpoints after two weeks were C(max) and AUC(0-24). RESULTS: Sixty (22 FO, 20 HF, 18 LF) and 52 (25 fasting, 27 fed) patients were evaluable for primary endpoints in parts I and II, respectively. Mean C(max) and AUC(0-168) after a single dose were higher in HF than FO patients [ratios of geometric means (90% CI) = 1.75 (1.30, 2.34) and 1.74 (1.25, 2.42), respectively]. There were no significant differences in C(max) or AUC(0-24) between fasting and fed groups after daily dosing. The frequencies of drug-related toxicities were similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: A HF meal increases plasma exposure to a single dose of vismodegib, but there are no pharmacokinetic or safety differences between fasting and fed groups at steady-state. Vismodegib may be taken with or without food for daily dosing.