Pharmacokinetic study of the oral fluorouracil antitumor agent S‐1 in patients with impaired renal function

Although dose reduction of S‐1 is recommended for patients with impaired renal function, dose modification for such patients has not been prospectively evaluated. The aim of the present study was to investigate the pharmacokinetic parameters of 5‐fluorouracil, 5‐chloro‐2,4 dihydroxypyridine and oteracil potassium, and to review the recommended dose modification of S‐1 in patients with renal impairment. We classified patients receiving S‐1 into 4 groups according to their renal function, as measured using the Japanese estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) equation. The daily S‐1 dose was adjusted based on the patient's eGFR and body surface area. Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic analysis. A total of 33 patients were enrolled and classified into 4 groups as follows: 10 patients in cohort 1 (eGFR ≥ 80 mL/min/1.73 m²), 10 patients in cohort 2 (eGFR = 50‐79 mL/min/1.73 m²), 10 patients in cohort 3 (eGFR = 30‐49 mL/min/1.73 m²), and 3 patients in cohort 4 (eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m²). Those in cohorts 3 and 4 treated with an adjusted dose of S‐1 showed a similar area under the curve for 5‐fluorouracil (941.9 ± 275.6 and 1043.5 ± 224.8 ng/mL, respectively) compared with cohort 2 (1034.9 ± 414.3 ng/mL). Notably, while there was a statistically significant difference between cohort 1 (689.6 ± 208.8 ng/mL) and 2 (P = 0.0474) treated with an equal dose of S‐1, there was no significant difference observed in the toxicity profiles of the cohorts. In conclusion, dose adjustment of S‐1 in patients with impaired renal function using eGFR is appropriate and safe.     

Association of gBRCA1/2 mutation locations with ovarian cancer risk in Japanese patients from the CHARLOTTE study

Whether germline (g) breast cancer susceptibility gene (BRCA) mutations are located within or outside the ovarian cancer cluster region (OCCR) (1380‐4062 bp for gBRCA1, and between 3249‐5681 bp and 6645‐7471 bp for gBRCA2) may influence risk variations for ovarian cancers. This ad hoc analysis of the CHARLOTTE epidemiological study in Japan assessed the distribution of gBRCA1/2 mutations in patients with newly diagnosed ovarian cancer, and investigated an association between gBRCA1/2 mutation locations and ovarian cancer risk. Differences in patient background and clinical characteristics in subgroups stratified by gBRCA1/2 mutation locations were also evaluated. We analyzed the data of 93 patients (14.7%) from the CHARLOTTE study who were positive for gBRCA1/2 mutations. After excluding 16 cases with L63X founder mutation, 28 (65.1%) of gBRCA1 mutations were within the OCCR. Of 30 gBRCA2 mutations, 15 (50.0%) were within the OCCR. Of 27 patients (one patient excluded for unknown family history) with gBRCA1 mutations located in the OCCR, 11 (40.7%) had a family history of ovarian cancer; the proportion of patients with a family history of ovarian cancer and gBRCA1 mutations outside the OCCR was lower (13.3%). Sixty percent of patients with gBRCA1 mutations outside the OCCR had a family history of breast cancer; the proportion of patients with a family history of breast cancer and gBRCA1 mutations within the OCCR was relatively lower (33.3%). Understanding the mutation locations may contribute to more accurate risk assessments of susceptible individuals and early detection of ovarian cancer among gBRCA mutation carriers.     

The combination of oral-recombinant methioninase and azacitidine arrests a chemotherapy-resistant osteosarcoma patient-derived orthotopic xenograft mouse model

Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology - Cancers are methionine (MET) and methylation addicted, causing them to be highly sensitive to MET restriction. The present study determined the efficacy of...     

Quality of life after single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomized,clinical trial

Background

Controversy continues as to whether single-incision laparoscopic cholecystectomy, with the somewhat larger incision at the umbilicus, may lead to a worse postoperative quality of life and more pain compared with the more classic 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The aim of this study was to compare single-incision and 4-port laparoscopic cholecystectomy from the perspective of quality of life.