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.     

Sonodynamic Therapy: Advances and Challenges in Clinical Translation

Sonodynamic therapy (SDT) consists of the synergetic interaction between ultrasound and a chemical agent. In SDT, the cytotoxicity is triggered by ultrasonic stimuli, notably through cavitation. The unique features of SDT are relevant in the clinical context more than ever: the need for efficacy, accuracy, and safety while being noninvasive and preserving the patient's quality of life. However, despite the promising results of this technique, only a few clinical reports describe the use of SDT. The objective of this article is to provide an extensive overview of the clinical and preclinical research conducted in vivo on SDT, to identify the limitations, and to detail the developed strategies to overcome them.     

Coronary Artery Lumen Segmentation Using Location–Adaptive Threshold in Coronary Computed Tomographic Angiography: A Proof-of-Concept

ObjectiveTo compare the lumen parameters measured by the location-adaptive threshold method (LATM), in which the inter- and intra-scan attenuation variabilities of coronary computed tomographic angiography (CCTA) were corrected, and the scan-adaptive threshold method (SATM), in which only the inter-scan variability was corrected, with the reference standard measurement by intravascular ultrasonography (IVUS).Materials and MethodsThe Hounsfield unit (HU) values of whole voxels and the centerline in each of the cross-sections of the 22 target coronary artery segments were obtained from 15 patients between March 2009 and June 2010, in addition to the corresponding voxel size. Lumen volume was calculated mathematically as the voxel volume multiplied by the number of voxels with HU within a given range, defined as the lumen for each method, and compared with the IVUS-derived reference standard. Subgroup analysis of the lumen area was performed to investigate the effect of lumen size on the studied methods. Bland-Altman plots were used to evaluate the agreement between the measurements.ResultsLumen volumes measured by SATM was significantly smaller than that measured by IVUS (mean difference, 14.6 mm³; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.9–24.3 mm³); the lumen volumes measured by LATM and IVUS were not significantly different (mean difference, −0.7 mm³; 95% CI, −9.1–7.7 mm³). The lumen area measured by SATM was significantly smaller than that measured by LATM in the smaller lumen area group (mean of difference, 1.07 mm²; 95% CI, 0.89–1.25 mm²) but not in the larger lumen area group (mean of difference, −0.07 mm²; 95% CI, −0.22–0.08 mm²). In the smaller lumen group, the mean difference was lower in the Bland-Altman plot of IVUS and LATM (0.46 mm²; 95% CI, 0.27–0.65 mm²) than in that of IVUS and SATM (1.53 mm²; 95% CI, 1.27–1.79 mm²).ConclusionSATM underestimated the lumen parameters for computed lumen segmentation in CCTA, and this may be overcome by using LATM.