Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Pretherapeutic screening for Dihydropyrimidine deshydrogenase deficiency in measuring uracilemia in dialysis patients leads to a high rate of falsely positive results

  • Short Communication
  • Published:
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

Pretherapeutic screening for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency is recommended prior to the administration of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. However, the best strategy to identify DPD deficiency in End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) patients is unknown.

Methods

We assessed the characteristics of both DPD phenotypes and DPYD genotypes in 20 dialyzed patients before and after dialysis session. The extent to which the concentrations of uracil [U] and dihydrouracil [UH2] were affected by dialysis was evaluated.

Results

Mean [U] was 14 ± 3.3 ng/ml before the dialysis session, and 7.9 ± 2.7 ng/ml after. Notably, mean [U] in 119 non-ESRD patients during the same timeline was 8.7 ± 3.9 ng/ml, which is similar to [U] values after dialysis session (p = 0.38). [U] values > 16 ng/ml were measured in 4 ESRD patients (20%), whereas the rate was 3.3% in the non-ESRD cohort. Whole gene sequencing did not reveal DPYD deleterious allelic variants in the 4 ESRD patients with [U] values > 16 ng/ml. The profile of [UH2] values during dialysis was similar to that of [U]: 385 ± 86 ng/ml before, and 185 ± 62 ng/ml after (mean reduction rate 42.5%). Thus, [UH2]:[U] ratio remained unaffected by dialysis, and was similar to the values in non-ESRD patients (22.4 ± 7.1).

Conclusion

Phenotyping based on measuring plasma [U] before a dialysis sessions in ESRD patients is associated with an unacceptable high rate of false positives. The optimal strategy for the identification of patients with DPD deficiency in this population would be the monitor the [UH2]:[U] ratio, which remains unaffected.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

References

  1. Butler AM, Olshan AF, Kshirsagar AV et al (2015) Cancer incidence among US medicare ESRD patients receiving hemodialysis, 1996–2009. Am J Kidney Dis 65(5):763–772. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2014.12.013

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Janus N, Launay-Vacher V, Thyss A et al (2013) Management of anticancer treatment in patients under chronic dialysis: results of the multicentric CANDY (CANcer and DialYsis) study. Ann Oncol 24(2):501–507. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mds344

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Andre T, Colin P, Louvet C et al (2003) Semimonthly versus monthly regimen of fluorouracil and leucovorin administered for 24 or 36 weeks as adjuvant therapy in stage II and III colon cancer: results of a randomized trial. J Clin Oncol 21(15):2896–2903. https://doi.org/10.1200/JCO.2003.10.065

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. van Kuilenburg ABP (2004) Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase and the efficacy and toxicity of 5-fluorouracil. Eur J Cancer 40(7):939–950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2003.12.004

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Meulendijks D, Henricks LM, Sonke GS et al (2015) Clinical relevance of DPYD variants c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A as predictors of severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data. Lancet Oncol 16(16):1639–1650. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1470-2045(15)00286-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Amstutz U, Henricks LM, Offer SM et al (2018) Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guideline for Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Genotype and Fluoropyrimidine Dosing: 2017 Update. Clin Pharmacol Ther 103(2):210–216. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpt.911

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Meulendijks D, Henricks LM, Jacobs BAW et al (2017) Pretreatment serum uracil concentration as a predictor of severe and fatal fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. Br J Cancer 116(11):1415–1424. https://doi.org/10.1038/bjc.2017.94

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Boisdron-Celle M, Remaud G, Traore S et al (2007) 5-Fluorouracil-related severe toxicity: a comparison of different methods for the pretherapeutic detection of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency. Cancer Lett 249(2):271–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canlet.2006.09.006

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Sistonen J, Büchel B, Froehlich TK et al (2014) Predicting 5-fluorouracil toxicity: DPD genotype and 5,6-dihydrouracil:uracil ratio. Pharmacogenomics 15(13):1653–1666. https://doi.org/10.2217/pgs.14.126

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Launay M, Dahan L, Duval M et al (2016) Beating the odds: efficacy and toxicity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase-driven adaptive dosing of 5-FU in patients with digestive cancer. Br J Clin Pharmacol 81(1):124–130. https://doi.org/10.1111/bcp.12790

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Loriot M-A, Ciccolini J, Thomas F et al (2018) Dihydropyrimidine déhydrogenase (DPD) deficiency screening and securing of fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapies: Update and recommendations of the French GPCO-Unicancer and RNPGx networks. Bull Cancer 105(4):397–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bulcan.2018.02.001

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Barnes KJ, Rowland A, Polasek TM, Miners JO (2014) Inhibition of human drug-metabolising cytochrome P450 and UDP-glucuronosyltransferase enzyme activities in vitro by uremic toxins. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 70(9):1097–1106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00228-014-1709-7

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Pedrazzoli P, Silvestris N, Santoro A et al (2017) Management of patients with end-stage renal disease undergoing chemotherapy: recommendations of the Associazione Italiana di Oncologia Medica (AIOM) and the Società Italiana di Nefrologia (SIN). ESMO Open 2(3):e000167. https://doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2017-000167

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Janus N, Thariat J, Boulanger H, Deray G, Launay-Vacher V (2010) Proposal for dosage adjustment and timing of chemotherapy in hemodialyzed patients. Ann Oncol 21(7):1395–1403. https://doi.org/10.1093/annonc/mdp598

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Funakoshi T, Horimatsu T, Nakamura M et al (2018) Chemotherapy in cancer patients undergoing haemodialysis: a nationwide study in Japan. ESMO Open 3(2):e000301. https://doi.org/10.1136/esmoopen-2017-000301

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Ozaki Y, Imamaki H, Ikeda A et al (2020) Successful management of hyperammonemia with hemodialysis on day 2 during 5-fluorouracil treatment in a patient with gastric cancer: a case report with 5-fluorouracil metabolite analyses. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 86(5):693–699. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-020-04158-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Pallet N, Hamdane S, Garinet S et al (2020) A comprehensive population-based study comparing the phenotype and genotype in a pretherapeutic screen of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency. Br J Cancer 123(5):811–818. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41416-020-0962-z

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None declared.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Nephrology, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, University of Paris, Paris, France

    Clotilde Gaible & Stéphane Roueff

  2. Service de Biochimie, Department of Clinical Chemistry, Hôpital Européen Georges Pompidou, Assistance Publique Hôpitaux de Paris, University of Paris, 75015, Paris, France

    Céline Narjoz, Marie-Anne Loriot & Nicolas Pallet

Authors
  1. Clotilde Gaible
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Céline Narjoz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Marie-Anne Loriot
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Stéphane Roueff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Nicolas Pallet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nicolas Pallet.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no conflict of interest to disclose.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gaible, C., Narjoz, C., Loriot, MA. et al. Pretherapeutic screening for Dihydropyrimidine deshydrogenase deficiency in measuring uracilemia in dialysis patients leads to a high rate of falsely positive results. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 88, 1049–1053 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-021-04354-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-021-04354-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation