Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28500677›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of clinical pharmacology2017

Optimizing the dose in cancer patients treated with imatinib, sunitinib and pazopanib.

Nienke A G Lankheet, Ingrid M E Desar, Sasja F Mulder, David M Burger, Dinemarie M Kweekel, Carla M L van Herpen, Winette T A van der Graaf, Nielka P van Erp

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of clinical pharmacology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 71 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Tumor Drug Concentration and Phosphoproteomic Profiles After Two Weeks of Treatment With Sunitinib in Patients with Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma.Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Nienke A G LankheetDepartment of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7237-9908
Ingrid M E DesarDepartment of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Sasja F MulderDepartment of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
David M BurgerDepartment of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Dinemarie M KweekelDepartment of Pharmacy, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, Netherlands.
Carla M L van HerpenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Winette T A van der GraafDepartment of Medical Oncology, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Nielka P van ErpDepartment of Pharmacy, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Radboud University Nijmegen · NLLeiden University Medical Center · NLRoyal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimFixed dose oral tyrosine kinase inhibitors imatinib, sunitinib and pazopanib show a high interpatient variability in plasma exposure. A relationship between plasma exposure and treatment outcome has been established, which supports the rationale for dose optimization of these drugs. The aim of this study was to monitor how many patients reached adequate trough levels after therapeutic drug monitoring-based dose optimization in daily practice.

methodsA cohort study was performed in patients treated with imatinib, sunitinib or pazopanib of whom follow-up drug levels were measured between August 2012 and April 2016. Patients' characteristics were collected by reviewing electronic patient records. Drug levels were measured using high-performance liquid chromatography coupled with tandem mass spectrometry and trough levels were estimated using a predefined algorithm. Dose interventions were proposed based on trough levels.

resultsIn total, 396 trough levels were determined in 109 patients. Median sample frequency per patient was 3. During the first measurement only 38% of patients showed trough levels within the predefined target ranges despite standard dosing; 52% of the patients showed drug levels below and 10% above the target range. In 35 out of 41 patients (85%) dose interventions led to adequate trough levels. Eventually, 64% of the total cohort reached adequate trough levels.

conclusionsDose optimization proved an effective tool to reach adequate trough levels in patients treated with imatinib, sunitinib and pazopanib. The percentage of patients with adequate trough levels increased from 38 to 64%. Therapeutic drug monitoring may add to the improvement of efficacy and reduction of toxicity and costs of these treatments.

Indexed as

Drug MonitoringAdolescentAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAntineoplastic AgentsChildChromatography, High Pressure LiquidFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansImatinib MesylateIndazolesIndolesMaleMiddle AgedAntineoplastic AgentsImatinib MesylateIndazolesIndolespazopanibProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyrimidinesPyrrolesSulfonamidesSunitinibimatinibindividualized dosingpazopanibpharmacokineticssunitinibtherapeutic drug monitoring

Identifiers

PMID28500677
PMCPMC5595974
OpenAlexW2612144746

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.