Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38523525›Full record

ArticleCancer medicine2024

Complete DPYD genotyping combined with dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase phenotyping to prevent fluoropyrimidine toxicity: A retrospective study.

Côme De Metz, Benjamin Hennart, Estelle Aymes, Pierre-Yves Cren, Niels Martignène, Nicolas Penel, Maël Barthoulot, Aurélien Carnot

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer medicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
1.1field-weighted citation impact, top 20% 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

3 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Observational
  2. Article
  3. 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 2 institutions in 1 country.

Côme De MetzDepartment of Medical Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France.ORCID 0000-0002-3199-5907
Benjamin HennartToxicology Unit, Biology and Pathology Centre, Lille University Medical Centre, Lille, France.ORCID 0000-0003-0302-6049
Estelle AymesDepartment of Biostatistics, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France.
Pierre-Yves CrenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France.
Niels MartignèneDepartment of Biostatistics, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France.
Nicolas PenelDepartment of Medical Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France.ORCID 0000-0001-5243-1548
Maël BarthoulotDepartment of Biostatistics, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France.
Aurélien CarnotDepartment of Medical Oncology, Centre Oscar Lambret, Lille, France.ORCID 0000-0003-2933-4066
Centre Oscar Lambret · FRUniversité de Lille · FR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionIn April 2019, French authorities mandated dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) screening, specifically testing uracilemia, to mitigate the risk of toxicity associated with fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy. However, this subject is still of debate as there is no consensus on a standardized DPD deficiency screening test. We conducted a real-life retrospective study with the aim of assessing the impact of DPD screening on the occurrence of severe toxicity and exploring the potential benefits of complete genotyping using next-generation sequencing.

methodsAll adult patients consecutively treated with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) or its oral prodrug at six cancer centers between March 2018 and February 2019 were considered for inclusion. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency screening included gene encoding DPD (DPYD) genotyping using complete genome sequencing and DPD phenotyping (uracilemia or dihydrouracilemia/uracilemia ratio) or both tests. Associations between each DPD screening method and (i) severe (grade ≥3) early toxicity and (ii) fluoropyrimidine dose reduction in the second chemotherapy cycle were evaluated using multivariable logistic regression analysis. Furthermore, we assessed the concordance between DPD genotype and phenotype using Cohen's kappa.

resultsA total of 551 patients were included. Most patients were tested for DPD deficiency (86%) including DPYD genotyping only (6%), DPD phenotyping only (8%), or both (72%). Complete DPD deficiency was not detected in the study population. Severe early toxicity events were observed in 73 patients (13%), with two patients (0.30%) presenting grade 5 toxicity. Despite the numerically higher toxicity rate in untested patients, the occurrence of severe toxicity was not significantly associated with the DPD screening method (p = 0.69). Concordance between the DPD genotype and phenotype was weak (Cohen's kappa of 0.14).

conclusionDue to insufficient numbers, our study was not able to demonstrate any added value of DPYD genotyping using complete genome sequencing to prevent 5-FU toxicity. The optimal strategy for DPD screening before fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy requires further clinical evaluation.

Indexed as

Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase DeficiencyDihydrouracil Dehydrogenase (NADP)AdultAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticCapecitabineFluorouracilGenotypeHumansRetrospective StudiesAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticCapecitabineDihydrouracil Dehydrogenase (NADP)Fluorouracilcapecitabinefluorouracilgenotypehigh‐throughput nucleotide sequencingneoplasmsphenotype

Identifiers

PMID38523525
PMCPMC10961597
OpenAlexW4393152061

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.