Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38971952›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2024

Reasons for non-feasibility of therapeutic drug monitoring of oral targeted therapies in oncology - an analysis of the closed cohorts of a multicentre prospective study.

Maud B A van der Kleij, Niels A D Guchelaar, Marinda Meertens, Kim Westerdijk, Eline L Giraud, Roos F Bleckman, Stefanie L Groenland, Ruben A G van Eerden, Alex L T Imholz, Annelie J E Vulink and 14 more

Abstract readMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Article in British journal of cancer, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
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

24 authors.

Maud B A van der KleijDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Division of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. m.vd.kleij@nki.nl.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-8492-8039
Niels A D GuchelaarDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8080-9093
Marinda MeertensDepartment of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Kim WesterdijkDepartment of Medical Oncology, Research Institute for Medical Innovation, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Eline L GiraudDepartment of Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology, Research Institute for Medical Innovation, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Roos F BleckmanDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Stefanie L GroenlandDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Division of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5085-3787
Ruben A G van EerdenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8937-3425
Alex L T ImholzDepartment of Medical Oncology, Deventer Hospital, Deventer, The Netherlands.
Annelie J E VulinkDepartment of Medical Oncology, Reinier de Graaf Hospital, Delft, The Netherlands.
Hans-Martin OttenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Meander Medical Centre, Amersfoort, The Netherlands.
Helle-Brit Fiebrich-WestraDepartment of Medical Oncology, Isala Hospital, Zwolle, The Netherlands.
Floor J E LubbermanDepartment of Pharmacy, Gelderse Vallei Hospital, Ede, The Netherlands.
Ingrid M E DesarDepartment of Medical Oncology, Research Institute for Medical Innovation, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Dirk-Jan A R MoesDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy & Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3219-253X
Daan J TouwDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.
Stijn L W KoolenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
Hans GelderblomDepartment of Medical Oncology, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
An K L ReynersDepartment of Medical Oncology, University Medical Centre Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1678-7816
Nielka P van ErpDepartment of Pharmacy and Clinical Pharmacology, Research Institute for Medical Innovation, Radboud University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Ron H J MathijssenDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5667-5697
Alwin D R HuitemaDepartment of Pharmacy & Pharmacology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Dutch Pharmacology Oncology Group (DPOG)
Neeltje SteeghsDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology, Division of Medical Oncology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute, Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2989-2279

Funding

GlaxoSmithKline (GlaxoSmithKline plc.) Unrestricted grant, no grant numberIpsen Fund Unrestricted grant, no grant numberNovartis Unrestricted grant, no grant numberPfizer (Pfizer Inc.) Unrestricted grant, no grant numberRoche (F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd) Unrestricted grant, no grant number
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTherapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) - performing dose adjustments based on measured drug levels and established pharmacokinetic (PK) targets - could optimise treatment with drugs that show large interpatient variability in exposure. We evaluated the feasibility of TDM for multiple oral targeted therapies. Here we report on drugs for which routine TDM is not feasible.

methodsWe evaluated drug cohorts from the Dutch Pharmacology Oncology Group - TDM study. Based on PK levels taken at pre-specified time points, PK-guided interventions were performed. Feasibility of TDM was evaluated, and based on the success and practicability of TDM, cohorts could be closed.

resultsFor 10 out of 24 cohorts TDM was not feasible and inclusion was closed. A high incidence of adverse events resulted in closing the cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib cohort. The enzalutamide and erlotinib cohorts were closed because almost all PK levels were above target. Other, non-pharmacological reasons led to closing the palbociclib, olaparib and tamoxifen cohort.

conclusionsAlthough TDM could help personalising treatment for many drugs, the above-mentioned reasons can influence its feasibility, usefulness and clinical applicability. Therefore, routine TDM is not advised for cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, enzalutamide, erlotinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib. Nonetheless, TDM remains valuable for individual clinical decisions.

Indexed as

Drug MonitoringNeoplasmsPyridinesAdministration, OralAnilidesAntineoplastic AgentsBenzamidesEverolimusFeasibility StudiesFemaleHumansImidazolesMaleMolecular Targeted TherapyNitrilesOximesAnilidesAntineoplastic AgentsBenzamidescabozantinibdabrafenibenzalutamideEverolimusImidazolesNitrilesOximespalbociclibPhenylthiohydantoinPhenylurea CompoundsPiperazinesPyridinesPyridonesPyrimidinonesregorafenibtrametinib

Identifiers

PMID38971952
PMCPMC11369282

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.