Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39955449›Full record

ArticleCancer chemotherapy and pharmacology2025

Thymine as potential biomarker to predict 5-FU systemic exposure in patients with gastro-intestinal cancer: a prospective pharmacokinetic study (FUUT-trial).

Maarten A Hanrath, Evi Banken, Sebastian A H van den Wildenberg, Daan van de Kerkhof, Dirk Jan A R Moes, Michele Boisdron-Celle, Bianca J C van den Bosch, Ramon Bax, Pierre M Bet, Jan Gerard Maring and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

13 authors.

Maarten A Hanrath *Department of Clinical Pharmacy, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Evi Banken *Department of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0002-6684-0101
Sebastian A H van den WildenbergDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Daan van de KerkhofDepartment of Clinical Chemistry, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Dirk Jan A R MoesDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy and Toxicology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands.
Michele Boisdron-CelleDepartment of Oncopharmacology-Pharmacogenetics INSERM U892, Western Cancer Institute Paul Papin, Angers, France.
Bianca J C van den BoschDepartment of Clinical Genetics, Clinical Genomics, Maastricht University Medical Center (MUMC+), Maastricht, the Netherlands.
Ramon BaxDepartment of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Pierre M BetDepartment of Clinical Pharmacology and Pharmacy, Amsterdam University Medical Center, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Jan Gerard MaringDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Isala, Zwolle, the Netherlands.
Geert-Jan M CreemersDepartment of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Irene E G van HellemondDepartment of Medical Oncology, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands.
Maarten J DeenenDepartment of Clinical Pharmacy, Catharina Hospital, Eindhoven, the Netherlands. maarten.deenen@catharinaziekenhuis.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIn 20-30% of the patients, fluoropyrimidines (5-FU) based chemotherapy leads to severe toxicity, which is associated with dihydropyridine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency. Therefore, DPYD genotyping became standard practice before treatment with fluoropyrimidines. Nevertheless, only 17% of the patients with severe toxicity have a DPYD variant. Therefore, an urgent need persists to investigate other strategies contributing to prediction and prevention of toxicity. Endogenous DPD substrates are considered as potential biomarkers to predict toxicity, yet contradictional data exist on demonstrating uracil as a reliable biomarker. Thymine as biomarker for toxicity has been investigated less. The aim of this study was to determine the association between the concentrations of uracil, thymine dihydrouracil (DHU) and dihydrothymine (DHT), with the systemic drug exposure of 5-FU and DPD enzyme activity in patients treated with 5-FU.

methodsWe included 36 patients with gastrointestinal malignancy who received 5-FU infusion. DPYD genotyping was conducted before start of treatment. Blood samples for determining 5-FU, uracil and thymine concentrations during infusion and DPD enzyme activity were taken.

resultsWe found a significant correlation between the 5-FU systematic exposure and baseline thymine concentrations (R

conclusion5-FU dose individualization based on thymine concentrations could be a promising addition to DPYD genotyping to predict 5-FU-induced toxicity. Larger prospective trials are needed to examine thymine as predictor for toxicity in daily practice.

trial registrationTrial NL7539 at 'Overview of Medical Research in the Netherlands' (ID NL-OMON21471). Date of registration 19-02-2019.

Indexed as

Antimetabolites, AntineoplasticFluorouracilGastrointestinal NeoplasmsThymineAdultAgedAged, 80 and overBiomarkersBiomarkers, TumorDihydrouracil Dehydrogenase (NADP)FemaleGenotypeHumansMaleMiddle AgedProspective StudiesAntimetabolites, AntineoplasticBiomarkersBiomarkers, TumordihydrouracilDihydrouracil Dehydrogenase (NADP)FluorouracilThymineUracil5-FlurouracilEndogenous DPD substratesGastrointestinal cancerThymineToxicity

Identifiers

PMID39955449
PMCPMC11829899

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.