Plasma Concentrations Of Capecitabine Research Articles

Pharmacokinetic and Safety Comparison of Two Capecitabine Tablets in Patients with Colorectal or Breast Cancer Under Fed Conditions: A Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label, Three-Period, and Reference-Replicated Crossover Study.

In this study, we assessed the pharmacokinetics (PK), bioequivalence, and safety of 150mg capecitabine compared to the branded reference formulation in colorectal or breast cancer patients receiving a high-fat diet. This was a multicenter, open, random, balanced, three-period, three-sequence and semi-repetitive cross study with 48 subjects. In each study period, the eligible subject received the test or reference formulation, followed by a 1-day washout period. Serial blood samples for pharmacokinetic assessment were collected at predose up to 8h postdose. The plasma concentrations of capecitabine were analyzed by LC/MS-MS. Pharmacokinetic parameters (non-compartmental model) were assessed with WinNonlin software. The pharmacokinetic parameters assessed were the area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time 0 to the time of last measurable concentration (AUC0-t), the AUC from time zero to infinity (AUC0-∞), the peak plasma concentration of the drug (Cmax), the time needed to reach maximum concentration (Tmax), the elimination half-life (t1/2), and the terminal elimination rate (λz). All were analyzed using an analysis of variance (ANOVA) model after logarithmic transformation of the data. To establish the bioequivalence (BE) for capecitabine, reference-scaled average bioequivalence (RSABE) acceptance criteria and average bioequivalence (ABE) acceptance criteria were used. Safety and tolerability were assessed during the entire study period. Reference scaled maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) was higher than 0.294, permitting use of RSABE. The within-subject SDs of the reference intervention (SWR) for AUC0-t and AUC0-∞ were < 0.294, meeting ABE criteria. The point estimate for the geometric least squares mean (GLSM) ratio for the point estimate of Cmax was 0.962, within the range of 0.80-1.25. The 90% upper confidence boundary for the test/reference of GLSM ratios was 97.84-105.40% for AUC0-t and 97.33-103.51% for AUC0-∞, all of which were within the prespecified limits. The 90% confidence intervals for AUC0-t and AUC0-∞ and 95% upper confidence limit for Cmax indicated bioequivalence. No serious adverse events were found among the subjects. According to the criteria for bioequivalence, the test formulation was bioequivalent to the reference formulation in terms of the rate and extent of absorption under fed conditions by measurement of total capecitabine and was safe and well tolerated. NCT04420871.

A Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic Model for Capecitabine in Colorectal Cancer Rats: Simulation of Antitumor Efficacy at Various Administration Schedules.

Capecitabine is an oral prodrug of 5-fluorouracil and is widely used for colorectal cancer (CRC) treatment. However, knowledge of its antitumor efficacy after modification of the dosing schedule is insufficient. The aim of this study was to predict the antitumor efficacy of capecitabine using a physiologically based pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PBPK-PD) model based on metabolic enzyme activities. CRC model rats were administrated 180mg/kg of capecitabine for 2weeks. Blood samples were collected at 0, 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, 1, 1.5, 2, 3, 4, 6, and 8h following capecitabine administration. Plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites were measured on days 1, 7, and 14. Metabolic enzyme activities were determined in vitro using the liver and small intestine of the CRC model rats. A PBPK-PD model was developed based on metabolic enzyme activities. The antitumor efficacy of capecitabine after regimen modification was simulated using the PBPK-PD model. Capecitabine antitumor efficacy was dose-dependent. A dose of >500μmol/kg was needed to inhibit tumor growth. After capecitabine regimen modification, a 1-week postponement of capecitabine administration was more efficacious than a reduction in the dosage to 80%. The PBPK-PD model could simulate the antitumor efficacy at various capecitabine administration schedules. PBPK-PD models can contribute to the development of an appropriate CRC chemotherapy regimen with capecitabine.

Combination Therapy of High-Dose Rabeprazole Plus Metronomic Capecitabine in Advanced Gastro-Intestinal Cancer: A Randomized Phase II Trial.

Simple SummaryThis is the first phase II study of high dose rabeprazole repurposing (1.5 mg/kg bid, three days a week) combined with metronomic capecitabine (mCAP), 1500 mg/daily, in gastrointestinal cancer, aimed at evaluating the activity and safety of high-dose proton pump inhibitor in combination with mCAP as salvage treatment in pretreated patients. A 3-months PFS rate of 66% and 57% was reported in the mCAP-rabeprazole and mCAP group, respectively. Although, the adjunct of high dose rabeprazole to mCAP did not improve mCAP activity, the combination of proton pump inhibitor with chemotherapy would deserve to be further investigated. Background: In recent years, proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) have been investigated at high-dose to modulate tumor microenvironment acidification thus restoring chemotherapeutic sensitivity. This is the first trial to study activity and safety of repurposing high dose rabeprazole combined with metronomic capecitabine (mCAP). Methods: A phase II study in which patients with gastrointestinal cancer, refractory to standard treatments, who had a life expectancy >3 months, were blind randomized 1:1 to mCAP, 1500 mg/daily, continuously with or without rabeprazole 1.5 mg/kg bid, three days a week. The primary endpoint was 3-months progression-free survival (PFS). The secondary endpoints were clinical benefit (CB) and overall survival (OS). Safety and plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites (5′-DFUR and 5-FU) were also evaluated. Results: Sixty-seven (median age 69 years; 63% male; 84% colorectal cancer, 76% ECOG-PS ≤ 1; 84% pretreated with two or more lines of chemotherapy) out of 90 patients screened for eligibility, were randomized to receive mCAP+rabeprazole (n = 32) vs. mCAP (n = 35). All patients were evaluable for response. No significant difference between mCAP+rabeprazole vs. mCAP, in terms of 3-months PFS rate (HR = 1.43, 95%CI 0.53–3.85; p = 0.477), median PFS (HR = 1.22, 95%CI 0.75–2.00, p = 0.420), CB (RR = 0.85, 95%CI 0.29–2.44; p = 0.786) and median OS (HR = 0.89, 95%CI 0.54–1.48; p = 0.664) was observed. However, a 3-year OS rate of 10% and 12% was reported in the mCAP-rabeprazole and mCAP groups, respectively. Overall, no grade 3 or 4 toxicity occurred but grade 1 or 2 adverse event of any type were more frequently in the mCAP+rabeprazole group than in the mCAP (OR 2.83, 95%CI 1.03–7.79; p = 0.043). Finally, there was not statistically significant difference in the plasma concentration of capecitabine and its metabolites between the two groups. Conclusions: Although the adjunct of high dose rabeprazole to mCAP was not shown to affect mCAP activity, as PPI are being investigated worldwide as drugs to be repositioned in cancer treatment and also considering the limited sample size as well as the favorable safety profile of the combination in the present study, further clinical investigations are desirable.

Variants of carboxylesterase 1 have no impact on capecitabine pharmacokinetics and toxicity in capecitabine plus oxaliplatin treated-colorectal cancer patients.

Capecitabine is a prodrug that undergoes metabolism in three steps to form an active 5-fluorouracil (5-FU). The first step is primarily catalyzed by liver carboxylesterases (CES) 1. Here, we examined the effects of CES1 variants on pharmacokinetics and toxicity of capecitabine. We enrolled postoperative colorectal cancer (CRC) patients administered with adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapeOX) and metastatic CRC patients receiving CapeOX. The pharmacokinetic analysis of the first capecitabine dose (1000mg/m2) was done on day 1, and oxaliplatin administration was shifted to day 2. Plasma concentrations of capecitabine, 5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine, 5'-deoxy-5-fluorouridine (5'-DFUR), and 5-FU were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography. CES1 polymorphisms (rs3217164, rs2244614, rs2244613, rs7187684, and rs11861118) and the functional CES1 genes (1A1, var1A1, 1A2, and pseudo 1A3) in their diplotype configurations were analyzed by direct sequencing. Thirty-seven patients were enrolled from September 2017 to February 2020. Patients with a higher area under the plasma concentration-time curve to capecitabine dose ratio (AUC/dose) of 5'-DFUR than its mean showed a higher frequency of overall ≥ grade 3 toxicity and lower relative dose intensity (RDI) of capecitabine than those with a lower ratio. Higher CES1 activity expressed as a metabolic ratio (AUC of capecitabine/sum of three AUCs of each metabolite) lower than its mean was associated with higher 5'-DFUR AUC/dose and lower RDI, indicating essential roles of CES1 in capecitabine activation to produce 5'-DFUR. However, the association between CES1 variants and capecitabine pharmacokinetics and toxicity was not significant. CES1 variants are not associated with capecitabine pharmacokinetics and toxicity.

Rabeprazole intake does not affect systemic exposure to capecitabine and its metabolites, 5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine, 5'-deoxy-5-fluorouridine, and 5-fluorouracil.

Several retrospective studies have shown that the antitumor efficacy of capecitabine-containing chemotherapy decreases when co-administered with a proton pump inhibitor (PPI). Although a reduction in capecitabine absorption by PPIs was proposed as the underlying mechanism, the effects of PPIs on capecitabine pharmacokinetics remain unclear. We prospectively examined the effects of rabeprazole on the pharmacokinetics of capecitabine and its metabolites. We enrolled patients administered adjuvant capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CapeOX) for postoperative colorectal cancer (CRC) patients and metastatic CRC patients receiving CapeOX with/without bevacizumab. Patients receiving a PPI before registration were allocated to the rabeprazole group, and the PPI was changed to rabeprazole (20mg/day) at least 1week before the initiation of capecitabine treatment. On day 1, oral capecitabine (1000mg/m2) was administered 1h after rabeprazole intake. Oxaliplatin (and bevacizumab) administration on day 1 was shifted to day 2 for pharmacokinetic analysis of the first capecitabine dose. Plasma concentrations of capecitabine, 5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine, 5'-deoxy-5-fluorouridine, and 5-fluorouracil were analyzed by high-performance liquid chromatography. Effects of rabeprazole on inhibition of cell proliferation by each capecitabine metabolite were examined with colon cancer cells (COLO205 and HCT116). Five and 9 patients enrolled between September 2017 and July 2018 were allocated to rabeprazole and control groups, respectively. No significant effects of rabeprazole on area under the plasma concentration-time curve divided by capecitabine dose for capecitabine and its three metabolites were observed. Rabeprazole did not affect the proliferation inhibition of colon cancer cells by the respective capecitabine metabolites. Rabeprazole does not affect capecitabine pharmacokinetics.

Pharmacokinetic analysis of metronomic capecitabine in refractory metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

The aim of the present study was to assess the pharmacokinetics (PK) of metronomic capecitabine and its metabolites in a population of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients. Thirty-four patients (M/F, 22/12) with a diagnosis of mCRC received capecitabine 800mg p.o. twice a day and cyclophosphamide 50mg/day p.o. Blood samples were collected at baseline, 15min, 30min, 1h, 1.5h, 2h, 3h and 5h at day 1 after capecitabine administration. Plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites were measured by high performance liquid chromatography and the main PK parameters were calculated. Maximum plasma concentrations (Cmax) of capecitabine (11.51 ± 9.73μg/ml) occurred at 0.5h, whereas the Cmax of 5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine (5'-DFCR; 2.45± 2.93μg/ml), 5'-deoxy-5-fluorouridine (5'-DFUR; 6.43 ± 8.2μg/ml), and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU; 0.24 ± 0.16μg/ml) were found at 1h, 1.5h and 1h, respectively. Capecitabine, 5'-DFCR, 5'-DFUR and 5-FU AUCs at day 1 were 21.30 ± 10.78, 5.2 ± 4.6, 19.59 ± 3.83 and 0.66 ± 0.77 hxμg/ml, respectively. In conclusion, low doses of capecitabine were rapidly absorbed and extensively metabolized, achieving measurable plasma concentrations in a heavily pretreated population of patients.

Circadian variations in the pharmacokinetics of capecitabine and its metabolites in rats

Capecitabine, an orally available prodrug of 5-fluorouracil, is widely used to treat patients with colorectal cancer. Although various studies have shown circadian variations in plasma 5-fluorouracil concentrations during long-term infusion, it is still unknown whether circadian variations also exist following administration of capecitabine. The present study aimed to investigate whether the pharmacokinetics of capecitabine and its metabolites, including 5-fluorouracil, vary according to administration time in rats. Rats were orally administered capecitabine (180mg/kg) at 07:00 (23h after light onset, HALO), 13:00 (5 HALO), or 19:00h (11 HALO). Plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites, such as 5′-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine (5′-DFCR), 5′-deoxy-5-fluorouridine (5′-DFUR), and 5-fluorouracil, were determined after capecitabine administration. The results showed that the t1/2 and AUC0–∞ values of 5-fluorouracil differed as a function of the dosing time of capecitabine. The maximum and minimum mean t1/2 values of 5-fluorouracil were obtained when the drug was administered at 07:00h (23 HALO: 3.1±1.2h) and 13:00h (5 HALO: 1.5±0.6h), respectively. The AUC0–∞ value of 5-fluorouracil at 07:00h (23 HALO: 533.9±195.7μmol∙h/L) was 1.8-fold higher than the value at 13:00h (5 HALO: 302.5±157.1μmol∙h/L). The clearance of 5-fluorouracil followed a cosine circadian curve, and the simulated population mean clearance was highest at rest times and lowest during active times in rats. The results for the plasma 5′-DFCR and 5′-DFUR levels indicated that circadian variations in the sequential metabolism of capecitabine to 5-fluorouracil would also affect plasma 5-fluorouracil levels following capecitabine administration. In conclusion, the pharmacokinetics of capecitabine and its metabolites, including 5-fluorouracil, varied according to time of dosing, suggesting that the capecitabine administration time is an important factor in achieving sufficient efficacy and reducing toxicity in patients.

Abstract 5042: Defining an optimal single time point sampling strategy representative of overall capecitabine pharmacokinetics

Abstract Background: Capecitabine is an oral chemotherapy pro-drug used to treat advanced colorectal cancer. Patients may experience hand-foot syndrome and diarrhea, among other side effects, that affect quality of life and may necessitate dose modification or discontinuation. There is significant regional variation in capecitabine tolerability, related to a myriad of factors including pharmacogenomics, dietary and cultural differences. Capecitabine dose modification, when necessary, is empirical based on toxicity suggesting a personalized dosing approach might better optimize therapy. Objective: In phase I of a personalized dosing approach, our objective was to define an optimal time point for blood sampling that best represented overall exposure of capecitabine and its metabolites. Methods: A single-arm prospective pharmacokinetic cohort study of patients with advanced or metastatic colorectal cancer prescribed capecitabine monotherapy was done. Blood samples were collected pre-dose and at timed intervals between 0 and 8 hours post-dose. Plasma concentration of capecitabine and its major metabolites, 5'-deoxy-5-fluorocytidine (5'-DFCR) and 5'-deoxy-5-fluorouracil (5'-DFUR), were measured by ultra-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS/MS). Results: 26 patients were enrolled; 65% were male and 42.3% had metastatic disease. Mean capecitabine dose was 2854 ± 944 mg. Hand-foot symptoms (60%), fatigue (53%) and diarrhea (30%) were the most common adverse drug reactions. Dose normalized mean (SD) AUC0-8h for capecitabine, 5’-DFCR and 5’-DFUR were 6.74 (3.0), 4.19 (1.5) and 6.33 (2.8) ng/ml*h, respectively. Spearman correlation between dose normalized concentrations and AUC at each blood draw was performed. The best estimated time points for capecitabine, 5’-DFCR and 5’-DFUR were 1.5, 2 and 2 hours with r2 values of 0.6 (p &amp;lt;0.01), 0.64 (p &amp;lt;0.001) and 0.51 (p &amp;lt;0.01), respectively. There was a significant correlation seen between capecitabine AUC and need for subsequent dose reduction (p&amp;lt;0.05). Conclusions: Blood samples obtained between 1.5 and 2 hours post-dose provide the best estimate of capecitabine exposure. Further pharmacokinetic analysis in this cohort is ongoing. This blood draw strategy will be used in a larger trial intended to develop a personalized capecitabine dosing algorithm. Citation Format: Stephen Welch, Wendy Teft, John Lenehan, Rommel Tirona, Karen Lumsden, Eric Winquist, Richard B. Kim. Defining an optimal single time point sampling strategy representative of overall capecitabine pharmacokinetics [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2017; 2017 Apr 1-5; Washington, DC. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 5042. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2017-5042

Significant Effect of Capecitabine on the Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Warfarin in Patients With Cancer

Clinical cases of capecitabine and other fluorouracil-based chemotherapies potentiating the effects of coumarin derivatives have been reported. This study assessed the influence of capecitabine on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics (PD) of warfarin. Four patients with advanced/metastatic cancer completed the study, receiving a single oral dose of 20 mg warfarin before the start of standard capecitabine treatment (day 1), and again during the third cycle of capecitabine (day 61). PK parameters of warfarin and capecitabine and PD parameters of warfarin were assessed on days 1 and 61. During capecitabine treatment, the area under the plasma concentration time curve from 0 to infinity (AUC(0-infinity)) of S-warfarin increased by 57% (90% CI, 32% to 88%) with a 51% prolongation of the elimination half-life (t(1/2); 90% CI, 32% to 74%). Exposure to R-warfarin was not significantly affected. Plasma concentrations of capecitabine and its metabolites were not influenced by warfarin. During capecitabine treatment, the effect of warfarin on the baseline corrected AUC of the International Normalized Ratio (INR) increased by 2.8 times (90% CI, 1.33 to 5.70), with the maximum observed INR value almost doubling. Because of the administration of vitamin K to some patients with elevated INRs, these figures are likely to underestimate the true PD effect. Mean baseline factor VII levels dropped while on capecitabine therapy, potentially contributing to the observed PD interaction, though this effect did not reach statistical significance. There is a significant pharmacokinetic interaction between capecitabine and S-warfarin, resulting in exaggerated anticoagulant activity. Patients receiving warfarin anticoagulant therapy concomitantly with capecitabine should have their INR closely monitored and warfarin doses adjusted accordingly.