» Articles » PMID: 35397172

Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Phenotyping Using Pretreatment Uracil: A Note of Caution Based on a Large Prospective Clinical Study

Abstract

In clinical practice, 25-30% of the patients treated with fluoropyrimidines experience severe fluoropyrimidine-related toxicity. Extensively clinically validated DPYD genotyping tests are available to identify patients at risk of severe toxicity due to decreased activity of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), the rate limiting enzyme in fluoropyrimidine metabolism. In April 2020, the European Medicines Agency recommended that, as an alternative for DPYD genotype-based testing for DPD deficiency, also phenotype testing based on pretreatment plasma uracil levels is a suitable method to identify patients with DPD deficiency. Although the evidence for genotype-directed dosing of fluoropyrimidines is substantial, the level of evidence supporting plasma uracil levels to predict DPD activity in clinical practice is limited. Notwithstanding this, uracil-based phenotyping is now used in clinical practice in various countries in Europe. We aimed to determine the value of pretreatment uracil levels in predicting DPD deficiency and severe treatment-related toxicity. To this end, we determined pretreatment uracil levels in 955 patients with cancer, and assessed the correlation with DPD activity in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) and fluoropyrimidine-related severe toxicity. We identified substantial issues concerning the use of pretreatment uracil in clinical practice, including large between-center study differences in measured pretreatment uracil levels, most likely as a result of pre-analytical factors. Importantly, we were not able to correlate pretreatment uracil levels with DPD activity nor were uracil levels predictive of severe treatment-related toxicity. We urge that robust clinical validation should first be performed before pretreatment plasma uracil levels are used in clinical practice as part of a dosing strategy for fluoropyrimidines.

Citing Articles

Adjuvant treatment with Capecitabine in patients who received orthotopic liver transplantation with incidental diagnosis of intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. Implications on DPYD polymorphisms assessment: report of two cases and review of the....

Liguori C, Magi S, Mandolesi A, Agostini A, Svegliati-Baroni G, Benedetti Cacciaguerra A Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2025; 95(1):40.

PMID: 40072607 PMC: 11903612. DOI: 10.1007/s00280-025-04756-x.


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

Hanrath M, Banken E, van den Wildenberg S, van de Kerkhof D, Moes D, Boisdron-Celle M Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2025; 95(1):34.

PMID: 39955449 PMC: 11829899. DOI: 10.1007/s00280-025-04759-8.


DPYD genotype should be extended to rare variants: report on two cases of phenotype / genotype discrepancy.

Vilquin P, Medard Y, Thomas F, Goldwirt L, Teixeira L, Mourah S Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2025; 95(1):16.

PMID: 39745516 DOI: 10.1007/s00280-024-04738-5.


Plasma clearance of 5-fluorouracil is more influenced by variations in glomerular filtration rate than by uracil concentration.

Matheux A, Collas L, Grisard M, Goulaieff L, Ghiringhelli F, Bengrine-Lefevre L Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2024; 95(1):9.

PMID: 39702680 DOI: 10.1007/s00280-024-04732-x.


Case report: A case of severe capecitabine toxicity due to confirmed in trans compound heterozygosity of a common and rare DPYD variant.

de Haar-Holleman A, Cortoos P, Vlaeminck J, Van Landuyt P, Steurbaut S, Vaeyens F Front Pharmacol. 2024; 15:1459565.

PMID: 39376610 PMC: 11456491. DOI: 10.3389/fphar.2024.1459565.


References
1.
Jacobs B, Deenen M, Pluim D, van Hasselt J, Krahenbuhl M, van Geel R . Pronounced between-subject and circadian variability in thymidylate synthase and dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase enzyme activity in human volunteers. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2016; 82(3):706-16. PMC: 5338101. DOI: 10.1111/bcp.13007. View

2.
Knikman J, Gelderblom H, Beijnen J, Cats A, Guchelaar H, Henricks L . Individualized Dosing of Fluoropyrimidine-Based Chemotherapy to Prevent Severe Fluoropyrimidine-Related Toxicity: What Are the Options?. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020; 109(3):591-604. PMC: 7983939. DOI: 10.1002/cpt.2069. View

3.
Meulendijks D, Henricks L, Jacobs B, Aliev A, Deenen M, de Vries N . Pretreatment serum uracil concentration as a predictor of severe and fatal fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. Br J Cancer. 2017; 116(11):1415-1424. PMC: 5520099. DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2017.94. View

4.
Hoff P, Ansari R, Batist G, Cox J, Kocha W, Kuperminc M . Comparison of oral capecitabine versus intravenous fluorouracil plus leucovorin as first-line treatment in 605 patients with metastatic colorectal cancer: results of a randomized phase III study. J Clin Oncol. 2001; 19(8):2282-92. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2001.19.8.2282. View

5.
Boisdron-Celle M, Remaud G, Traore S, Poirier A, Gamelin L, Morel A . 5-Fluorouracil-related severe toxicity: a comparison of different methods for the pretherapeutic detection of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency. Cancer Lett. 2006; 249(2):271-82. DOI: 10.1016/j.canlet.2006.09.006. View