A Joint Model of Longitudinal Pharmacokinetic and Time-to-event Data to Study Exposure-response Relationships: a Proof-of-concept Study with Alectinib

Overview

Journal Cancer Chemother Pharmacol

Specialty Oncology

Date 2024 Jul 11

PMID 38992166

Authors

Lishi Lin

Vincent van der Noort

Neeltje Steeghs

Gerrina Ruiter

Jos H Beijnen

Alwin D R Huitema

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Purpose: In exposure-response analyses of oral targeted anticancer agents, longitudinal plasma trough concentrations are often aggregated into a single value even though plasma trough concentrations can vary over time due to dose adaptations, for example. The aim of this study was to compare joint models to conventional exposure-response analyses methods with the application of alectinib as proof-of-concept.

Methods: Joint models combine longitudinal pharmacokinetic data and progression-free survival data to infer the dependency and association between the two datatypes. The results from the best joint model and the standard and time-dependent cox proportional hazards models were compared. To normalize the data, alectinib trough concentrations were normalized using a sigmoidal transformation to transformed trough concentrations (TTC) before entering the models.

Results: No statistically significant exposure-response relationship was observed in the different Cox models. In contrast, the joint model with the current value of TTC in combination with the average TTC over time did show an exposure-response relationship for alectinib. A one unit increase in the average TTC corresponded to an 11% reduction in progression (HR, 0.891; 95% confidence interval, 0.805-0.988).

Conclusion: Joint models are able to give insights in the association structure between plasma trough concentrations and survival outcomes that would otherwise not be possible using Cox models. Therefore, joint models should be used more often in exposure-response analyses of oral targeted anticancer agents.

References

Morcos P, Nueesch E, Jaminion F, Guerini E, Hsu J, Bordogna W . Exposure-response analysis of alectinib in crizotinib-resistant ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2018; 82(1):129-138. PMC: 6010493. DOI: 10.1007/s00280-018-3597-5. View

Groenland S, Geel D, Janssen J, de Vries N, Rosing H, Beijnen J . Exposure-Response Analyses of Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase Inhibitors Crizotinib and Alectinib in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2020; 109(2):394-402. PMC: 7891593. DOI: 10.1002/cpt.1989. View

Demetri G, Wang Y, Wehrle E, Racine A, Nikolova Z, Blanke C . Imatinib plasma levels are correlated with clinical benefit in patients with unresectable/metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2009; 27(19):3141-7. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.20.4818. View

Carton E, Noe G, Huillard O, Golmard L, Giroux J, Cessot A . Relation between plasma trough concentration of abiraterone and prostate-specific antigen response in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer patients. Eur J Cancer. 2016; 72:54-61. DOI: 10.1016/j.ejca.2016.11.027. View

Verheijen R, Bins S, Mathijssen R, Lolkema M, van Doorn L, Schellens J . Individualized Pazopanib Dosing: A Prospective Feasibility Study in Cancer Patients. Clin Cancer Res. 2016; 22(23):5738-5746. DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-16-1255. View

Groenland S, Ratain M, Chen L, Gandhi V . The Right Dose: From Phase I to Clinical Practice. Am Soc Clin Oncol Educ Book. 2021; 41:92-106. DOI: 10.1200/EDBK_319567. View

Ibrahim J, Chu H, Chen L . Basic concepts and methods for joint models of longitudinal and survival data. J Clin Oncol. 2010; 28(16):2796-801. PMC: 4503792. DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.0654. View

Mchunu N, Mwambi H, Rizopoulos D, Reddy T, Yende-Zuma N . Using joint models to study the association between CD4 count and the risk of death in TB/HIV data. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2022; 22(1):295. PMC: 9675185. DOI: 10.1186/s12874-022-01775-7. View

Baart S, Van Der Palen R, Putter H, Tsonaka R, Blom N, Rizopoulos D . Joint Modeling of Longitudinal Markers and Time-to-Event Outcomes: An Application and Tutorial in Patients After Surgical Repair of Transposition of the Great Arteries. Circ Cardiovasc Qual Outcomes. 2021; 14(11):e007593. PMC: 8598112. DOI: 10.1161/CIRCOUTCOMES.120.007593. View

10.

Andersen B, McElroy J, Carbone D, Presley C, Smith R, Shields P . Psychological Symptom Trajectories and Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Survival: A Joint Model Analysis. Psychosom Med. 2021; 84(2):215-223. PMC: 8831460. DOI: 10.1097/PSY.0000000000001027. View

11.

Janssen J, de Vries N, Venekamp N, Rosing H, Huitema A, Beijnen J . Development and validation of a liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay for nine oral anticancer drugs in human plasma. J Pharm Biomed Anal. 2019; 174:561-566. DOI: 10.1016/j.jpba.2019.06.034. View

12.

van der Kleij M, Guchelaar N, Mathijssen R, Versluis J, Huitema A, Koolen S . Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Kinase Inhibitors in Oncology. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2023; 62(10):1333-1364. PMC: 10519871. DOI: 10.1007/s40262-023-01293-9. View

13.

Schemper M, Smith T . A note on quantifying follow-up in studies of failure time. Control Clin Trials. 1996; 17(4):343-6. DOI: 10.1016/0197-2456(96)00075-x. View