Dataset Information

Evaluation of body-surface-area adjusted dosing of high-dose methotrexate by population pharmacokinetics in a large cohort of cancer patients.

ABSTRACT:

Background

The aim of this study was to identify sources of variability including patient gender and body surface area (BSA) in pharmacokinetic (PK) exposure for high-dose methotrexate (MTX) continuous infusion in a large cohort of patients with hematological and solid malignancies.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective PK analysis of MTX plasma concentration data from hematological/oncological patients treated at the University Hospital of Cologne between 2005 and 2018. Nonlinear mixed effects modeling was performed. Covariate data on patient demographics and clinical chemistry parameters was incorporated to assess relationships with PK parameters. Simulations were conducted to compare exposure and probability of target attainment (PTA) under BSA adjusted, flat and stratified dosing regimens.

Results

Plasma concentration over time data (2182 measurements) from therapeutic drug monitoring from 229 patients was available. PK of MTX were best described by a three-compartment model. Values for clearance (CL) of 4.33 [2.95-5.92] L h^- 1 and central volume of distribution of 4.29 [1.81-7.33] L were estimated. An inter-occasion variability of 23.1% (coefficient of variation) and an inter-individual variability of 29.7% were associated to CL, which was 16 [7-25] % lower in women. Serum creatinine, patient age, sex and BSA were significantly related to CL of MTX. Simulations suggested that differences in PTA between flat and BSA-based dosing were marginal, with stratified dosing performing best overall.

Conclusion

A dosing scheme with doses stratified across BSA quartiles is suggested to optimize target exposure attainment. Influence of patient sex on CL of MTX is present but small in magnitude.

SUBMITTER: Arshad U

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8214796 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCapecitabine is generally dosed based on body surface area (BSA). This dosing strategy has several limitations; however, evidence for alternative strategies is lacking. Therefore, we analyzed the toxicity and effectiveness of fixed-dose capecitabine and compared this strategy with a BSA-based dose of capecitabine in a large set of patients.MethodsPatients treated with fixed-dose capecitabine between 2003 and 2015 were studied. A comparable group of patients, dosed based on BSA, was chosen as a control cohort. A total of two combined scores were used: capecitabine-specific toxicity (diarrhea, National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria grade ⩾3, hand-foot syndrome ⩾2, or neutropenia ⩾2), and clinically relevant events due to toxicity, that is, hospital admission, dose reduction, or discontinuation. Per treatment regimen, patients were divided into three BSA groups based on BSA quartiles corrected for sex. Toxicity scores were compared by a Chi-square test between cohorts, and within cohorts using BSA groups. Progression-free survival (PFS) was estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method.ResultsA total of 2319 patients were included (fixed dosed, n = 1126 and BSA-based dose, n = 1193). Overall, four regimens were evaluated: capecitabine-radiotherapy (n = 1178), capecitabine-oxaliplatin (n = 519), capecitabine triplet (n = 181) and capecitabine monotherapy (n = 441). The incidence of capecitabine-specific toxicity and clinically relevant events was comparable between fixed-dose and BSA-dosed patients, while a small difference (7.1%) in absolute dose was found. Both cohorts showed only a higher incidence of both toxicity scores in the lowest BSA group of the capecitabine-radiotherapy group (p < 0.05). Subgroups of the fixed-dose cohort analyzed for PFS, showed no differences between BSA groups.ConclusionsFixed-dose capecitabine is as comparably well tolerated and effective as BSA-based dosing and could be considered as a reasonable alternative for BSA-based dosing.

Project description:PurposeThe Surviving Sepsis Campaign guidelines recommend 30 mL/kg of fluids within 3 hours (30by3) of sepsis-induced hypoperfusion, but a national mandate released an allowance for dosing based on ideal instead of actual body weight (IBW/ABW) for obese patients. This study aims to determine the dose-effect of 30by3 for patients with severe sepsis or septic shock (SS/SS) with respect to body mass index (BMI) categories and secondarily, examine the clinical impact of IBW vs. ABW-based dosing.MethodsRetrospective cohort study of adults (≥18 years; n = 1,032) with SS/SS presenting to an urban, tertiary-care emergency department. Models include MEDS score, antibiotic timing, lactate, renal and heart failure, among others.ResultsThe cohort was 10.2% underweight and 28.7% obese. Overall mortality was 17.1% with 20.4% shock mortality. An exponential increase in mortality was observed for each 5 mL/kg under 30by3 for underweight (p = 0.02), but not obese patients. ABW vs IBW-30by3 dosing was reached in 80.0 vs 52.4% (underweight), 56.4 vs 56.9% (normal/overweight), and 23.3 vs 46.0% (obese). Across all BMI categories, there was increased mortality for not reaching ABW-based 30by3 dosing (OR 1.78, 95% CI 1.18-2.69) with no significant impact for IBW (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.87 -1.91). The increased mortality for failing to reach ABW-dosed 30by3 remained for underweight patients ABW (OR 5.82, 95% CI 1.32-25.57) but not obese patients. Longer ICU stays were observed for not reaching 30by3 based on ABW (β = 2.40, 95% CI 0.84-3.95) and IBW dosing (β = 1.58, 95% CI 0.07-3.08) overall. This effect remained for obese and underweight (except IBW dosing) patients.ConclusionsAn exponential, dose-effect increase in mortality was observed for underweight patients not receiving 30by3. Therefore, the mortality impact of under-dosing may be amplified using ABW for underweight patients. Fluid dosing did not impact mortality for obese patients, but we caution against deviation from guidelines without further studies.