Oops, you're using an old version of your browser so some of the features on this page may not be displaying properly.

MINIMAL Requirements: Google Chrome 24+Mozilla Firefox 20+Internet Explorer 11Opera 15–18Apple Safari 7SeaMonkey 2.15-2.23

Poster Display session 2

2642 - Patient-tailored tamoxifen dosing based on an increased quantitative understanding of its complex pharmacokinetics: A novel integrative modelling approach

Date

29 Sep 2019

Session

Poster Display session 2

Topics

Tumour Site

Breast Cancer

Presenters

Anna Mueller-Schoell

Citation

Annals of Oncology (2019) 30 (suppl_5): v99-v103. 10.1093/annonc/mdz241

Authors

A. Mueller-Schoell1, L. Klopp-Schulze1, W. Huisinga2, M. Joerger3, P. Neven4, S.L. Koolen5, R.H.J. Mathijssen6, S. Schmidt7, C. Kloft1

Author affiliations

  • 1 Department Of Clinical Pharmacy And Biochemistry, Freie Universitaet Berlin, 12169 - Berlin/DE
  • 2 Institute Of Mathematics, University of Potsdam, 14476 - Potsdam/DE
  • 3 Medical Oncology & Hematology, Kantonsspital St. Gallen, 9007 - St. Gallen/CH
  • 4 Vesalius Research Center - Vib, University Hospitals Leuven, Ku Leuven, University of Leuven, 3000 - Leuven/BE
  • 5 Medical Oncology And Hospital Pharmacy, Erasmus University Medical Center, 3015 CE - Rotterdam/NL
  • 6 Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, 3015 GD - Rotterdam/NL
  • 7 Center For Pharmacometrics And Systems Pharmacology, College Of Pharmacy, University of Florida, 32827-7400 - Orlando/US

Resources

Login to access the resources on OncologyPRO.

If you do not have an ESMO account, please create one for free.

Abstract 2642

Background

About 20% of breast cancer (BC) patients do not attain tamoxifen’s (TAM) active metabolite endoxifen (ENDX) target concentrations when receiving 20 mg TAM once daily (q.d.). Thus, individualised dosing of up to 120 mg TAM q.d. for ENDX target attainment (TA) has been proposed. Combining concentrations and antiestrogenic activities of ENDX and its 3 precursors, the antiestrogenic activity score (AAS) has been developed as alternative TA metric. We aimed to integrate experimental and clinical data from diverse sources in an innovative modelling approach to identify patient groups at risk of treatment failure and to assess whether ENDX- or AAS-guided dosing would be more favourable for TA applying in silico simulation.

Methods

In vitro data from enzyme kinetic experiments, pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters from previous clinical studies and in vivo data from three clinical trials were synthesised into a minimal nonlinear mixed-effects physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (NLME-PBPK) model. Using simulation, lowest doses needed for TA, applying either the ENDX (≥5.97 ng/mL) or the AAS (≥1798) threshold, were investigated in a representative virtual BC population with various CYP2D6 activity scores (AS) and age.

Results

The developed NLME-PBPK model captured individual TAM and 3 metabolite concentration profiles from 406 BC patients well. Bioactivation to ENDX was 4.5-fold higher in CYP2D6 normal (NM) than in poor metabolisers (PM). Patients with low CYP2D6 activity and young age showed highest risks for ENDX non-TA. Among all patients, 76% received the same dose irrespective of the TA metric used. For the remaining 23% with different dose selections, applying the AAS instead of the ENDX target, TA increased in NM and intermediate metabolisers (IM) (+21.7% and +6.9%, respectively), while TA decreased in PM (-11.7%).

Conclusions

Our modelling approach combined pharmacogenetic factors, physiological changes and variability on PK parameters in a quantitative manner and allowed to translate PK information on TAM and its three major metabolites into individualised dosing. While ENDX-guided dosing was preferable for PM in our simulation, AAS-guided dosing was superior for NM and IM.

Clinical trial identification

Editorial acknowledgement

Legal entity responsible for the study

The authors.

Funding

Has not received any funding.

Disclosure

L. Klopp-Schulze: Full / Part-time employment: Merck Healthcare KGaA. S.L. Koolen: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony, Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Pfizer; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche; Research grant / Funding (institution): Astellas; Research grant / Funding (institution): Cristal Therapeutics; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ipsen. R.H.J. Mathijssen: Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Astellas; Research grant / Funding (institution): Bayer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Cristal Therapeutics; Advisory / Consultancy, Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pamgene; Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche; Research grant / Funding (institution): Sanofi; Research grant / Funding (institution), Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Pfizer; Advisory / Consultancy: Servier. C. Kloft: Research grant / Funding (institution), Grants received outside the submitted work: DDMoRe; Research grant / Funding (institution), Grants received outside the submitted work: Industry consortium (AbbVie Deutschland GmbH & Co. KG, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharma GmbH & Co. KG, Gruenenthal GmbH, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd., Merck KGaA and SANOFI); Research grant / Funding (institution), Grants received outside the submitted work: Federal Ministry of Education and Research; Research grant / Funding (institution), Grants received outside the submitted work: Diurnal Ltd. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

This site uses cookies. Some of these cookies are essential, while others help us improve your experience by providing insights into how the site is being used.

For more detailed information on the cookies we use, please check our Privacy Policy.

Customise settings
  • Necessary cookies enable core functionality. The website cannot function properly without these cookies, and you can only disable them by changing your browser preferences.