BACKGROUND: Naldemedine is an orally available peripherally acting μ-opioid receptor antagonist approved to treat opioid-induced constipation (OIC). It is contraindicated for patients with known or suspected gastrointestinal obstruction to protect against naldemedine-induced perforation. Here, we report a clinical case of suspected perforation of a diverticulum in the sigmoid colon associated with naldemedine. CASE PRESENTATION: The patient was a 65-year-old man with a history of oral cancer who had been prescribed oxycodone (20 mg/day) for cancer pain. On day 0, the patient started naldemedine 0.2 mg once daily before bedtime for OIC. The dose of oxycodone was increased for pain control up to 60 mg/day. On day 35 of naldemedine treatment, the patient developed fever and abdominal pain, and his frequency of defecation had decreased. Initial laboratory results showed a C-reactive protein (CRP) level of 28.5 mg/dL and white blood cell (WBC) count of 13,500/µL. On day 37, the patient still had tenderness in his lower abdomen. Abdominal computed tomography revealed free air in the abdominal cavity suggesting an intestinal perforation. A Hartmann procedure was performed. Histopathological findings showed numerous diverticula in the sigmoid colon, some of which were perforated. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that the effects of OIC may have compressed the intestinal tract, which was followed by naldemedine-activation of peristalsis, which led to the onset of intestinal perforation. In patients with pre-existing diverticular disease, we should monitor for increased WBC counts and CRP levels after the initiation of treatment with naldemedine, and consider performing appropriate tests early in the event of abdominal complaints.

BACKGROUND: Anamorelin, a drug to treat cancer cachexia, binds to ghrelin receptors and improves body weight and appetite. In clinical trials in Japan, patients experienced a 10.7% frequency of stimulant conduction system depression as a severe side effect. Although rare, anamorelin sometimes causes fatal arrhythmias. Because patients with cancer cachexia are often underweight, data on the safety of anamorelin in obese patients are lacking. We report a case of QT interval prolongation after anamorelin administration to an obese patient with non-small cell lung cancer. CASE PRESENTATION: A female patient with a body mass index of 30 kg/m2 underwent immunotherapy for lung adenocarcinoma. She presented with severe weight loss, anorexia, and fatigue. She had no history of heart disease. On day 12, after administration of anamorelin 100 mg once daily, the patient developed nausea, diarrhea, and anorexia, which were considered cancer immunotherapy-induced immune-related adverse events, and she was admitted to the hospital. An electrocardiogram (ECG) on admission showed a QTc interval of 502 ms. On admission, her hepatic function was Child-Pugh class B, and anamorelin was discontinued the next day. On day 3 after anamorelin discontinuation, the QTc interval was prolonged by up to 557 ms, then decreased to 490 ms on day 6, and improved to 450 ms on day 16. Re-administration of anamorelin was avoided. CONCLUSIONS: When administering anamorelin to obese patients, we should be aware of the potential for stimulatory conduction system depression, as in underweight patients. Therefore, we should monitor patients by ECG from the early stages of anamorelin administration. Anamorelin is lipophilic, and its volume of distribution is increased in obese patients. Consequently, obese patients may continue to have QT interval prolongation after discontinuation of anamorelin, requiring long-term side-effect monitoring.

PURPOSE: Because of the large interindividual variability of afatinib pharmacokinetics and adverse events, we evaluated the effects of polymorphisms in pregnane X receptor (NR1I2) and ABC transporters (ABCB1, ABCG2, and ABCC2) on the pharmacokinetics of afatinib. METHODS: The steady-state area under the concentration-time curve (AUC)0-24 of afatinib was analyzed using blood sampling just prior to and at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 h on day 15 after administration. RESULTS: The median oral clearance (CL/F) of afatinib in patients with the NR1I2 7635A allele was significantly lower than those in patients with the 7635G/G genotype (42.0 and 60.0 L/h, respectively, P = 0.025). There were no significant differences in afatinib CL/F between genotypes for NR1I2 8055C > T, -25385C > T, ABCB1, ABCG2, and ABCC2 polymorphisms. Based on the area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve, the threshold afatinib AUC0-24 value for prediction of dose reduction or withdrawal was 689 ng·h/mL at the best sensitivity (81.0%) and specificity (72.7%). In multivariate logistic regression analysis, an afatinib AUC0-24 above 689 ng·h/mL was independently associated with increased risk of dose reduction or withdrawal (OR: 11.66, P = 0.012). CONCLUSIONS: The NR1I2 7635A allele was related to a lower afatinib CL/F. Based on the AUC of 689 ng h/mL and CL/F, the optimal doses for patients with the NR1I2 7635G/G genotype and 7635A allele were recommended to be set at 40 and 30 mg/day, respectively, and subsequent adjustment of the maintenance dose based on the plasma concentrations of afatinib may be necessary to avoid afatinib-related adverse events.

Osimertinib is a standard treatment for patients with EGFR-mutated non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC). We evaluated the relationship between plasma osimertinib concentrations and treatment outcome in patients with NSCLC for this cohort study. The plasma levels of osimertinib and its metabolite AZ5104 were measured a week after the start of treatment (P1). The primary endpoint was to evaluate the correlation between plasma concentration and adverse events (AEs). The correlation with treatment efficacy was one of the secondary endpoints. In patients with CNS metastases, the concentration in the cerebrospinal fluid was also measured. Forty-one patients were enrolled. The frequency of AEs was highest for rash, followed by anorexia and thrombocytopenia. Thirty-eight cases provided measurements for P1. The median plasma concentration of osimertinib was 227 ng/mL, and that of AZ5104 was 16.5 ng/mL. The mean CNS penetration rate of two cases was 3.8%. The P1 in the group with anorexia was significantly higher than that in the group without anorexia (385.0 ng/mL vs. 231.5 ng/mL, p = 0.009). Divided into quartiles by P1 trough level, Q2 + Q3 (164-338 ng/mL) had longer PFS, while Q1 and Q4 had shorter PFS. An appropriate plasma level of osimertinib may avoid some adverse events and induce long PFS. Further large-scale trials are warranted.

The effects of polymorphisms in CYP3A4 (20230G > A), CYP3A5 (6986A > G), ABCB1 (1236C > T, 2677G > T/A, 3435C > T), ABCG2 (421C > A), and ABCC2 (-24C > T) on the area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) of osimertinib in 23 patients with non-small cell lung cancer were investigated. Blood sampling was performed just prior to and at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 h after osimertinib administration at the steady-state on day 15 after beginning therapy. The osimertinib AUC0-24 was significantly correlated with age (P = 0.038), serum albumin (P = 0.002), and serum creatinine (P = 0.012). Additionally, there were significant differences in the AUC0-24 of osimertinib among the groups administered vonoprazan, histamine 2-receptor antagonists or esomeprazole, and no acid suppressants (P = 0.021). By contrast, there were no significant differences in the AUC0-24 of osimertinib between genotypes of CYP3A4/5 or ABC transporters. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in the AUC0-24 of osimertinib between patients with diarrhea, skin rash, or hepatotoxicity and those without these conditions. In multivariate analysis, only serum albumin value was an independent factor predicting the AUC0-24 of osimertinib. Analysis of CYP3A4/5 and ABC transporter polymorphisms before osimertinib therapy may not predict the efficacy or side effects of osimertinib. The lower serum albumin values were associated with an increase in the AUC0-24 of osimertinib; however, further studies are needed to assess the factors contributing to the interindividual variability of osimertinib pharmacokinetics.

We evaluated the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of afatinib required to avoid the onset of grade 2 or higher diarrhea. The C0 and AUC0-24 of afatinib were significant higher in patients with grade 2 diarrhea than in those with grade 0-1 diarrhea. The areas under the receiver operator curves were 0.795 with the highest sensitivity (89%) and specificity (74%) at an AUC0-24 threshold of 823.5 ng·h/mL, and 0.754 with the highest sensitivity (89%) and specificity (74%) at a C0 threshold of 28.5 ng/mL. In Kaplan-Meier analysis based on these cut-off AUC0-24 and C0 values, the median time to the incidence of grade 2 diarrhea was 16 days. The predicted AUC0-24 of afatinib from the single point of C6 showed the highest correlation with the measured AUC0-24 (r2 = 0.840); however, a significant correlation between the AUC0-24 and C0 was also observed (r2 = 0.761). C0 could be used as a marker of therapeutic drug monitoring because afatinib C0 was related to AUC0-24. Therefore, afatinib C0 should be monitored on day 8 after beginning therapy, and the daily dose of afatinib should be adjusted as an index with a cut-off value of 28.5 ng/mL.

ATP-binding castle protein G2 (ABCG2) is thought to inhibit the activities of certain gefitinib transporters, thereby affecting drug pharmacokinetics. The C421A polymorphism affects the function and expression of ABCG2 on the cell membrane. Previous studies have shown that proton-pump inhibitors (PPIs) inhibit gefitinib absorption, as well as the function of ABCG2. We evaluated the plasma concentrations of gefitinib in patients with and without the ABCG2 C421A polymorphism, who were or were not taking PPIs. In total, 61 patients with advanced epidermal-growth-factor-positive non-small-cell lung cancer were enrolled in this study. They were treated with gefitinib at a dose of 250 mg per day. Plasma gefitinib concentration and ABCG2 C421A status were determined after 2 weeks. The patients were divided into CC- and CA/AA genotype groups. We compared the trough and peak gefitinib levels and the area under the curve (AUC) values for 24-h gefitinib concentrations. We also compared these parameters among four groups distinguished according to the presence or absence of the polymorphism and PPI use. The mean trough gefitinib level and AUC value for 24-h gefitinib concentration were significantly lower in the CA/AA group compared to the CC group (mean trough level: 333.2 vs. 454.5 ng/mL, respectively, P = 0.021; AUC: 9949.9 vs. 13,085.4 ng・h/mL, respectively, P = 0.034). Among patients taking PPIs, the mean trough gefitinib level was significantly lower in the CA/AA group than the CC group (220.1 vs. 340.5 ng/mL, respectively, P = 0.033). The CA/AA-type of ABCG2 C421A polymorphism may be associated with lower gefitinib plasma concentrations.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: We investigated the correlations among signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) rs4796793C >G polymorphism, gefitinib pharmacokinetics and clinical responses in Japanese patients with non-small cell lung cancer receiving gefitinib therapy. METHODS: Forty-five patients were enrolled in this study. Plasma trough concentrations (C0 ) of gefitinib at the steady-state were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: Patients having a gefitinib C0 of at least ≥200 ng/mL had significantly longer PFS than patients having a C0 of <200 ng/mL (median [95% confidence interval (CI)] PFS: 11.0 [8.2-13.7] and 5.3 [0.0-12.0] months, respectively, P = .042). There were no significant differences in PFS between patients with STAT3 rs4796793C/C and G alleles; however, patients with STAT3 rs4796793C/C having a gefitinib C0 of ≥ 200 ng/mL had significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) than those with a C0 of <200 ng/mL (median [95% CI] PFS: 11.4 [4.1-18.6] and 3.0 [0.0-7.0] months, respectively, P = .008; median [95% CI] OS: 20.6 [7.4-33.7] and 12.6 [10.1-15.1] months, respectively, P = .042). In patients with the STAT3 rs4796793G allele, there were no significant differences in PFS and OS between the two gefitinib C0 groups. In addition, there were no significant differences in PFS or OS according to smoking, presence of proton pump inhibitor combination, or onset of side effects. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Clinical outcomes of gefitinib in patients with the STAT3 rs4796793C/C genotype depended on plasma concentrations of gefitinib. In addition to information regarding EGFR mutations, the STAT3 rs4796793C >G polymorphism and gefitinib C0 may be potential predictors of clinical outcomes after beginning of gefitinib therapy.

INTRODUCTION: In this study, we investigated the degree of drug interactions between gefitinib and gastric acid suppressants (ie, histamine 2-receptor antagonists [H2RAs] or proton pump inhibitors [PPIs]) with a clinical standard dose in Japanese patients with non-small-cell lung cancer. METHODS: Retrospectively, 47 patients were divided into 3 groups: gefitinib therapy with a PPI (15 patients) or an H2RA (8 patients) or gefitinib therapy alone (24 patients). On day 15 after beginning gefitinib therapy (administration at 08:00) with or without H2RA (administration twice daily at 08:00 and 18:30) or PPI (administration once daily at 08:00 or 18:30), whole blood samples were collected just prior to and at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 12, and 24 hours after administration. RESULTS: The total area under the observed plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-24) and the maximum and trough plasma concentrations of gefitinib with the PPI were significantly lower than those without the PPI. The AUC0-24 of gefitinib with PPI administration in either the morning or evening were significantly lower than those without PPI administration (P = .015 and .049, respectively); however, there were no significant differences in gefitinib AUC0-24 between patients taking PPI in the morning and evening. No significant differences were observed in gefitinib exposure among the 3 CYP2C19 genotypes. The AUC0-24 of gefitinib with H2RA tended to be lower than that without H2RA. CONCLUSION: If the plasma concentrations of gefitinib cannot be monitored, the combination of gefitinib and PPI should be avoided, and an H2RA should also be used carefully.