Anthony M. Marinaki

Genetic basis of inosine triphosphate pyrophosphohydrolase deficiency.

Abstract. Inosine triphosphate pyrophosphohydrolase (ITPase) deficiency is a common inherited condition characterized by the abnormal accumulation of inosine triphosphate (ITP) in erythrocytes. The genetic basis and pathological consequences of ITPase deficiency are unknown. We have characterized the genomic structure of the ITPA gene, showing that it has eight exons. Five single nucleotide polymorphisms were identified, three silent (138G→A, 561G→A, 708G→A) and two associated with ITPase deficiency (94C→A, IVS2+21A→C). Homozygotes for the 94C→A missense mutation (Pro32 to Thr) had zero erythrocyte ITPase activity, whereas 94C→A heterozygotes averaged 22.5% of the control mean, a level of activity consistent with impaired subunit association of a dimeric enzyme. ITPase activity of IVS2+21A→C homozygotes averaged 60% of the control mean. In order to explore further the relationship between mutations and enzyme activity, we examined the association between genotype and ITPase activity in 100 healthy controls. Ten subjects were heterozygous for 94C→A (allele frequency: 0.06), 24 were heterozygotes for IVS2+21A→C (allele frequency: 0.13) and two were compound heterozygous for these mutations. The activities of IVS2+21A→C heterozygotes and 94C→A/IVS2+21A→C compound heterozygotes were 60% and 10%, respectively, of the normal control mean, suggesting that the intron mutation affects enzyme activity. In all cases when ITPase activity was below the normal range, one or both mutations were found. The ITPA genotype did not correspond to any identifiable red cell phenotype. A possible relationship between ITPase deficiency and increased drug toxicity of purine analogue drugs is proposed.

Thiopurine methyltransferase activity and the use of azathioprine in inflammatory bowel disease

Background : Azathioprine therapy is discontinued in one‐third of patients with inflammatory bowel disease because of toxicity or a lack of clinical response. Patients with thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) deficiency are intolerant to azathioprine, whilst carriers are at increased risk of side‐effects.

Prospective evaluation of the pharmacogenetics of azathioprine in the treatment of inflammatory bowel disease

Background  One‐third of patients with inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) receiving azathioprine (AZA) withdraw treatment due to side effects or lack of clinical response.

Assessment of thiopurine methyltransferase enzyme activity is superior to genotype in predicting myelosuppression following azathioprine therapy in patients with inflammatory bowel disease

Background Myelosuppression occurs in 2–7% of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD) patients treated with azathioprine, and can be associated with reduced activity of thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) in some patients. It has been proposed that pretreatment assessment of TPMT status reduces the incidence of toxicity and is cost‐effective.

Pharmacogenetic association with adverse drug reactions to azathioprine immunosuppressive therapy following liver transplantation

Azathioprine (AZA) is a thiopurine prodrug commonly used in triple‐immunosuppressive therapy following liver transplantation. Approximately 1 in 10 patients suffers side effects in response to the drug, the most problematic being bone marrow toxicity. There is evidence that polymorphisms in the genes encoding thiopurine methyltransferase (TPMT) and inosine triphosphate pyrophosphatase (ITPase) predict adverse drug reactions to AZA therapy. Furthermore, common genetic polymorphisms in the gene encoding methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) may have an indirect impact on thiopurine drug methylation by influencing levels of the methyl donor S‐adenosylmethionine (SAM). The aim of this study was to determine whether polymorphisms in these candidate pharmacogenetic loci predict adverse drug reactions to AZA immunosuppressive therapy in liver transplant patients. A series of 65 liver transplant recipients were recruited to the study from the Liver Transplant Out‐Patient clinic at The Royal Infirmary of Edinburgh. Clinical response to AZA was retrospectively correlated against TPMT activity, TPMT*2, *3A, and *3A genotypes, inosine triphosphatase (ITPA) 94C>A and IVS2+21A>C genotypes, and MTHFR 677C>T and 1298A>C genotypes. Variant TPMT, ITPA, and MTHFR genotypes were not significantly associated with adverse drug reactions to AZA, including bone marrow suppression. However, the 2 patients who suffered nodular regenerative hyperplasia (NRH) were both heterozygous for the TPMT*3A mutation. In conclusion, our findings suggest that TPMT, ITPA, and MTHFR genotypes do not predict adverse drug reactions, including bone marrow suppression, in liver transplant patients. However, the possible association between NRH and a heterozygous TPMT genotype should be investigated further. (Liver Transpl 2005;11:826–833.)

Clinical relevance of DPYD variants c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A as predictors of severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity: a systematic review and meta-analysis of individual patient data

BACKGROUND The best-known cause of intolerance to fluoropyrimidines is dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) deficiency, which can result from deleterious polymorphisms in the gene encoding DPD (DPYD), including DPYD*2A and c.2846A>T. Three other variants-DPYD c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A-have been associated with DPD deficiency, but no definitive evidence for the clinical validity of these variants is available. The primary objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the clinical validity of c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A as predictors of severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. METHODS We did a systematic review of the literature published before Dec 17, 2014, to identify cohort studies investigating associations between DPYD c.1679T>G, c.1236G>A/HapB3, and c.1601G>A and severe (grade ≥3) fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity in patients treated with fluoropyrimidines (fluorouracil, capecitabine, or tegafur-uracil as single agents, in combination with other anticancer drugs, or with radiotherapy). Individual patient data were retrieved and analysed in a multivariable analysis to obtain an adjusted relative risk (RR). Effect estimates were pooled by use of a random-effects meta-analysis. The threshold for significance was set at a p value of less than 0·0167 (Bonferroni correction). FINDINGS 7365 patients from eight studies were included in the meta-analysis. DPYD c.1679T>G was significantly associated with fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity (adjusted RR 4·40, 95% CI 2·08-9·30, p<0·0001), as was c.1236G>A/HapB3 (1·59, 1·29-1·97, p<0·0001). The association between c.1601G>A and fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity was not significant (adjusted RR 1·52, 95% CI 0·86-2·70, p=0·15). Analysis of individual types of toxicity showed consistent associations of c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A/HapB3 with gastrointestinal toxicity (adjusted RR 5·72, 95% CI 1·40-23·33, p=0·015; and 2·04, 1·49-2·78, p<0·0001, respectively) and haematological toxicity (adjusted RR 9·76, 95% CI 3·03-31·48, p=0·00014; and 2·07, 1·17-3·68, p=0·013, respectively), but not with hand-foot syndrome. DPYD*2A and c.2846A>T were also significantly associated with severe fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity (adjusted RR 2·85, 95% CI 1·75-4·62, p<0·0001; and 3·02, 2·22-4·10, p<0·0001, respectively). INTERPRETATION DPYD variants c.1679T>G and c.1236G>A/HapB3 are clinically relevant predictors of fluoropyrimidine-associated toxicity. Upfront screening for these variants, in addition to the established variants DPYD*2A and c.2846A>T, is recommended to improve the safety of patients with cancer treated with fluoropyrimidines. FUNDING None.

Novel pharmacogenetic markers for treatment outcome in azathioprine-treated inflammatory bowel disease

Background  Azathioprine (AZA) pharmacogenetics are complex and much studied. Genetic polymorphism in TPMT is known to influence treatment outcome. Xanthine oxidase/dehydrogenase (XDH) and aldehyde oxidase (AO) compete with TPMT to inactivate AZA.

Review article: malignancy on thiopurine treatment with special reference to inflammatory bowel disease

Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2010; 32: 119–130

Pharmacogenetic variants in the DPYD, TYMS, CDA and MTHFR genes are clinically significant predictors of fluoropyrimidine toxicity

Background:Fluoropyrimidine drugs are extensively used for the treatment of solid cancers. However, adverse drug reactions are a major clinical problem, often necessitating treatment discontinuation. The aim of this study was to identify pharmacogenetic markers predicting fluoropyrimidine toxicity.Methods:Toxicity in the first four cycles of 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine-based chemotherapy were recorded for a series of 430 patients. The association between demographic variables, DPYD, DPYS, TYMS, MTHFR, CDA genotypes, and toxicity were analysed using logistic regression models.Results:Four DPYD sequence variants (c.1905+1G>A, c.2846A>T, c.1601G>A and c.1679T>G) were found in 6% of the cohort and were significantly associated with grade 3–4 toxicity (P<0.0001). The TYMS 3′-untranslated region del/del genotype substantially increased the risk of severe toxicity (P=0.0123, odds ratio (OR)=3.08, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.38–6.87). For patients treated with capecitabine, a MTHFR c.1298CC homozygous variant genotype predicted hand–foot syndrome (P=4.1 × 10−6, OR=9.99, 95% CI: 3.84–27.8). The linked CDA c.−92A>G and CDA c.−451C>T variants predicted grade 2–4 diarrhoea (P=0.0055, OR=2.3, 95% CI: 1.3–4.2 and P=0.0082, OR=2.3, 95% CI: 1.3–4.2, respectively).Conclusion:We have identified a panel of clinically useful pharmacogenetic markers predicting toxicity to fluoropyrimidine therapy. Dose reduction should be considered in patients carrying these sequence variants.

Optimising outcome on thiopurines in inflammatory bowel disease by co-prescription of allopurinol ☆

BACKGROUND AND AIMS Azathioprine and mercaptopurine remain first line immunomodulatory treatments for inflammatory bowel disease. Toxicity and non-response are significant issues. Co-prescription of allopurinol with reduced-dose (25-33%) azathioprine or mercaptopurine may overcome these problems. We present the outcome of co-prescription in a large single-centre cohort. METHOD Patients on thiopurine/allopurinol co-prescription were identified. Indication for and outcome on combination treatment were established. Blood parameters and metabolite results were compared on single agent and combination treatment. Toxicity associated with combination treatment was sought. RESULTS 110 patients on combination treatment were identified. Clinical remission was achieved in 60/79 (76%) of patients in whom the effect of thiopurine could be studied in isolation. 20/25 patients with hepatotoxicity tolerated combination treatment and normalised their liver function tests. 24/28 patients with atypical side effects tolerated co-therapy. 13/20 non-responders responded to combination treatment. In patients started on combination treatment as first line therapy, 15/23 achieved clinical remission. Thioguanine nucleotides were significantly higher and methylated metabolites significantly lower on combination therapy. Mean cell volume was higher and total white cell and neutrophil counts lower on combination treatment. 13 adverse events occurred, including 6 specific to co-therapy (3 rash, 2 abnormal liver function tests, 1 dosing error). All were minor and self-limiting. CONCLUSION This is the largest published experience of the use of allopurinol to optimise outcomes on thiopurine treatment. Combination therapy permitted successful treatment of a significant number of patients who would otherwise have been labelled as thiopurine failures. A few self-limiting side effects were encountered.