UGT1A1 assessment in cancer patient receiving irinotecan based chemotherapy /
قياس مستوى (يو چى تى 1إيه 1) فى مرضى السرطان المعالجين بالأيرينوتيكان كأساس فى علاجھم الكيميائى
Amany Mohammed Elzeiny ; Supervised Samar Farghali Farid , Abeer Ahmed Bahnassy , Ahmed Elsaied Elbastawisy
- Cairo : Amany Mohammed Elzeiny , 2016
- 62 P. ; 25cm
Thesis (M.Sc.) - Cairo University - Faculty of Pharmacy - Department of Pharmaceutics
Background and Aim of the study UGT1A1*28 polymorphism is associated with neutropenia and diarrhea in previous reports, this study tried to investigate correlation with other toxicities like vomiting. Methods This is a prospective cohort study including all eligible cases of advanced colorectal cancer (CRC). The genotypes of UGT1A1*28 were assessed in the peripheral blood and/or in tissues by PCR. Patients were divided into two groups, group 1: patients with no mutation, group 2: patients with homo or hetero mutation. All patients received standard IFL regimen. Primary endpoints were: 1-comparison between the 2 groups as regard vomiting .2-assessment of the incidence of UGT1A1*28 polymorphism. Secondary endpoints were: comparison between the 2 groups as regard: neutropenia, diarrhea, treatment delay, progressive diseases (PD), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Results Forty six cases of advanced colorectal cancer presenting to National Cancer Institute, Cairo University, with a median age of 45 years were included and followed up during the period from September 2010 to January 2013 with a median follow up of 9 months. UGT1A1*28 polymorphism was present in 20 patients (43%) of them 15% are homozygous. Grade (II-IV) vomiting was found in 8.3 % of group 1 versus 52.5 % of group2 (P=0.01).Grade (II-IV) neutropenia were found in 20.8 % of group 1 versus 64.7 % of group2 (P=0.03). Grade (II-IV) diarrhea was found in 37.5 % of patients of group 1 and 27.5% of patients with group 2 (P=0.75). Treatment delay occurred in 29.16 % of group 1 versus 72.4 % of group 2 (P=0.02). Twenty five percent of group 1 showed PD versus 25 % of group 2 (P=0.8). 1 year PFS was 19% in group 1 versus 23 % in group 2 (P= 0.8) while there was a trend towards better OS in group 1 (47 % versus % 35) (P= 0.07)