nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.08.2012 | Short Communication

Concurrent use of proton pump inhibitors or H2 blockers did not adversely affect nilotinib efficacy in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia

verfasst von: Ophelia Q. P. Yin, Frank J. Giles, Michele Baccarani, Philipp le Coutre, Ovidiu Chiparus, Neil Gallagher, Giuseppe Saglio, Timothy P. Hughes, Andreas Hochhaus, Hagop M. Kantarjian, Richard A. Larson

Erschienen in: Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology | Ausgabe 2/2012

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

The impact of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) and histamine H2 receptor antagonists (H2 blockers) on the efficacy of nilotinib was evaluated.

Methods

Retrospective analyses were performed in patients with newly diagnosed Philadelphia chromosome-positive (Ph+) chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase (CML-CP; N = 492) and in patients with imatinib-resistant or imatinib-intolerant Ph+ CML-CP (N = 256) treated with nilotinib.

Results

In the newly diagnosed population, 87 (17.7 %) and 49 (10.0 %) patients received PPIs and H2 blockers, respectively. Major molecular response at 12 months was achieved by 59 (49.6 %) patients who received at least one PPI or H2 blocker (n = 119) and 153 (41.0 %) patients who did not receive any comedication (n = 373; P = 0.13). PPIs and H2 blockers were used by 77 (30.1 %) and 17 (6.6 %) patients with imatinib-resistant or imatinib-intolerant CML-CP, respectively. Major cytogenetic response by 12 months was achieved by 55 (64.0 %) patients who received at least one PPI or H2 blocker (n = 86) versus 98 (57.6 %) patients who did not receive any comedication (n = 170; P = 0.40); 39 (45.3 %) versus 65 (38.2 %), respectively, achieved complete cytogenetic response by 12 months (P = 0.34). Similar findings were observed in patients who received comedication for >50 % of the time on nilotinib therapy. Nilotinib steady-state trough concentration was not affected by the presence of PPIs or H2 blockers.

Conclusions

Concurrent use of PPIs or H2 blockers did not affect the pharmacokinetics and efficacy of nilotinib in patients with Ph+ CML-CP.

Kantarjian HM, Giles FJ, Bhalla KN, Pinilla-Ibarz JA, Larson RA, Gattermann N, Ottmann OG, Hochhaus A, Radich JP, Saglio G, Hughes TP, Martinelli G, Kim DW, Shou Y, Gallagher NJ, Blakesley R, Baccarani M, Cortes J, le Coutre PD (2011) Nilotinib is effective in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase following imatinib resistance or intolerance: 24-month follow-up results. Blood 117:1141–1145PubMedCrossRef

Kantarjian HM, Hochhaus A, Saglio G, De Souza C, Flinn IW, Stenke L, Goh Y, Rosti G, Nakamae H, Gallagher NJ, Hoenekopp A, Blakesley RE, Larson RA, Hughes TP (2011) Nilotinib versus imatinib for the treatment of patients with newly diagnosed chronic phase, Philadelphia chromosome-positive, chronic myeloid leukaemia: 24-month minimum follow-up of the phase 3 randomised ENESTnd trial. Lancet Oncol 12:841–851PubMedCrossRef

Yin OQP, Gallagher N, Fischer D, Demirhan E, Zhou W, Golor G, Schran H (2010) Effect of the proton pump inhibitor esomeprazole on the oral absorption and pharmacokinetics of nilotinib. J Clin Pharmacol 50:960–967PubMedCrossRef

Kantarjian HM, Giles F, Gattermann N, Bhalla K, Alimena G, Palandri F, Ossenkoppele GJ, Nicolini FE, O’Brien SG, Litzow M, Bhatia R, Cervantes F, Haque A, Shou Y, Resta DJ, Weitzman A, Hochhaus A, le Coutre P (2007) Nilotinib (formerly AMN107), a highly selective BCR-ABL tyrosine kinase inhibitor, is effective in patients with Philadelphia chromosome-positive chronic myelogenous leukemia in chronic phase following imatinib resistance and intolerance. Blood 110:3540–3546PubMedCrossRef

Saglio G, Kim DW, Issaragrisil S, le Coutre P, Etienne G, Lobo C, Pasquini R, Clark RE, Hochhaus A, Hughes TP, Gallagher N, Hoenekopp A, Dong M, Haque A, Larson RA, Kantarjian HM, The ENESTnd Investigators (2010) Nilotinib versus imatinib for newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukemia. N Engl J Med 362:2251–2259PubMedCrossRef

Martinez C, Albet C, Agundez JA, Herrero E, Carrillo JA, Marquez M, Benitez J, Ortiz JA (1999) Comparative in vitro and in vivo inhibition of cytochrome P450 CYP1A2, CYP2D6, and CYP3A by H2-receptor antagonists. Clin Pharmacol Ther 65:369–376PubMedCrossRef

Rendic S, Ruf HH, Weber P, Kajfez F (1984) Cimetidine and ranitidine: their interaction with human and pig liver microsomes and with purified cytochrome P-450. Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet 9:195–200PubMedCrossRef

Yin OQ, Gallagher N, Li A, Zhou W, Harrell R, Schran H (2010) Effect of grapefruit juice on the pharmacokinetics of nilotinib in healthy participants. J Clin Pharmacol 50:188–194PubMedCrossRef

Eley T, Luo FR, Agrawal S, Sanil A, Manning J, Li T, Blackwood-Chirchir A, Bertz R (2009) Phase I study of the effect of gastric acid pH modulators on the bioavailability of oral dasatinib in healthy subjects. J Clin Pharmacol 49:700–709PubMedCrossRef

10.

Takahashi N, Miura M, Niioka T, Sawada K (2011) Influence of H2-receptor antagonists and proton pump inhibitors on dasatinib pharmacokinetics in Japanese leukemia patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2011 Dec 7 [Epub ahead of print]

11.

OSI Pharmaceuticals, LLC (2010) Tarceva^® (erlotinib) Prescribing information. Farmingdale, NY, USA

12.

Tomilo DL, Smith PF, Ogundele AB, Difrancesco R, Berenson CS, Eberhardt E, Bednarczyk E, Morse GD (2006) Inhibition of atazanavir oral absorption by lansoprazole gastric acid suppression in healthy volunteers. Pharmacotherapy 26:341–346PubMedCrossRef

13.

Burger DM, Hugen PW, Kroon FP, Groeneveld P, Brinkman K, Foudraine NA, Sprenger H, Koopmans PP, Hekster YA (1998) Pharmacokinetic interaction between the proton pump inhibitor omeprazole and the HIV protease inhibitor indinavir. AIDS 12:2080–2082PubMedCrossRef

14.

Egorin MJ, Shah DD, Christner SM, Yerk MA, Komazec KA, Appleman LR, Redner RL, Miller BM, Beumer JH (2009) Effect of a proton pump inhibitor on the pharmacokinetics of imatinib. Br J Clin Pharmacol 68:370–374PubMedCrossRef

15.

Miner P Jr, Katz PO, Chen Y, Sostek M (2003) Gastric acid control with esomeprazole, lansoprazole, omeprazole, pantoprazole, and rabeprazole: a five-way crossover study. Am J Gastroenterol 98:2616–2620PubMedCrossRef

16.

Rohss K, Lind T, Wilder-Smith C (2004) Esomeprazole 40 mg provides more effective intragastric acid control than lansoprazole 30 mg, omeprazole 20 mg, pantoprazole 40 mg and rabeprazole 20 mg in patients with gastro-oesophageal reflux symptoms. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 60:531–539PubMedCrossRef

17.

Pauli-Magnus C, Rekersbrink S, Klotz U, Fromm MF (2001) Interaction of omeprazole, lansoprazole and pantoprazole with P-glycoprotein. Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol 364:551–557PubMedCrossRef

18.

Suzuki K, Doki K, Homma M, Tamaki H, Hori S, Ohtani H, Sawada Y, Kohda Y (2009) Co-administration of proton pump inhibitors delays elimination of plasma methotrexate in high-dose methotrexate therapy. Br J Clin Pharmacol 67:44–49PubMedCrossRef

19.

Hiwase DK, Eadie L, Saunders V, Hughes T, White DL (2010) Proton pump inhibitors augment nilotinib and dasatinib mediated Bcr-Abl kinase inhibition. Blood 116:1626 (abstr 3991)

Titel: Concurrent use of proton pump inhibitors or H2 blockers did not adversely affect nilotinib efficacy in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia
verfasst von: Ophelia Q. P. Yin
Frank J. Giles
Michele Baccarani
Philipp le Coutre
Ovidiu Chiparus
Neil Gallagher
Giuseppe Saglio
Timothy P. Hughes
Andreas Hochhaus
Hagop M. Kantarjian
Richard A. Larson
Publikationsdatum: 01.08.2012
Verlag: Springer-Verlag
Erschienen in: Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology / Ausgabe 2/2012
Print ISSN: 0344-5704
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-0843
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-012-1881-3

Springer Medizin

Concurrent use of proton pump inhibitors or H2 blockers did not adversely affect nilotinib efficacy in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia