4.7 Article

Factors affecting cytochrome P-450 3A activity in cancer patients

Journal

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
Volume 10, Issue 24, Pages 8341-8350

Publisher

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-1371

Keywords

-

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose: The purpose is to identify the demographic, physiologic, and inheritable factors that influence CYP3A activity in cancer patients. Experimental Design: A total of 134 patients (62 females; age range, 26 to 83 years) underwent the erythromycin breath test as a phenotyping probe of CYP3A. Genomic DNA was screened for six variants of suspected functional relevance in CYP3A4 (CYP3A4*1B, CYP3A4*6, CYP3A4*17, and CYP3A4*18) and CYP3A5 (CYP3A5*3C and CYP3A5*6). Results: CYP3A activity (AUC(0-40min)) varied up to 14-fold in this population. No variants in the CYP3A4 and CYP3A5 genes were a significant predictor of CYP3A activity (P > 0.2954). CYP3A activity was reduced by similar to50% in patients with concurrent elevations in liver transaminases and alkaline phosphatase or elevated total bilirubin (P < 0.001). In a multivariate analysis, CYP3A activity was not significantly influenced by age, sex, and body size measures (P > 0.05), but liver function combined with the concentration of the acute-phase reactant, alpha-1 acid glycoprotein, explained similar to18% of overall variation in CYP3A activity (P < 0.001). Conclusions: These data suggest that baseline demographic, physiologic, and chosen genetic polymorphisms have a minor impact on phenotypic CYP3A activity in patients with cancer. Consideration of additional factors, including the inflammation marker C-reactive protein, as well as concomitant use of other drugs, food constituents, and complementary and alternative medicine with inhibitory and inducible effects on CYP3A, is needed to reduce variation in CYP3A and treatment outcome to anticancer therapy.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available