The Role of Transporters in the Pharmacokinetics of Orally Administered Drugs

Drug transporters are recognized as key players in the processes of drug absorption, distribution, metabolism, and elimination. The localization of uptake and efflux transporters in organs responsible for drug biotransformation and excretion gives transporter proteins a unique gatekeeper function in controlling drug access to metabolizing enzymes and excretory pathways. This review seeks to discuss the influence intestinal and hepatic drug transporters have on pharmacokinetic parameters, including bioavailability, exposure, clearance, volume of distribution, and half-life, for orally dosed drugs. This review also describes in detail the Biopharmaceutics Drug Disposition Classification System (BDDCS) and explains how many of the effects drug transporters exert on oral drug pharmacokinetic parameters can be predicted by this classification scheme

Transanal total mesorectal excision: how are we doing so far?

AIM: This subgroup analysis of a prospective multicentre cohort study aims to compare postoperative morbidity between transanal total mesorectal excision (TaTME) and laparoscopic total mesorectal excision (LaTME). METHOD: The study was designed as a subgroup analysis of a prospective multicentre cohort study. Patients undergoing TaTME or LaTME for rectal cancer were selected. All patients were followed up until the first visit to the outpatient clinic after hospital discharge. Postoperative complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo classification and the comprehensive complication index (CCI). Propensity score matching was performed. RESULTS: In total, 220 patients were selected from the overall prospective multicentre cohort study. After propensity score matching, 48 patients from each group were compared. The median tumour height for TaTME was 10.0 cm (6.0-10.8) and for LaTME was 9.5 cm (7.0-12.0) (P = 0.459). The duration of surgery and anaesthesia were both significantly longer for TaTME (221 vs 180 min, P < 0.001, and 264 vs 217 min, P < 0.001). TaTME was not converted to laparotomy whilst surgery in five patients undergoing LaTME was converted to laparotomy (0.0% vs 10.4%, P = 0.056). No statistically significant differences were observed for Clavien-Dindo classification, CCI, readmissions, reoperations and mortality. CONCLUSION: The study showed that TaTME is a safe and feasible approach for rectal cancer resection. This new technique obtained similar postoperative morbidity to LaTME.status: publishe

A multicentre cohort study of serum and peritoneal biomarkers to predict anastomotic leakage after rectal cancer resection

AIM: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is one of the most feared complications after rectal resection. This study aimed to assess a combination of biomarkers for early detection of AL after rectal cancer resection. METHOD: This study was an international multicentre prospective cohort study. All patients received a pelvic drain after rectal cancer resection. On the first three postoperative days drain fluid was collected daily and C-reactive protein (CRP) was measured. Matrix metalloproteinase-2 (MMP2), MMP9, glucose, lactate, interleukin 1-beta (IL1β), IL6, IL10, tumour necrosis factor alpha (TNFα), Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecalis, lipopolysaccharide-binding protein and amylase were measured in the drain fluid. Prediction models for AL were built for each postoperative day using multivariate penalized logistic regression. Model performance was estimated by the c-index for discrimination. The model with the best performance was visualized with a nomogram and calibration was plotted. RESULTS: A total of 292 patients were analysed; 38 (13.0%) patients suffered from AL, with a median interval to diagnosis of 6.0 (interquartile ratio 4.0-14.8) days. AL occurred less often after partial than after total mesorectal excision (4.9% vs 15.2%, P = 0.035). Of all patients with AL, 26 (68.4%) required reoperation. AL was more often treated by reoperation in patients without a diverting ileostomy (18/20 vs 8/18, P = 0.03). The prediction model for postoperative day 1 included MMP9, TNFα, diverting ileostomy and surgical technique (c-index = 0.71). The prediction model for postoperative day 2 only included CRP (c-index = 0.69). The prediction model for postoperative day 3 included CRP and MMP9 and obtained the best model performance (c-index = 0.78). CONCLUSION: The combination of serum CRP and peritoneal MMP9 may be useful for earlier prediction of AL after rectal cancer resection. In clinical practice, this combination of biomarkers should be interpreted in the clinical context as with any other diagnostic tool.status: publishe

Determining the optimal dose in the development of anticancer agents

Identification of the optimal dose remains a key challenge in drug development. For cytotoxic drugs, the standard approach is based on identifying the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in phase I trials and incorporating this to subsequent trials. However, this strategy does not take into account important aspects of clinical pharmacology. For targeted agents, the dose-effect relationships from preclinical studies are less obvious, and it is important to change the way these agents are developed to avoid recommending drug doses for different populations without evidence of differential antitumour effects in different diseases. The use of expanded cohorts in phase I trials to better define MTD and refine dose optimization should be further explored together with a focus on efficacy rather than toxicity-based predictions. Another key consideration in dose optimization is related to interindividual pharmacokinetic variability. High variability in intra-individual pharmacokinetics has been observed for many orally-administered drugs, especially those with low bioavailability, which might complicate identification of dose-effect relationships. End-organ dysfunction, interactions with other prescription drugs, herbal supplements, adherence, and food intake can influence pharmacokinetics. It is important these variables are identified during early clinical trials and considered in the development of further phase II and subsequent large-scale phase III studies