Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 15, 2025

Pre-clinical Evaluation of Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitors for Treatment of Acute Leukemia
Published on: September 18, 2013
Antimetabolite dose intensity and adverse outcomes in children with acute lymphoblastic leukemia: a COG-AALL03N1
Aman Wadhwa1,2, Yanjun Chen1, Lindsey Hageman1
1Institute for Cancer Outcomes and Survivorship, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL.
Abstract:
The association between antimetabolite dose intensity (DI) and adverse events among children receiving maintenance therapy for acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) remains unclear, especially in the context of antimetabolite adherence. Using Children's Oncology Group AALL03N1 data, we examined the association between high DI during the first 4 study months and (i) treatment-related toxicities during the subsequent 2 study months; and (ii) relapse risk. Patients were classified into a high DI phenotype (either 6-mercaptopurine [6-MP] or methotrexate [MTX] DI ≥110% during the first 4 study months, or 6-MPDI or MTXDI 100%-110% at study enrollment and ≥25% increase over the 4 study months) and normal DI phenotype (all others). Only patients with wild-type TPMT and NUDT15 were included. 6-MP adherence data were available for 63.7% of study participants and used to stratify as adherent (median adherence ≥85%) and nonadherent (median adherence <85%) participants. Multivariable analyses were adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical prognosticators. Of the 644 patients, 29.3% were exposed to high DI. High DI was associated with a 2.1-fold greater odds of hematologic toxicity (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4-3.1; reference: normal DI) in the entire cohort and 2.9-fold higher among adherers (95% CI = 1.6-5.1); odds were comparable among nonadherers (2.1-fold; 95% CI = 0.4-10.1). Although high DI was not associated with relapse in the entire cohort (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 1.4; 95% CI = 0.8-2.4), it was associated with a greater hazard of relapse among adherent participants (aHR = 2.4; 95% CI = 1.0-5.5) but not among nonadherent participants (aHR = 0.9; 95% CI = 0.2-3.8). Dose escalation above protocol doses during maintenance therapy for ALL should be done cautiously after assessing adherence to prescribed therapy.
Related Concept Videos
Factors Affecting Drug Response: Overview
Combination Therapies and Personalized Medicine
The combination of the drug acetazolamide and sulforaphane is a good example of combination therapy to treat cancer. The cells in the interior of a large tumor often die due to the hypoxic and...
Renal Failure: Dose Adjustments
Reduced renal clearance and elimination rate are common outcomes of renal impairment. These alterations lead to a prolonged elimination half-life and an altered apparent volume of distribution for drugs. As a result, dosage adjustments are typically necessary to maintain optimal drug levels in the body.
However, dosage adjustments...
Drugs for Treatment of Crohn's Disease in IBD Using Immunomodulatory Agents
Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting: Dopamine Receptor Antagonists
Phenothiazines, such as prochlorperazine...
Nonlinear Pharmacokinetics: Dependence of Elimination Half-Life and Dose Clearance
A study on guinea pigs examined the...

