This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Ando, M. Articles by Hasegawa, Y. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Ando, M. Articles by Hasegawa, Y.

Multi-Institutional Validation Study of Carboplatin Dosing Formula Using Adjusted Serum Creatinine Level¹

Japanese Red Cross Nagoya First Hospital, Nagoya 453-8511 [M. A., S. S.]; National Nagoya Hospital, Nagoya 460-0001 [H. S.]; Nagoya Ekisaikai Hospital, Nagoya 454-8502 [M. Y.]; First Department of Internal Medicine [M. A., Y. A., Y. H.] and Clinical Preventive Services, Nagoya University School of Medicine, [K. S.], Nagoya 466-8550; and National Cancer Center Hospital East, Kashiwa 277-0882 [H. M., Y. S.], Japan

Creatinine clearance (Ccr) is widely used as a practical substitute for glomerular filtration rate (GFR) in the Calvert formula: carboplatin dose (mg) = target area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC, mg ml^-1 min) x [GFR (ml min^-1) + 25]. However, it causes systematic overdosing when the creatinine levels are measured by an enzymatic peroxidase-antiperoxidase method (PAP-Cr). We previously suggested an amended dosing formula to adjust this overdosing: carboplatin dose (mg) = AUC (mg ml^-1 min) x [adjusted Ccr (ml min^-1) + 25], where the Ccr was adjusted by adding 0.2 (mg dl^-1) to serum PAP-Cr. In this study, we prospectively validated this formula in 55 patients from six institutions. Target AUC ranged from 3 to 7 mg ml^-1 min, and Ccr was measured by 24-h urine collection. Estimation of carboplatin clearance with the amended formula was unbiased [mean prediction error (MPE) ± SE = 2.9 ± 3.4%] and acceptably precise [root mean squared error (RMSE) = 24.7%], whereas the Calvert formula using nonadjusted Ccr overpredicted carboplatin clearance systematically (MPE ± SE = 24.9 ± 4.9% and RMSE = 36.1%). The improvement in the bias and precision of the estimation was seen in all of the participating institutions as shown by decrease in the absolute value of MPE and RMSE for each institution. The Chatelut formula also highly overestimated carboplatin clearance when PAP-Cr was used, but the adjustment of PAP-Cr yielded a decrease in MPE by 30.4% and in RMSE by 21.3%. These results confirmed the necessity of adjusting the serum PAP-Cr in carboplatin dosing formulas.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. Schmitt, L. Gladieff, A. Lansiaux, C. Bobin-Dubigeon, M.-C. Etienne-Grimaldi, M. Boisdron-Celle, F. Serre-Debauvais, F. Pinguet, A. Floquet, E. Billaud, et al. A Universal Formula Based on Cystatin C to Perform Individual Dosing of Carboplatin in Normal Weight, Underweight, and Obese Patients Clin. Cancer Res., May 15, 2009; 15(10): 3633 - 3639. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. S Shord, L. R Bressler, L. Radhakrishnan, N. Chen, and J L. Villano Evaluation of the Modified Diet in Renal Disease Equation for Calculation of Carboplatin Dose Ann. Pharmacother., February 1, 2009; 43(2): 235 - 241. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				V Launay-Vacher, E Chatelut, S. Lichtman, H Wildiers, C Steer, and M Aapro Renal insufficiency in elderly cancer patients: International Society of Geriatric Oncology clinical practice recommendations Ann. Onc., August 1, 2007; 18(8): 1314 - 1321. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. Kaestner and G. Sewell Dose-banding of carboplatin: rationale and proposed banding scheme Journal of Oncology Pharmacy Practice, June 1, 2007; 13(2): 109 - 117. [Abstract] [PDF]

				J. M. Gallo, P. Vicini, A. Orlansky, S. Li, F. Zhou, J. Ma, S. Pulfer, M. A. Bookman, and P. Guo Pharmacokinetic Model-Predicted Anticancer Drug Concentrations in Human Tumors Clin. Cancer Res., December 1, 2004; 10(23): 8048 - 8058. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]