
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Molecular Oncology, Markers, Clinical Correlates |
Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology and Comprehensive Cancer Center, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, Alabama 35294
| ABSTRACT |
|---|
|
|
|---|
| INTRODUCTION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
45 years and has evolved as an important agent in the treatment of a large spectrum of tumors, including gastrointestinal, breast, and head and neck (1)
. Over the past 20 years, the pyrimidine catabolic pathway, in particular the first enzymatic step involving DPD, has been recognized as critical in determining the ultimate metabolism and, in turn, the pharmacology of 5-FU (2)
. Although the antitumor action (and host toxicity) of 5-FU depends on anabolism of the drug to cytotoxic nucleotides, studies from our laboratory have shown that 8090% of an administered dose of 5-FU is rapidly converted into biologically inactive metabolites through the catabolic pathway (3)
. Increased DPD activity (with corresponding increased catabolism of 5-FU) has been correlated with resistance to 5-FU (4
, 5)
. Conversely, decreased DPD activity (with corresponding decreased catabolism of 5-FU) has been shown to increase 5-FU half-life, thus increasing the amount of drug available for the anabolic (cytotoxic) pathway (6)
. Taken together, these data suggest that the variability of DPD activity in the normal population may account for observed differences in the pharmacokinetics and oral bioavailability of 5-FU (7)
.
The importance of DPD in 5-FU toxicity has been illustrated by patients with DPD enzyme deficiency. After administration of standard doses of 5-FU, these patients develop profound toxicity including mucositis, granulocytopenia, neuropathy, and (in some cases) death (8, 9, 10, 11)
. In 1988, our laboratory reported one of the first profoundly DPD-deficient patients who developed grade IV toxicity after CMF chemotherapy (8)
. The familial pedigree of this patient revealed that the probands son and daughter were partially DPD deficient (8)
. Later population studies in breast cancer patients have demonstrated that
5% are DPD deficient, with enzyme activity below the 95th percentile of a control population (12)
.
Since being identified as a pharmacogenetic disorder, there has been a steady increase each year in the number of case reports of DPD deficiency with severe toxicity secondary to treatment with 5-FU (13 , 14) . These reports, combined with the recent introduction of new generation fluoropyrimidine-based chemotherapy agents (e.g., capecitabine) have resulted in continued research to understand the molecular basis of DPD deficiency with the purification and characterization of the human protein (15) , cloning and characterization of the DPYD gene (16) and the promoter (17) , and the identification of 19 variant alleles in DPD-deficient patients (18, 19, 20) .
This report describes the first compound heterozygote genotype in a profoundly DPD-deficient patient with segregation of mutations among immediate family members. The mutations responsible for profound DPD deficiency in this patient and partial DPD deficiency in the probands two children are identified, and the pattern of inheritance is elucidated. This comprehensive familial approach which uses both phenotype and genotype analysis should be used in future studies to determine which mutations in the DPYD gene result in DPD deficiency.
| MATERIALS AND METHODS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Phenotypic analysis revealed that the proband was profoundly DPD deficient (no detectable enzyme activity). Pharmacokinetic analysis of the proband demonstrated altered 5-FU metabolism characterized by prolonged half-life (150 versus 13 min for normal controls) and decreased clearance (70 versus 594 ml/min/m2 for normal controls; Ref. 8 ). Phenotypic analysis of the probands children revealed that both her son and daughter were partially DPD deficient. Both children were otherwise healthy without any characteristic phenotype.
Determination of DPD Activity.
DPD enzyme activity was originally determined in the proband, her father, two children, and available extended family members from PBM cells as described (8)
. In the present study, DPD enzyme activity was reevaluated in the PBM cells of the available surviving family members (the probands husband, two children, and three grandchildren) and controls using a recently described semiautomated radioassay for DPD enzyme activity (21)
. Both the proband and her father (tested in 1988) have died since publication of the original study. The probands nephew (identified as partially DPD deficient in 1988) was unavailable for participation in this study. Plasma uracil concentrations were also measured (in surviving family members and controls where DPD enzyme activity was obtained) as described previously (8
, 9)
.
Quantitation of DPD mRNA.
The theoretical basis and validation of quantitating DPD mRNA using the ABI PRISM 7700 Sequence Detection System (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA) is described in detail elsewhere (22)
. Briefly, total RNA was isolated from PBM cells of the probands husband, two children, and three grandchildren, along with controls using RNAzol (Biotecx, Houston, TX), following the manufacturers instructions. Total RNA was diluted to a final concentration of 5 ng/µl in water containing 12.5 µg/ml total yeast RNA as a carrier. All samples were stored at -70°C until analysis. Final DPD forward, reverse, and probe concentrations were 100, 200, and 100 nM, respectively. Thermal cycling conditions were 30 min at 48°C, followed by 10 min at 95°C and 40 cycles of 15 s at 95°C and 1 min at 60°C. The absolute standard curve method was used to determine the copy number of DPD mRNA (22)
.
Genotypic Analysis.
In the present study, genomic DNA from the probands husband, two children, and three grandchildren was prepared from PBM cells using the Easy-DNA kit (Invitrogen, San Diego, CA), following the manufacturers instructions. Archived genomic DNA obtained from the proband in 1988 was maintained at -70°C until analysis. All 23 exons along with the flanking intronic regions of the DPYD gene were PCR amplified under conditions similar to those described previously by our laboratory (9)
. Amplification of exon 1 (along with 427 bp of the promoter region of the DPYD gene) was carried out with 1% DMSO (17)
. The primers used to amplify each exon are listed in Table 1
. After amplification, PCR products were resolved on 2% agarose gels and purified using a Qiaquick Gel Extraction kit (Qiagen, Valencia, CA) according to the manufacturers instructions. Samples were sequenced on an ABI 310 automated DNA sequencer using the dideoxynucleotide chain termination method (Applied Biosystems, Foster City, CA). Sequence reactions were repeated three times in each direction (using the same primers that were used to amplify each specific PCR amplicon) and analyzed using MacVector 4.1 sequence analysis software (IBI, New Haven, CT).
|
| RESULTS |
|---|
|
|
|---|
|
|
Quantitation of DPD mRNA.
DPD mRNA levels were quantitated by real-time quantitative PCR in the PBM cells of the probands husband (II-6), two children (III-6 and III-7), and three grandchildren (IV-1, IV-2, and IV-3) and are summarized in Table 2
. No archived RNA was available from the proband (II-5) or her father (I-1). DPD mRNA levels were also quantitated in the PBM cells of seven unrelated control individuals (Table 2)
with normal DPD enzyme activity. DPD enzyme activity correlated (R2 = 0.98) with mRNA levels in family members with normal enzyme activity but not in the partially DPD-deficient children (III-6 and II-7; Fig. 2
).
|
The probands husband (II-6, and father to both children) demonstrated neither the DPYD*13 nor DPYD*2A mutation in his DPYD gene. However, complete sequence analysis of the father revealed that he was a heterozygote for both the T85C (C29R, DPYD*9A) and the A496G (M166V) mutations (as shown in Fig. 1
and Table 2
).
Sequence analysis of the probands two children revealed a segregation of mutations, with the daughter (III-6) demonstrating a heterozygote DPYD*13 T1679G (I560S) genotype and the son (III-7) demonstrating a heterozygote DPYD*2A (intron 14 G1A) genotype. The probands daughter (III-6) also demonstrated a heterozygote A496G (M166V) mutation. All three of the probands grandchildren (IV-1, IV-2, and IV-3) demonstrated a heterozygote genotype for the A496G (M166V) mutation (as summarized in Fig. 1
and Table 2
). The locations of the mutations (within the DPYD gene) characterized in this study are shown in Fig. 3
.
|
| DISCUSSION |
|---|
|
|
|---|
To determine the molecular basis for DPD deficiency in the proband, archived genomic DNA (isolated from the patients PBM cells in 1988) was used as a template, and all 23 exons (including the intron/exon junctions) were PCR amplified. Primers in the flanking introns were designed based on data from the characterization of the human DPYD gene (16) , promoter (17) , and recent studies examining variant DPYD alleles (25) . Complete sequence analysis revealed two heterozygous mutations in the proband: (a) a G to A mutation in the GT 5' splicing recognition sequence of intron 14 (DPYD*2A); and (b) a T1679G mutation (now designated DPYD*13), which results in a nonconserved I560S substitution. Complete sequence analysis demonstrated that these alleles represent the only sequence differences in this DPD-deficient patient. The DPYD*2A mutation remains the most characterized and frequently observed allele associated with DPD enzyme deficiency (9 , 11 , 25) . However, the DPYD*13 missense mutation has been reported in only one other patient with reduced DPD enzyme activity (26) .
The probands husband (and father to both partially DPD-deficient children) demonstrated neither the DPYD*2A nor the DPYD*13 mutation in his DPYD gene (as shown in Table 2
). However, complete sequence analysis of the father revealed that he was heterozygote for both the DPYD*9A and the A496G (M166V) mutations. Both of these mutations have been reported previously to be associated with DPD deficiency (19
, 23
, 24)
. However, the father demonstrated normal DPD activity. Although the frequency of these alleles in the general population remains to be determined, their identification in an individual with normal enzyme activity suggests that both are nonfunctional polymorphisms. This conclusion is supported by a recently published study demonstrating normal DPD enzyme activity in individuals with the DPYD*9A polymorphism (26)
and by the identification of the A496G (M166V) genotype in the probands three grandchildren with normal DPD enzyme activity (Fig. 1)
. These results (combined with the autosomal codominant pattern of inheritance demonstrated in the proband and her children, see below) confirm that neither of these mutations alters DPD enzyme activity.
Sequence analysis of the probands two children demonstrated segregation of both mutations (DPYD*2A and DPYD*13) identified in the proband. The son demonstrated a heterozygote DPYD*2A genotype whereas the daughter demonstrated a heterozygote DPYD*13 genotype. This unique segregation of mutations revealed that the proband was a compound heterozygote containing one variant allele on each DPYD gene. Furthermore, this genotype allowed the independent assessment of the effect of each mutation on DPD enzyme activity. As shown in Table 2
, both children demonstrated partial DPD deficiency, thus demonstrating that both forms of the DPYD gene were expressed and that this pharmacogenetic syndrome follows a codominant pattern of inheritance, not autosomal recessive as originally thought (8)
.
The molecular basis for DPD deficiency is best understood in the DPYD*2A mutation. A previous study by our laboratory demonstrated that a homozygote DPYD*2A genotype results in a 165-bp deletion (corresponding to exon 14) in the DPD mRNA (9) . Western blot analysis demonstrated that the aberrant DPD mRNA was translated into a nonfunctional polyubiquitinated DPD protein. Thus, enhanced proteolysis provides a hypothetical mechanism for loss of DPD catalytic activity, similar to what has been reported with human thiopurine S-methyltransferase deficiency (27) . In contrast, the DPYD*13 mutation results in a single nonconserved I560S substitution. Although this substitution does not occur in any recognized functional domain, amino acids located in regions critical for enzyme structure and/or catalytic function would be expected to be conserved across species. A recent report examining the conservation of the DPD enzyme demonstrates that the I560 position is 100% conserved across all five mammalian species (human, mouse, rat, bovine, and pig) examined (28) and suggests that this position is important in maintaining DPD enzyme activity.
The phenotypic characterization of this family demonstrating partial DPD deficiency together with a known genotype prompted us to examine other types of analysis (plasma uracil and DPD mRNA levels) that may, in the future, be used to identify DPD deficiency before treatment with 5-FU. Analysis of the partially DPD-deficient individuals (the probands daughter and son) showed plasma uracil levels in the normal range (<50 ng/ml; Table 2
). Elevated uracil levels were detected only in the proband, who demonstrated profound (no detectable enzyme activity) DPD deficiency. These analyses suggest that only profoundly, not partially, DPD-deficient individuals have elevated plasma uracil levels. This is particularly important because a recent study reports that most DPD-deficient patients in a population of patients who demonstrated unanticipated toxicity secondary to treatment with 5-FU are partially deficient (31% partial versus 12% profound deficiency; Ref. 10
). These data illustrate the potential limitations of determining plasma uracil levels for the identification and characterization of partially DPD-deficient patients.
In addition to uracil levels, DPD mRNA levels were also evaluated (Fig. 2
and Table 2
). DPD mRNA levels quantitated from the probands husband and three grandchildren (individuals in the family having normal DPD activity) correlated with enzyme activity (Fig. 2)
. These data agree with previous studies from our laboratory demonstrating a linear relationship between DPD mRNA and activity levels (22)
. The partially DPD-deficient family members (III-6 and III-7) also demonstrated DPD mRNA levels in the normal range, suggesting that neither mutation (DPYD*2A nor DPYD*13) affects DPD mRNA levels. This is not particularly surprising because neither mutation would directly interfere with RNA transcription, nor do they occur in regions known to affect RNA stability (29)
. Although several recent pharmacogenomic studies have used DPD mRNA as a surrogate marker for DPD enzyme activity to predict 5-FU efficacy (30
, 31)
, the present studies suggest that quantitation of DPD mRNA cannot be used to identify DPD-deficient patients with this genotype. Taken collectively, these data indicate that phenotypic analysis of DPD enzyme activity remains the most reliable method for the identification and characterization of this pharmacogenetic syndrome.
In summary, comparative phenotypic and genotypic analysis of this family has allowed us to conclude that: (a) a new compound heterozygote genotype resulting in profound DPD deficiency has been identified; (b) DPD deficiency exhibits an autosomal codominant pattern of inheritance, not autosomal recessive as thought originally; (c) two mutations reported previously to be associated with DPD deficiency [T85C (C29R, DPYD*9A) and A496G (M166V)] have no functional significance on DPD enzyme activity. Further analysis suggests that neither uracil nor DPD mRNA levels can be used to predict partial DPD deficiency for the mutations examined in this study. This approach demonstrates the usefulness of familial genotypic and phenotypic analyses to determine the functional significance DPYD mutations.
| FOOTNOTES |
|---|
1 Supported by USPHS Grant CA 62164. ![]()
2 To whom requests for reprints should be addressed, at Department of Pharmacology and Toxicology, Volker Hall, Box 600, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294. Phone: (205) 934-4578; Fax: (205) 975-5650; E-mail: robert.diasio{at}ccc.uab.edu ![]()
3 The abbreviations used are: 5-FU, 5-fluorouracil; DPD, dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase; CMF, cyclophosphamide/methotrexate/5-FU; PBM, peripheral blood mononuclear. ![]()
Received 10/12/01; revised 12/12/01; accepted 12/20/01.
| REFERENCES |
|---|
|
|
|---|
mRNA is regulated by the 3'-untranslated region. Possible role of redox-sensitive protein binding in mRNA accumulation. J. Biol. Chem., 275: 38384-38392, 2000.This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
M. Schwab, U. M. Zanger, C. Marx, E. Schaeffeler, K. Klein, J. Dippon, R. Kerb, J. Blievernicht, J. Fischer, U. Hofmann, et al. Role of Genetic and Nongenetic Factors for Fluorouracil Treatment-Related Severe Toxicity: A Prospective Clinical Trial by the German 5-FU Toxicity Study Group J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2008; 26(13): 2131 - 2138. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. H. Ezzeldin and R. B. Diasio Predicting Fluorouracil Toxicity: Can We Finally Do It? J. Clin. Oncol., May 1, 2008; 26(13): 2080 - 2082. [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
G. S. Sellick, R. Wade, S. Richards, D. G. Oscier, D. Catovsky, and R. S. Houlston Scan of 977 nonsynonymous SNPs in CLL4 trial patients for the identification of genetic variants influencing prognosis Blood, February 1, 2008; 111(3): 1625 - 1633. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. K. Mattison, J. Fourie, R. A. Desmond, A. Modak, M. W. Saif, and R. B. Diasio Increased prevalence of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase deficiency in african-americans compared with Caucasians. Clin. Cancer Res., September 15, 2006; 12(18): 5491 - 5495. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. H. Ezzeldin, A. M. Lee, L. K. Mattison, and R. B. Diasio Methylation of the DPYD Promoter: An Alternative Mechanism for Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Deficiency in Cancer Patients Clin. Cancer Res., December 15, 2005; 11(24): 8699 - 8705. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Seck, S. Riemer, R. Kates, T. Ullrich, V. Lutz, N. Harbeck, M. Schmitt, M. Kiechle, R. Diasio, and E. Gross Analysis of the DPYD Gene Implicated in 5-Fluorouracil Catabolism in a Cohort of Caucasian Individuals Clin. Cancer Res., August 15, 2005; 11(16): 5886 - 5892. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
K. Ogura, T. Ohnuma, Y. Minamide, A. Mizuno, T. Nishiyama, S. Nagashima, M. Kanamaru, A. Hiratsuka, T. Watabe, and T. Uematsu Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Activity in 150 Healthy Japanese Volunteers and Identification of Novel Mutations Clin. Cancer Res., July 15, 2005; 11(14): 5104 - 5111. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
L. K. Mattison, H. Ezzeldin, M. Carpenter, A. Modak, M. R. Johnson, and R. B. Diasio Rapid Identification of Dihydropyrimidine Dehydrogenase Deficiency by Using a Novel 2-13C-Uracil Breath Test Clin. Cancer Res., April 15, 2004; 10(8): 2652 - 2658. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
H. Ezzeldin, M. R. Johnson, Y. Okamoto, and R. Diasio Denaturing High Performance Liquid Chromatography Analysis of the DPYD Gene in Patients with Lethal 5-Fluorouracil Toxicity Clin. Cancer Res., August 1, 2003; 9(8): 3021 - 3028. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
| Cancer Research | Clinical Cancer Research |
| Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention | Molecular Cancer Therapeutics |
| Molecular Cancer Research | Cancer Prevention Research |
| Cancer Prevention Journals Portal | Cancer Reviews Online |
| Annual Meeting Education Book | Meeting Abstracts Online |