DOI: 10.1200/jco.2026.44.19_suppl.306 ISSN: 0732-183X

A two-step pre-treatment screening strategy combining enzyme phenotyping and targeted DPYD genotyping: A pragmatic approach for preventing fluoropyrimidine toxicity.

Joshua John Uzagare, Ajoy Oommen John, Ashish Singh, Binu Susan Mathew, Serin Daniel, Poongodi P., Anjana Joel, Deepa Susan Philip, Josh Thomas Georgy, Praveen Kumar Marimuthu, Kovilapu Harikrishna

306

Background: Severe fluoropyrimidine toxicity is linked to reduced DPD activity. Universal DPYD genotyping has low sensitivity, high cost, long turnaround, and still fails to prevent toxicity in up to one-third of patients. Phenotyping with serum uracil and dihydrouracil:uracil (DHU:U) ratio is faster and more sensitive but less specific. We evaluated a two-step workflow—phenotyping all patients, then genotyping only phenotype-abnormal cases—to improve toxicity prediction and reduce genotyping requirements. Methods: In this study, 160 adults starting fluoropyrimidines underwent baseline fasting uracil and DHU:U testing. An abnormal phenotype was defined as uracil > 14.5 ng/mL or DHU:U < 6. The first 79 patients had universal DPYD phenotyping and genotyping; in the remaining patients, only abnormal phenotypes were genotyped. Grade ≥3 hematologic or gastrointestinal toxicities within cycles 1-3 were recorded along with dose reductions of 5-FU. Test performance for toxicity prediction was calculated for phenotype alone and the two-step strategy. Results: The median age was 47 (IQR 38–58), with 59% male and 73% having gastrointestinal cancers. Treatment included doublet chemotherapy (56%) and triplet (25%). Higher uracil increased toxicity risk (OR 1.15, p = 0.025); a higher DPYD activity score was protective (OR 0.79, p = 0.003). In the initial 79-patient cohort, 6 (7.6%) had an abnormal phenotype and 1 (1.2%) an abnormal genotype. Grade ≥3 toxicity occurred in 31 (39.2%): universal genotyping identified none, while the two-step strategy identified 4 (12.9%). No normal-phenotype patient with toxicity had an actionable variant. In the later 81-patient cohort undergoing two-step testing, 35 (43.2%) had an abnormal phenotype and 4 (4.9%) an abnormal genotype. Grade ≥3 toxicity was noted in 25 (30.8%), despite pre-emptive cycle 1 dose reduction in those with an abnormal phenotype (48.5%). In the Overall cohort (n = 160), 56 (35.0%) developed toxicity. The two-step strategy identified 16 (28.6%). Phenotype alone yielded 28.6% sensitivity, 76.2% specificity, 40.0% PPV, and 65.8% NPV. The two-step strategy improved specificity to 88.6% and PPV to 66.7%, keeping sensitivity and NPV unchanged. Under a sensitivity analysis projecting universal genotyping: assuming all untested were variant-negative gives 3/56 (5.4 %) identified; assuming all untested variant-positive gives 10/56 (17.9 %). We observed that only 2.8% of normal phenotype pateints with toxicity carried an actionable genotype variant. Conclusions: A two-step testing strategy predicts more severe toxicities, reduces genotyping requirements, and lowers costs compared to universal genotyping, offering a scalable, evidence-based method for safer fluoropyrimidine dosing.

More from our Archive