Evaluation of dried blood spots as an alternative matrix for therapeutic drug monitoring of abiraterone and delta(4)-abiraterone in prostate cancer patients

Weiss, Thaís Luise Dillenburg; Gössling, Gustavo; Antunes, Marina Venzon; Schwartsmann, Gilberto; Linden, Rafael; Verza, Simone Gasparín

doi:10.1016/j.jpba.2020.113861

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 29 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Approximately half of the studies (11 of 23) examined other factors affecting the concentration results, including spot homogeneity or the spot volume effect 19,21,25,27,29,30,32,34,38,40 (Table 1). For example, Verheijen et al 32 developed and validated a DBS assay using LC-MS/MS to measure the concentration of pazopanib by DBS sampling for TDM.…”

Section: Physicochemical Factors Impacting Concentration Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Capillary blood sampling and venous DBS sampling were both used in 14 of the 23 studies 20,23,[25][26][27][30][31][32][33]35,37,38,40,46 (Table 1). In 13 of the 14 studies, DBS sampling for the participants was performed by a research team (physicians, nurses, etc); the DBS was performed by participants in one study.…”

Section: Application To Patient Samplesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Most studies reported an analytical run time (14 of 23) [19][20][21][25][26][27][28][29]33,34,[37][38][39]41 ranging from 2.3 to 8.5 minutes, and a sample preparation time (20 of 23), [19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30]33,34,[36][37][38][39][40][41] ranging from 80 to 160 minutes. However, the actual hands-on time was not revealed in any of the included studies.…”

Section: Sample Preparation Timementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Dried Blood Spot Sampling in the Monitoring of Anticancer Therapy for Solid Tumors: A Systematic Review

Shafiei

Mahmood

Beale

et al. 2023

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:Dried blood spot (DBS) sampling is a convenient alternative to whole-blood sampling for therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) in clinical practice. The aim of this study was to systematically review studies that have examined and used DBS sampling for the TDM of chemotherapy and targeted therapy agents for the treatment of patients with solid cancers.Methods:Using the PRISMA guidelines, a systematic literature search of EMBASE and PUBMED was performed to identify eligible clinical studies that used DBS sampling to monitor chemotherapy or targeted therapy for the treatment of solid cancers.Results:Of the 23 eligible studies, 3 measured concordance between drug concentrations determined by DBS and whole-blood, 7 developed analytical methods of DBS, and 13 performed both. DBS was employed for the TDM of everolimus (3 studies), vemurafenib (2 studies), pazopanib (2 studies), abiraterone (2 studies), mitotane, imatinib, adavosertib, capecitabine, 5-fluorouracil, gemcitabine, cyclophosphamide, ifosfamide, etoposide, irinotecan, docetaxel, gefitinib, palbociclib/ribociclib, and paclitaxel (one study each). The studies included a median of 14 participants (range: 6–34), with 10–50 μL of blood dispensed on DBS cards (20) and Mitra devices (3). Seventeen of the 20 studies that used DBS found no significant impact of the hematocrit on the accuracy and precision of the developed method in the normal hematocrit ranges (eg, 29.0%–59.0%). DBS and plasma or venous concentrations were highly correlated (correlation coefficient, 0.872–0.999) for all drugs, except mitotane, which did not meet a predefined level of significance (r > 0.872; correlation coefficient, r = 0.87, P < 0.0001).Conclusions:DBS provides an alternative sampling strategy for the TDM of many anticancer drugs. Further research is required to establish a standardized approach for sampling and processing DBS samples to allow future implementation.

show abstract