Abstract
<jats:p><div>Abstract Purpose:<p>Fluoropyrimidine (FP) chemotherapy can cause life-threatening toxicity. Four <i>DPYD</i> polymorphisms (<i>DPYD</i>*2A, *13, p.Asp949Val, and HapB3) are most well established to increase FP toxicity risk. This study aimed to identify additional <i>DPYD</i> polymorphisms that increase FP severe toxicity.</p> Experimental Design:<p>Adult patients treated with standard doses of systemic FP (5-fluorouracil/capecitabine) for any tumor type with available genetic data were included. The primary toxicity endpoint was a composite of Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event grade ≥3 toxicity or treatment modification due to toxicity in the first two FP cycles. A literature-curated list of suspected deleterious unvalidated <i>DPYD</i> variants was classified as uncommon (minor allele frequency <0.01) or common. The genetic association with toxicity was analyzed via multivariable logistic regression.</p> Results:<p>Among 849 eligible patients, the composite toxicity endpoint occurred in 25%. Genetic data were available for five uncommon and six common suspected deleterious <i>DPYD</i> variants. In the primary analysis of 799 patients who did not carry a validated variant, carriers of an uncommon deleterious variant (1.1% of patients) had significantly higher risk of toxicity than noncarriers (67% vs. 24%; adjusted OR, 7.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.75–38.20; <i>P</i> = 0.009). None of the common deleterious variants were associated with toxicity. Toxicity prediction in the entire cohort (<i>n</i> = 849) was slightly improved by testing the uncommon and validated variants versus testing only the validated variants (positive predictive value: 44.1% vs. 40%).</p> Conclusions:<p>Five uncommon <i>DPYD</i> variants, in combination, increase FP toxicity risk and improve risk prediction. Testing these variants could identify more high-risk patients who should receive adjusted FP doses to prevent severe toxicity.</p><p><a target="_blank" href="https://aacrjournals.org/clincancerres/article-abstract/doi/10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-26-0952"><i>See related commentary by Gaddy et al., p. 3109</i></a></p></div></jats:p>