Pharmacokinetics of Pegaspargase with a Limited Sampling Strategy for Asparaginase Activity Monitoring in Children with Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Background: Asparaginase (ASPase) plays an important role in the therapy of acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL). Serum ASPase activity (SAA) can be modified and even abolished by host immune responses; therefore, current treatment guidelines recommend to monitor SAA during treatment administration. The SAA monitoring schedule needs to be carefully planned to reduce the number of samples without hampering the possibility of measuring pharmacokinetics (PK) parameters in individual patients. Complex modelling approaches, not easily applicable in common practice, have been applied in previous studies to estimate ASPase PK parameters. This study aimed to estimate PK parameters by using a simplified approach suitable for real-world settings with limited sampling. Methods: Our study was based on 434 patients treated in Italy within the AIEOP-BFM ALL 2009 trial. During the induction phase, patients received two doses of pegylated ASPase and were monitored with blood sampling at five time points, including time 0. PK parameters were estimated by using the individually available SAA measurements with simple modifications of the classical non-compartmental PK analysis. We also took the opportunity to develop and validate a series of limited sampling models to predict ASPase exposure. Results: During the induction phase, average ASPase activity at day 7 was 1380 IU/L after the first dose and 1948 IU/L after the second dose; therapeutic SAA levels (>100 IU/L) were maintained until day 33 in 90.1% of patients. The average AUC and clearance were 46,937 IU/L × day and 0.114 L/day/m2, respectively. The database was analyzed for possible associations of PK parameters with biological characteristics of the patients, finding only a limited dependence on sex, age and risk score; however, these differences were not sufficient to allow any dose or schedule adjustments. Thereafter the possibility of further sampling reduction by using simple linear models to estimate the AUC was also explored. The most simple model required only two samplings 7 days after each ASPase dose, with the AUC being proportional to the sum of the two measured activities A(7) and A(21), calculated by the formula AUC = 14.1 × [A(7) + A(21)]. This model predicts the AUC with 6% average error and 35% maximum error compared to the AUC estimated with all available measures. Conclusions: Our study demonstrates the feasibility of a direct estimation of PK parameters in a real-life situation with limited and variable blood sampling schedules and also offers a simplified method and formulae easily applicable in clinical practice while maintaining a reliable pharmacokinetic monitoring.