ELSEVIER

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jpa

O

Journal of Pharmaceutical Analysis ----

Short communication

VLDL: The key factors influencing the distribution of mitotane in patients with adrenocortical carcinoma

Check for updates

Xiangjie Di a, b, c, 1, Yixian Liu a, b, 1, Jia You a, b, Yuchun Men a, b, Zhenlei Wang a, b, Chao Zhou ª, Ying Jin a, b, Yating Ge a, b, e, Yongji He a, b, Li Zheng a, b,*

a Cancer Center, Clinical Trial Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China

b NMPA Key Laboratory for Clinical Research and Evaluation of Innovative Drug West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China

” Development and Related Diseases of Women and Children Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China

d SCIEX China, Shanghai, 200335, China

e Department of Clinical Pharmacy and Pharmacy Administration, West China School of Pharmacy, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China

ARTICLE INFO

Article history: Received 2 October 2024 Received in revised form 5 February 2025 Accepted 27 February 2025 Available online 1 March 2025

Mitotane, an orphan drug with narrow therapeutic window and significant interindividual variability for treating adrenocor- tical carcinoma, requires therapeutic drug monitoring [1]. Current detection methods fail to accurately measure plasma drug con- centrations after a high-fat meal, and the reasons behind the significant pharmacokinetic variability among individuals remain unclear, complicating individualized treatment [2,3]. During our therapeutic drug monitoring process, we found that hyper- lipidemic patients are more likely to reach the target drug con- centration and experience concurrent neurotoxicity. We also observed that mitotane bound to lipoproteins is crucial for its delivery to target organs and its therapeutic effect, which contrasts with previous research findings. Therefore, the aim of this study is to explore a better therapeutic drug monitoring method, while identifying key factors that influence drug absorption and distribution, providing evidence for rational drug use in patients.

For this purpose, three parts were designed and conducted. Firstly, a new pretreatment method involving freezing and centrifugation was developed and validated to eliminate the impact of high-fat meals on blood drug concentration monitoring. Secondly,

a hyperlipidemic mice model was established to differentiate the effects of chronic hyperlipidemia and transient high-fat diet on drug absorption and distribution. Third, we used metabolomics and the random forest algorithm to identify key factors influencing steady- state and distribution to target organs of mitotane concentration. The materials and methods are shown in the Supplementary data. Animal care and experimental protocols were approved by the An- imal Ethics Committee of West China Hospital of Sichuan University (Approval number: 20240306117). The clinical study was approved by the Ethics Committee of West China Hospital, Sichuan University (Approval number: ChiCTR2300073328) and was registered at https://www.chictr.org.cn.

In the first part, we observed abnormal fluctuations in drug concentrations in lipemic blood following a high-fat diet through clinical observation (Table S1, and Figs. S1 and 1A). Subsequently, we compared 68 samples from 16 subjects using both the new and original methods. Compared with the traditional method, the new method (Supporting Information: 1.3.4.3 Different Mitotane plasma concentration monitoring) incorporates in the pretreatment step. The hyperlipidemic samples return to normal after pretreatments (Fig. S2), which allowed accurate measurement of true blood drug concentrations. The comparison results indicate that the new method can avoid the impact of high-fat diet on drug concentration monitoring (Table S2).

In second part, we established hyperlipidemic mice model and compared it with normal mice to study the effects of short-term high fat diet and hyperlipidemia on the absorption and distribu- tion of mitotane, while applying the new pretreatment procedure to process mouse plasma samples. The experimental design is shown in Table S3. In the mouse adrenal glands, the comparison between group 3 and group 1 showed P = 0.0282, and the com- bined comparison of group 2 with groups 4 and 5 showed P = 2.17 × 10-5 (Fig. 1B). This suggests that hyperlipidemia facilitates mitotane distribution in the adrenal glands, and that long-term high-fat diet combined with hyperlipidemia further enhances mitotane distribution in the adrenal glands. In contrast, long-term

Peer review under responsibility of Xi’an Jiaotong University.

* Corresponding author. Cancer Center, Clinical Trial Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, 610041, China.

E-mail address: zhengli@wchscu.cn (L. Zheng).

1 Both authors contributed equally to this work.

Fig. 1. Clinical data on mitotane (MTT) blood concentration monitoring, results of animal distribution experiments and non-target metabolomics results. (A) Changes in MTT concentration during therapeutic drug monitoring of the subjects, with a monitoring interval of 4 weeks. The dashed lines represent the therapeutic window, with the upper dashed

A

B

C

Adrenal gland

Left brain



Mitontane concentration (mg/L)

Mitontane concentration (mg/L)



2000

30

80

Mitotane concentration (mg/L)

1500

20

64.656

1000

10

60

500

0

0

40

39.293

-500

1

2

3

4

5

-10

Group

1

2

3

4

Group

5

D

Plasma


E

24.013

Cerebellum

Therapeutic ceiling 20 mg Therapeutic threshold 14 mg

18.831

17.920

22.572

14.558


-


Mitontane concentration (mg/L)

Mitontane concentration (mg/L)


40


100

0

30

2023.07.28

2023. 08. 11

2023. 09. 15

2023. 11.02

2023. 12. 15

2024. 01.03

2024.02.02

20

50

10-

0.

0-

-

-10

1

2

3

-50

4

Group

5

1

2

Group

3

4

5

F

G

H

TG

LDL

TC

HDL

6


6

10

5

4

8

4

O

O

4


6

3

2

4

2

2

0

?

2

1

-2

0

0

0

NOR

FAST

NOR

FAST

NOR

FAST

NOR

FAST

J

K

4

Glycerophospholipid metabolism

Mloptapromyš-

251.

231

Diacetylheptaprmnyl.

Glycmolipid metabolism

glyomylphosphate

-1

0

1

Sphingolipid metabolism

111 260

27167

Glycerol-IP

un glyvera- E-phoipho L-serine

0118

36.1.16

Phosphatidylcholin

3114

phosphosoline

3

Glycerophospholipid metabolism

Glycerono-IK

1.1.1.94

1.13.21

2.7 3 39

LPCAT

31.15

3142

COP-

3.1 1.32

3.15

31.4.46

glycerol

2017 21

23 1 62

Pophocholine

wCilyomol.JP

„AcyLo-glyceto-

-log10(P value)

Histidine metabolism

23/4]

231.13

231 215 231

198

2782

2-Mgyl- -gyorrol-3P

Dimethyl Ithanolamine

31.43

CDP-4

Phospho

I-Acyl-

27.7.15

27.1 32

O Cholite

2316

313.13

O-Acetylcholine

glycérine-37-

al

217

ATAI

21 1103

2

Arginine biosynthesis

Eder lipid motabeilen

23

51

23.1 52]

Mowametry phosphatidyl-

C

DCÍ

¥

Phosphodimethyl

211 17

21 1 100

Glycerolipia metabolism

3144

Pyruvate metabolism

3134

L-Soring- phospho-

)N- Methylethanol

ne phosphate

Glycolysis

wglycelol.]

271307

in-glycol

21.1.107

271134

4232

Acetaldehyde

Steroid hormone biosynthesis

11 44

F714

4317

GiPl-anchor biosynthesis

17714

433.

433-

1

361.2

3.1 43

Diebanolamine

Triethanolamine

LPIAT 31.1.52

.

27811

34741

278.24

LPSAT O

2114

41.1.

L-Serine

Serine metabolism

CDP-discyl-

Lyphospho.

2788

411.65

1.

3142

3.1.1.32

Inositol phosphate metabolisen

2785

3.1.1 32

2314

Phosphatidyl- glycerophosphate

31 1 111

phosphoethanolamine

0

313 23

Glycine, porine, and temine metabolism

Candiolipin

3143

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1.0

LCLAT CLDI

candiolipin

İ

Pathway impact

LPG.AT

L

M

N

· FAST

NOR

Significant · Downregulated

Upregulated

· Not significant

Random forest classification

10-

3-Hydroxy

Orthogonal T score [1] (22.7%)

0.5

Overall

FAST

NOR

6

(25R)-38,48-dihydroxycholess-5-en-2

00/22:4(72, 102. 132, 162)22-5(42, 72, 502. 132. 162)

00)-4-43R. 55. 75. BR. 95. 105. 125, 130, 545, 1TR)3, 7, 12-trihydroxy-)

ethylhexadecahydro-596-cyclopentajalphenanthoen-17-plipentanoic acid

5

plasterone

0.4

-log10(P value)

4-

inuric acid

0-

O

Prego-4-804-3.20-dione

0.3

Error

0

..

-

2-

-5-

0.2

0.1

-10-

0

0

-5

0

5

-4

-2

0

2

4

6

8

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

log2(FC)

T score [1] (12.8%)

Trees

high-fat diet without hyperlipidemia does not increase mitotane distribution in the adrenal glands. In the mouse left brain, we observed that long-term high-fat diet promotes mitotane distri- bution within the cranium (Fig. 1C). From the distribution of mitotane in different organs in group 5 compared to group 4, it is evident that the high plasma concentrations detected by the old method in transient lipemia induced by a high-fat meal do not affect drug distribution (Figs. 1B-E). The new detection method can avoid interference from transient lipemia. We also observed that on the fifth day of the experiment, the fourth and fifth groups were the first to exhibit symptoms of neurotoxicity (Videos S1-S5). Although there was no statistical difference between the group 4 and group 2, the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test with a P value of 0.0159 indicated a difference in data dispersion. These data show a close relationship between lipoproteins and mitotane distribution, as well as the drug’s efficacy and adverse reactions.

Supplementary video related to this article can be found at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpha.2025.101252

In third part, untargeted metabolomics was used to validate the relationship between mitotane absorption and distribution with lipoproteins, and to identify which lipoprotein has the greatest impact on the absorption and distribution. Subjects who reached the therapeutic window and received a daily dose >1,500 mg were placed in the normal group(NOR group), while those with a dose ≤1,500 mg were placed in the fast achieved thera- peutic windw group(FAST group). The results and quality control of metabolomics are shown in Table S4 and Fig. S3, integrated with clinical assay data from subjects (Figs. 1F-1I) which indicate that levels of triglycerides (TG) and low-density lipoprotein (LDL) in the FAST group was significantly higher than that in the NOR group. Very low density lipoprotein(VLDL) is a component of LDL and TG. At the same time, In the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG) pathway analysis (Figs. 1J and K), about FAST group, we observed that downregulation of glycerol-3P, which is located at the end of lipid metabolism, and also downregulation of phospho-ethanolamine and phosphatidyl-ethanolamine, both of which are key components of VLDL secreted by the liver. These data provide multifaceted evidence that VLDL is a key factor influencing the absorption and distribution of mitotane. Mitotane bound to VLDL may be a key factor influencing drug efficacy. This is consistent with our clinical observations and animal experi- ment results, but differs from the conclusion of previous studies which suggested that the free drug is the active form [4,5]. We also identified a series of key metabolites that affect dosing regimens by using volcano plot (Figs.1L and Table S5), orthogonal pro- jections to latent structures discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) and random forest models (Figs. 1M, 1N and S4). The TG with specific molecular structures, such as TG (15:0/22:4 (7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z)/22:5 (4Z,7Z,10Z,13Z,16Z)) and TG (24:0/15:0/O-18:0), along with

dihydrotestosterone and other metabolites, is key metabolites that differentiate the FAST group from the NOR group. This aligns with our clinical observations of hormonal imbalances and lipid metabolism disorders, thereby reinforcing the physiological relevance of these metabolic changes.

In conclusion, this study suggests that it is important to adopt our new preprocessing method to avoid the impact of transient high-fat meals on drug concentration and dosing guidance. Addi- tionally, it is recommended to measure LDL and TG levels in pa- tients while monitoring drug concentrations. Furthermore, for patients with adrenal cortical carcinoma and elevated LDL and TG levels, a dose escalation regimen may be considered to achieve the target drug concentration, while avoiding high-fat meals to reduce neurotoxicity. For patients with normal LDL and TG levels, a high- dose bolus regimen may be considered based on clinical circum- stances. Of course, due to the limited sample size in our study, specific dosing recommendations need to be validated through rigorously designed clinical trials.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Xiangjie Di: Writing - original draft, Visualization, Validation, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Funding acquisition, Data curation. Yixian Liu: Writing - review & editing, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Software, Project adminis- tration, Investigation, Data curation. Jia You: Supervision, Project administration, Investigation, Data curation. Yuchun Men: Re- sources, Project administration, Investigation. Zhenlei Wang: Su- pervision, Data curation. Chao Zhou: Software. Ying Jin: Software, Data curation. Yating Ge: Methodology. Yongji He: Data curation. Li Zheng: Writing - review & editing, Supervision, Funding acquisi- tion, Conceptualization.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.

Acknowledgments

This study was supported by 1.3.5 Project for Disciplines of Excellence-Clinical Research Fund, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, China (Grant No .: 23HXFH027), Foundation of Devel- opment and Related Diseases of Women and Children Key Labo- ratory of Sichuan Province, China (Grant No .: FYYFEJB2024002) and The Key Research and Development Program of Sichuan Province, China (Grant No .: 2024YFFK0334).

line at 20 mg/L and the lower dashed line at 14 mg/L. (B) MTT concentration in the adrenal gland; Group4/Group3: P = 0.0282; Group1/Group3: P = 0.0282; Group1/Group4: P = 0; Group2/Group4: P = 0.0124; Group1/Group5: P = 0.0001; Group2/Group5: P = 0.0454. (C) MTT concentration in the left brain; Group4/Group3: P = 0.0011; Group5/Group3: P = 0.0013; Group1/Group4: P = 0; Group 1/Group5: P = 0; Group2/Group1: P = 0.0084. (D) MTT concentration in the plasma; Group4/Group3: P = 0.0009; Group5/Group3: P = 0.0075; Group1/Group4: P = 0.00000304; Group2/Group4: P = 0.042; Group1/Group5: P = 0; Group2/Group1: P = 0.0037. (E) MTT concentration in the cerebellum; Group4/Group3: P = 0.001; Group5/Group3: P = 0.0027; Group1/Group4: P = 0; Group1/Group5: P = 0; Group2/Group1: P = 0.0079. (F) Comparative analysis of triglycerides (TG) levels between two groups of study subjects: P = 0.0004. (G) Comparative analysis of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels between two groups of study subjects: P = 0.0344. (H) Comparative analysis of total cholesterol (TC) levels between two groups of study subjects: P = 0.0778. (I) Comparison of high-density lipoprotein (HDL) levels between the two groups of subjects: P = 0.6494. (J) Metabolic pathways undergoing significant changes in fast achieved therapeutic windw (FAST) group compared to normal (NOR) group. (K) Glycerophospholipid metabolism pathway. (L) Volcano plot of differential metabolites. Differential metabolites (red and blue) and nondifferential substances (black) were determined under the con- ditions of fold change (FC) ≥ 1.2 and false discovery rate-adjusted P value threshold <0.05. (M) Orthogonal projections to latent structures discriminant analysis (OPLS-DA) score plots for vein plasma in electrospray ionization positive (ESI+) model. FAST group is shown in green, and NOR group is shown in blue. (N) Random Forest classification error rates over the number of trees for different classes. The overall error rate (red line), the FAST group (green line), and the NOR group (blue line) as a function of the number of trees in the random forest model.

In Figs 1F-I, Group 1: normolipidemic, normal diet, MTT; Group 2: normolipidemic, normal diet, MTT in corn oil; Group 3: hyperlipidemia, high-fat diet, MTT; Group 4: hyper- lipidemia; high-fat diet, MTT in corn oil; Group 5: hyperlipidemia, high-fat diet, MTT in corn oil, extra oil before execution.

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpha.2025.101252.

References

[1] R.M. Paragliola, F. Torino, G. Papi, et al., Role of mitotane in adrenocortical carcinoma - review and state of the art, Eur. Endocrinol. 14 (2018) 62-66.

[2] T. Else, A.C. Kim, A. Sabolch, et al., Adrenocortical carcinoma, Endocr. Rev. 35 (2014) 282-326.

[3] M. Terzolo, A. Angeli, M. Fassnacht, et al., Adjuvant mitotane treatment for adrenocortical carcinoma, N. Engl. J. Med. 356 (2007) 2372-2380.

[4] M. Kroiss, D. Plonné, S. Kendl, et al., Association of mitotane with chylomicrons and serum lipoproteins: Practical implications for treatment of adrenocortical carcinoma, Eur. J. Endocrinol. 174 (2016) 343-353.

[5] M. Faron, A. Naman, J. Delahousse, et al., Prognostic value of total, free and lipoprotein fraction-bound plasma mitotane levels in advanced adrenocor- tical carcinoma: A prospective study of the ENDOCAN-COMETE-Cancer network, J. Endocrinol. Invest. 48 (2024) 357-367.