Two patients with fluoropyrimidine overdose successfully managed without uridine triacetate

Abstract

Introduction

In this case report we describe two patients with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) overdose due to an unintentional increased infusion rate in which treatment with uridine triacetate was considered. Where previous case reports focus on the use of uridine triacetate in case of toxicity, this case report shows why it should be considered to abstain from the use of uridine triacetate.

Case reports

The first patient is a 71-year-old woman who received 1200 mg/m² 5-FU in 2 h instead of 23 h. The second patient is a 74-year-old woman who received 2600 mg/m² 5-FU in 13 h instead of 24 h. The DPYD genotype of both patients was tested before the start of therapy and was found to be normal.

Management & Outcome

Both patients received best supportive care and were admitted to the intensive care unit for monitoring of acute manifestations of toxicity. The first patient did not develop toxicity. The second patient did develop toxicity, but recovered completely.

Discussion

The rationale for abstaining from the use of uridine triacetate was the inadequacy of evidence backing its clinical and cost-effectiveness and the fact that uridine triacetate is not registered for the use in the European Union. Comparison of clinical outcomes of the already published open-label cohort with clinical outcomes of a comparable, well-described, best supportive care cohort is required before the added value of uridine triacetate can be determined. In addition, there is a need for a valid predictor of toxicity after fluoropyrimidine overdose.