Clinical Pharmacokinetics

, Volume 53, Issue 3, pp 247–259 | Cite as

Modelling the Sitagliptin Effect on Dipeptidyl Peptidase-4 Activity in Adults with Haematological Malignancies After Umbilical Cord Blood Haematopoietic Cell Transplantation

  • Nieves Vélez de MendizábalEmail author
  • Robert M. Strother
  • Sherif S. Farag
  • Hal E. Broxmeyer
  • Steven Messina-Graham
  • Shripad D. Chitnis
  • Robert R. Bies
Original Research Article


Background and Objectives

Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 (DPP4) inhibition is a potential strategy to increase the engraftment rate of haematopoietic stem/progenitor cells. A recent clinical trial using sitagliptin, a DPP4 inhibitor approved for type 2 diabetes mellitus, has been shown to be a promising approach in adults with haematological malignancies after umbilical cord blood (UCB) haematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). On the basis of data from this clinical trial, a semi-mechanistic model was developed to simultaneously describe DPP4 activity after multiple doses of sitagliptin in subjects with haematological malignancies after a single-unit UCB HCT.


The clinical study included 24 patients who received myeloablative conditioning followed by oral sitagliptin with single-unit UCB HCT. Using a nonlinear mixed-effects approach, a semi-mechanistic pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic model was developed to describe DPP4 activity from these trial data, using NONMEM version 7.2 software. The model was used to drive Monte Carlo simulations to probe the various dosage schedules and the attendant DPP4 response.


The disposition of sitagliptin in plasma was best described by a two-compartment model. The relationship between sitagliptin concentrations and DPP4 activity was best described by an indirect response model with a negative feedback loop. Simulations showed that twice daily or three times daily dosage schedules were superior to a once daily schedule for maximal DPP4 inhibition at the lowest sitagliptin exposure.


This study provides the first pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic model of sitagliptin in the context of HCT, and provides a valuable tool for exploration of optimal dosing regimens, which are critical for improving the time to engraftment in patients after UCB HCT.


Umbilical Cord Blood Sitagliptin DPP4 Inhibition Antithymocyte Globulin Pharmacodynamic Model 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We thank the Disease and Therapeutic Response Modeling Program for the Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CTSI) at Indiana University, and David R. Jones for his useful comments on the bioanalytical assays. Analytical work was performed by the Clinical Pharmacology Analytical Core Laboratory, a core laboratory of the Indiana University Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, supported by National Cancer Institute grant no. P30 CA082709.

Conflict of Interest Disclosure Statements

Nieves Vélez de Mendizábal, Shripad Chitnis and Robert Bies were supported by Eli Lilly and Company through the Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CTSI). Steven Messina-Graham was supported as a predoctoral student on under-represented minority grant no. GM079657 and subsequently on grant no. T32 (Hal Broxmeyer) from the US National Institutes of Health (NIH). Robert M. Strother has no conflicts of interest to declare. Hal Broxmeyer is a founder of Cord: Use Family Cord Blood Bank and serves on the medical scientific advisory board of the bank. Parts of these studies were supported by grants from the V Foundation for Cancer Research (Sherif Farag), and Public Service Multi-PI R01HL112669 from the NIH (Hal Broxmeyer and Sherif Farag). Robert Bies is the Director of the Disease and Therapeutic Response Modeling Program, funded through a gift from Eli Lilly & Co. to the Indiana CTSI.

Supplementary material

40262_2013_109_MOESM1_ESM.docx (7.2 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 7376 kb)


  1. 1.
    Neumiller JJ. Clinical pharmacology of incretin therapies for type 2 diabetes mellitus: implications for treatment. Clin Ther. 2011;33(5):528–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Christopherson KW 2nd, Hangoc G, Broxmeyer HE. Cell surface peptidase CD26/dipeptidylpeptidase IV regulates CXCL12/stromal cell-derived factor-1 alpha-mediated chemotaxis of human cord blood CD34+ progenitor cells. J Immunol. 2002;169(12):7000–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Broxmeyer HE, Cooper S, Kohli L, Hangoc G, Lee Y, Mantel C, et al. Transgenic expression of stromal cell-derived factor-1/CXC chemokine ligand 12 enhances myeloid progenitor cell survival/antiapoptosis in vitro in response to growth factor withdrawal and enhances myelopoiesis in vivo. J Immunol. 2003;170(1):421–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Peled A, Petit I, Kollet O, Magid M, Ponomaryov T, Byk T, et al. Dependence of human stem cell engraftment and repopulation of NOD/SCID mice on CXCR4. Science. 1999;283(5403):845–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Broxmeyer HE, Hoggatt J, O’Leary HA, Mantel C, Chitteti BR, Cooper S, et al. Dipeptidylpeptidase 4 negatively regulates colony-stimulating factor activity and stress hematopoiesis. Nat Med. 2012;18(12):1786–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brunstein CG, Setubal DC, Wagner JE. Expanding the role of umbilical cord blood transplantation. Br J Haematol. 2007;137(1):20–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rocha V, Broxmeyer HE. New approaches for improving engraftment after cord blood transplantation. Biol Blood Marrow Transplant. 2010;16(1 Suppl):S126–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Broxmeyer HE, Farag SS, Rocha V. Cord blood hematopoietic cell transplantation. In: Thomas’ hematopoietic cell transplantation. New York: Wiley-Blackwell; 2013.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Farag SS, Srivastava S, Messina-Graham S, Schwartz J, Robertson MJ, Abonour R, et al. In vivo DPP-4 inhibition to enhance engraftment of single-unit cord blood transplants in adults with hematological malignancies. Stem Cells Dev. 2013;22(7):1007–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bergman AJ, Stevens C, Zhou Y, Yi B, Laethem M, De Smet M, et al. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of multiple oral doses of sitagliptin, a dipeptidyl peptidase-IV inhibitor: a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study in healthy male volunteers. Clin Ther. 2006;28(1):55–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Herman GA, Stevens C, Van Dyck K, Bergman A, Yi B, De Smet M, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of sitagliptin, an inhibitor of dipeptidyl peptidase IV, in healthy subjects: results from two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled studies with single oral doses. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2005;78(6):675–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vincent SH, Reed JR, Bergman AJ, Elmore CS, Zhu B, Xu S, et al. Metabolism and excretion of the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor [14C]sitagliptin in humans. Drug Metab Dispos. 2007;35(4):533–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kim BH, Kim SE, Kang D, Lim KS, Kim JR, Jang IJ, et al. Pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic modeling of biomarker response to sitagliptin in healthy volunteers. Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol. 2013;113(2):113–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Herman GA, Mistry GC, Yi B, Bergman AJ, Wang AQ, Zeng W, et al. Evaluation of pharmacokinetic parameters and dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibition following single doses of sitagliptin in healthy, young Japanese males. Br J Clin Pharmacol. 2011;71(3):429–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bergman A, Mistry GC, Luo WL, Liu Q, Stone J, Wang A, et al. Dose-proportionality of a final market image sitagliptin formulation, an oral dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, in healthy volunteers. Biopharm Drug Dispos. 2007;28(6):307–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Herman GA, Bergman A, Liu F, Stevens C, Wang AQ, Zeng W, et al. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamic effects of the oral DPP-4 inhibitor sitagliptin in middle-aged obese subjects. J Clin Pharmacol. 2006;46(8):876–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bergman A, Ebel D, Liu F, Stone J, Wang A, Zeng W, et al. Absolute bioavailability of sitagliptin, an oral dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, in healthy volunteers. Biopharm Drug Dispos. 2007;28(6):315–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hooker AC, Staatz CE, Karlsson MO. Conditional weighted residuals (CWRES): a model diagnostic for the FOCE method. Pharm Res. 2007;24(12):2187–97.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ludden TM, Beal SL, Sheiner LB. Comparison of the Akaike information criterion, the Schwarz criterion and the F test as guides to model selection. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm. 1994;22(5):431–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Lindbom L, Ribbing J, Jonsson EN. Perl-speaks-NONMEM (PsN)—a Perl module for NONMEM related programming. Comput Methods Programs Biomed. 2004;75(2):85–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Ou X, O’Leary H, Broxmeyer HE. Implications of DPP4 modification of proteins that regulate stem/progenitor and more mature cell types. Blood. 2013;122(2):161–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    O’Leary H, Ou X, Broxmeyer HE. The role of dipeptidyl peptidase 4 in hematopoiesis and transplantation. Curr Opin Hematol. 2013;20(4):314–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Christopherson KW 2nd, Hangoc G, Mantel CR, Broxmeyer HE. Modulation of hematopoietic stem cell homing and engraftment by CD26. Science. 2004;305(5686):1000–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Gluckman E, Rocha V, Boyer-Chammard A, Locatelli F, Arcese W, Pasquini R, et al. Outcome of cord-blood transplantation from related and unrelated donors. Eurocord Transplant Group and the European Blood and Marrow Transplantation Group. N Engl J Med. 1997;337(6):373–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Rubinstein P, Carrier C, Scaradavou A, Kurtzberg J, Adamson J, Migliaccio AR, et al. Outcomes among 562 recipients of placental-blood transplants from unrelated donors. N Engl J Med. 1998;339(22):1565–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wagner JE, Barker JN, DeFor TE, Baker KS, Blazar BR, Eide C, et al. Transplantation of unrelated donor umbilical cord blood in 102 patients with malignant and nonmalignant diseases: influence of CD34 cell dose and HLA disparity on treatment-related mortality and survival. Blood. 2002;100(5):1611–8.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ballen KK, Gluckman E, Broxmeyer HE. Umbilical cord blood transplantation: the first 25 years and beyond. Blood. 2013;122(4):491–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rosenstock J, Zinman B. Dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitors and the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2007;14(2):98–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Jacobson P, Uberti J, Davis W, Ratanatharathorn V. Tacrolimus: a new agent for the prevention of graft-versus-host disease in hematopoietic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1998;22(3):217–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Jones RJ, Grochow LB. Pharmacology of bone marrow transplantation conditioning regimens. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1995;29(770):237–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Nieto Y, Vaughan WP. Pharmacokinetics of high-dose chemotherapy. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2004;33(3):259–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Przepiorka D, Devine S, Fay J, Uberti J, Wingard J. Practical considerations in the use of tacrolimus for allogeneic marrow transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 1999;24(10):1053–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Chu XY, Bleasby K, Yabut J, Cai X, Chan GH, Hafey MJ, et al. Transport of the dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor sitagliptin by human organic anion transporter 3, organic anion transporting polypeptide 4C1, and multidrug resistance P-glycoprotein. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 2007;321(2):673–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Krishna R, Bergman A, Larson P, Cote J, Lasseter K, Dilzer S, et al. Effect of a single cyclosporine dose on the single-dose pharmacokinetics of sitagliptin (MK-0431), a dipeptidyl peptidase-4 inhibitor, in healthy male subjects. J Clin Pharmacol. 2007;47(2):165–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Duncan N, Craddock C. Optimizing the use of cyclosporin in allogeneic stem cell transplantation. Bone Marrow Transplant. 2006;38(3):169–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Beconi MG, Reed JR, Teffera Y, Xia YQ, Kochansky CJ, Liu DQ, et al. Disposition of the dipeptidyl peptidase 4 inhibitor sitagliptin in rats and dogs. Drug Metab Dispos. 2007;35(4):525–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Durinx C, Lambeir AM, Bosmans E, Falmagne JB, Berghmans R, Haemers A, et al. Molecular characterization of dipeptidyl peptidase activity in serum: soluble CD26/dipeptidyl peptidase IV is responsible for the release of X-Pro dipeptides. Eur J Biochem. 2000;267(17):5608–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nieves Vélez de Mendizábal
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Robert M. Strother
    • 1
    • 3
  • Sherif S. Farag
    • 4
  • Hal E. Broxmeyer
    • 5
  • Steven Messina-Graham
    • 5
  • Shripad D. Chitnis
    • 1
    • 2
  • Robert R. Bies
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Division of Clinical Pharmacology, Department of MedicineIndiana University School of MedicineIndianapolisUSA
  2. 2.Indiana Clinical and Translational Sciences Institute (CTSI)IndianapolisUSA
  3. 3.Christchurch HospitalChristchurchNew Zealand
  4. 4.Division of Hematology–Oncology, Department of MedicineIndiana University School of MedicineIndianapolisUSA
  5. 5.Department of Microbiology and ImmunologyIndiana University School of MedicineIndianapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations