Search

HIV protease inhibitors are associated with HIV protease inhibitor-related lipodystrophy syndrome. We hypothesized that liposarcomas would be similarly susceptible to the apoptotic effects of an HIV protease inhibitor, nelfinavir.We conducted a phase I trial of nelfinavir for liposarcomas. There was no limit to prior chemotherapy. The starting dose was 1,250 mg twice daily (Level 1). Doses were escalated in cohorts of three to a maximally evaluated dose of 4,250 mg (Level 5). One cycle was 28 days. Steady-state pharmacokinetics (PKs) for nelfinavir and its primary active metabolite, M8, were determined at Levels 4 (3,000 mg) and 5.Twenty subjects (13 males) were enrolled. Median (range) age was 64 years (37-81). One subject at Level 1 experienced reversible, grade 3 pancreatitis after 1 week and was replaced. No other dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Median (range) number of cycles was 3 (0.6-13.5). Overall best responses observed were 1 partial response, 1 minor response, 4 stable disease, and 13 progressive disease. Mean peak plasma levels and AUCs for nelfinavir were higher at Level 4 (7.3 mg/L; 60.9 mg/L × h) than 5 (6.3 mg/L; 37.7 mg/L × h). The mean ratio of M8:nelfinavir AUCs for both levels was ~1:3.PKs demonstrate auto-induction of nelfinavir clearance at the doses studied, although the mechanism remains unclear. Peak plasma concentrations were within range where anticancer activity was demonstrated in vitro. M8 metabolite is present at ~1/3 the level of nelfinavir and may also contribute to the anticancer activity observed.

The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) of the combination of bortezomib and temozolomide in patients with solid tumors. The secondary objective was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics (PK) of bortezomib with and without concurrent hepatic enzyme-inducing anticonvulsants (HEIAs).Bortezomib was administered on days 2, 5, 9, and 12; temozolomide on days 1-5 of a 28-day cycle. Dose escalation proceeded using a standard 3+3 design. Patients with primary or metastatic brain tumors were eligible and were stratified based on whether they were taking HEIAs or not.Of the 25 patients enrolled, 22 were not taking HEIAs. MTDs were only given to patients not receiving HEIAs. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) consisted of grade-3 constipation, hyponatremia, fatigue, elevated hepatic enzymes, and grade-4 neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, constipation, and abdominal pain. Stable disease (8 weeks) was observed in 5 patients. Bortezomib systemic clearance (CL(sys)) on day 9 was 51% of the CL(sys) on day 2 (P 0.01) Similarly, the normalized area under the concentration-time curve (norm AUC) on day 9 was 1.9 times the norm AUC on day 2 (P 0.01). The median bortezomib CL(sys) on days 2 and 9 was significantly higher (P 0.04) in patients taking HEIAs, and the median norm AUC was correspondingly lower (P 0.04).The MTDs for the combination of bortezomib and temozolomide in patients not taking HEIAs are 1.3 and 200 mg/m(2), respectively. The rate of bortezomib elimination in patients taking HEIAs was increased twofold. Additional trials are needed to better define the optimal dosing in such patients.

To determine the response rate to 26-h continuous infusion cyclosporine A (CSA) combined with a fixed dose level of carboplatin (CBDCA) in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer, and to determine the effect of CSA on the pharmacokinetics of CBDCA.To examine the effect of duration of CSA exposure on reversal of CBDCA resistance, clonogenic assays were performed in vitro in platinum-resistant A2780 cells. CBDCA (AUC 4) with CSA repeated every 3 weeks was then administered to patients on this phase II study. Pharmacokinetics of CSA and CBDCA were determined in a subset of patients.Preincubation of platinum-resistant A2780 cells with CSA reversed CBDCA resistance in a concentration-dependent and time-dependent manner. A group of 23 patients received 58 courses of CBDCA/CSA therapy. One partial response was observed. Eight patients achieved disease stabilization. Toxicity was similar to that observed in our previous phase I study and consisted of myelosuppression, nausea, vomiting, and headache. The mean +/- SD end-of-infusion CSA level (HPLC assay) was 1253 +/- 400 microg/ml. The pharmacokinetic studies suggest that CSA does not increase CBDCA AUC.Steady-state levels of1 microg/ml CSA (HPLC assay) are achievable in vivo. Modest partial reversal of platinum resistance (in one patient with an objective response and in eight patients with stable disease noted) is achievable in vivo in patients pretreated with CSA. This phenomenon is not explained by alterations in CBDCA pharmacokinetics.

Dexrazoxane administration prior to short infusion doxorubicin prevents anthracycline-related heart damage. Since delivery of doxorubicin by 96-h continuous intravenous infusion also reduces cardiac injury, we studied delivering dexrazoxane and doxorubicin concomitantly by prolonged intravenous infusion.Patients with advanced malignancies received tandem cycles of concurrent 96-h infusions of dexrazoxane 500 mg/m2 and doxorubicin 165 mg/m2, and 24 h after completion of chemotherapy, granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (5 microg/kg) and oral levofloxacin (500 mg) were administered daily until the white blood cell count reached 10,000 microl(-1). Plasma samples were analyzed for dexrazoxane and doxorubicin concentrations.Ten patients were enrolled; eight patients had measurable disease. Two partial responses were observed in patients with soft-tissue sarcoma. The median number of days of granulocytopenia (500 microl(-1)) was nine and of platelet count20,000 microl(-1) was seven. Six patients received a single cycle because of progression (one), stable disease (four), or reversible, asymptomatic 10% decrease in cardiac ejection fraction (two). Principal grade 3/4 toxicities included hypotension (two), anorexia (four), stomatitis (four), typhlitis (two), and febrile neutropenia (seven), with documented infection (three). One death from neutropenic sepsis occurred. Dexrazoxane levels ranged from 1270 to 2800 nM, and doxorubicin levels ranged from 59.1 to 106.9 nM.These results suggest that tandem cycles of concurrent 96-h infusions of dexrazoxane and high-dose doxorubicin can be administered with minimal cardiac toxicity, and have activity in patients with recurrent sarcomas. However, significant non-cardiac toxicities indicate that the cardiac sparing potential of this approach would be maximized at lower dose levels of doxorubicin.

This study was designed to ascertain the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) and maximally tolerated doses of the combination of fixed-dose tamoxifen and carboplatin, with escalating doses of topotecan, and to determine the pharmacokinetics of topotecan in the plasma and cerebrospinal fluid.Tamoxifen 100 mg po bid, topotecan 0.25, 0.5, 0.75, or 1.0 mg/m(2)/d IV, administered as a 72 h continuous infusion on days 1-3, followed by carboplatin AUC = 3, IV on day 3. Cycles were repeated every 4 weeks.Seventeen patients received 39 cycles of treatment: median 2, (range 1-5). The tumors included glioblastoma (6), anaplastic astrocytoma (2), metastatic non-small cell (3), small cell lung (2), and one each with medulloblastoma, ependymoma, and metastatic breast or colon carcinoma. The median Karnofsky performance status was 70% (range 60-90%) and age: 52 (range 24-75). Eleven patients were female and six male. Toxicities included thrombocytopenia (2), neutropenia without fever lasting 6 days (1), DVT (2), and emesis (1). Topotecan levels, total and lactone, were measured prior to the end of infusion in plasma and cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). At 1.0 mg/m(2)/d, the median CSF/plasma ratio was 19.4% (range 15.1-59.1%). The total plasma topotecan in two pts with DLTs was 4.63 and 5.87 ng/ml, in three without DLTs at the same dose level the mean total plasma topotecan was 3.4 ng/ml (range 3.02-3.83). Plasma lactone levels were 33% of the total; CSF penetration was 20% of the total plasma levels. 4/8 pts with high-grade gliomas had stable disease (median: 3 cycles (range 2-5)). Two had minor responses. One patient with metastatic non-small cell and one with small cell lung cancer had objective PRs.The recommended phase II doses are: tamoxifen 100 mg po bid, topotecan 0.75 mg/m(2)/d IV continuous infusion for 72 h, followed by carboplatin AUC = 3 IV on day 3. Measurable topotecan levels, both total and lactone, are observed in the CSF.

GTI-2040 is a 20-mer antisense oligonucleotide targeting the mRNA of ribonucleotide reductase M2. It was combined with oxaliplatin and capecitabine in a phase I trial in patients with advance solid tumors based on previous studies demonstrating potentiation of chemotherapy with ribonucleotide reductase inhibitors.Patients at least 18 years of age with advanced incurable solid tumors and normal organ function as well as a Karnofsky performance status ofor =60% were eligible. One prior chemotherapy regimen for advanced disease or relapse within 12 months of adjuvant chemotherapy was required. Patients could have received prior fluoropyrimidines, including capecitabine, but not oxaliplatin. Treatment cycles were 21 days. In each cycle, GTI-2040 was given as a continuous intravenous infusion over 14 days, oxaliplatin as a 2-h intravenous infusion on day 1, and capecitabine orally twice a day for 14 days. In cycle 1 only, oxaliplatin and capecitabine were started on day 2 to allow ribonucleotide reductase mRNA levels to be measured with and without oxaliplatin and capecitabine. Doses were escalated in cohorts of three patients using a standard 3 + 3 design until the maximum tolerated dose was established, defined as no more than one first-cycle dose-limiting toxicity among six patients treated at a given dose level.The maximum tolerated dose was estimated to be the combination of GTI-2040 3 mg/kg per day for 14 days, capecitabine 600 mg/m(2) twice daily for 14 days, and oxaliplatin 100 mg/m(2) every 21 days. Dose-limiting toxicities were hematologic. GTI-2040 pharmacokinetics, obtained at steady-state on days 7 and 14, showed the high inter-patient variability previously reported. Two of six patients had stable disease at the maximum tolerated dose and one patient, with heavily pre-treated non-small cell lung cancer, had a partial response at a higher dose level. In samples from a limited number of patients, there was no clear decrease in ribonucleotide reductase expression in peripheral blood mononuclear cells during treatment.A combination of GTI-2040, capecitabine and oxaliplatin is feasible in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Oxaliplatin has in vitro activity similar to or higher than other platinum agents. Preclinically, gemcitabine has demonstrated synergy when combined with platinum compounds. These facts formed the rationale for determining the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of gemcitabine in combination with oxaliplatin. Eligible patients with advanced incurable solid tumors were given oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 as a 2-h infusion on day 1 followed by escalating doses of gemcitabine given over 30 min on day 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. A total of 43 patients were enrolled, including 30 patients at the MTD in an expanded cohort. At a gemcitabine dose of 800 mg/m2, 1/6 patients had a dose limiting toxicity (DLT) (grade 3 blurred vision and memory loss). At 1,000 mg/m2, 1/6 patients had a DLT (grade 3 increase in AST). At 1,200 mg/m2, 2/3 patients had a DLT (grade 4 thrombocytopenia and grade 3 confusion). The MTD of gemcitabine with 130 mg/m2 of oxaliplatin was therefore 1,000 mg/m2. The clearances of gemcitabine and ultrafilterable platinum are within the ranges previously reported for single agents. A patient with colon cancer had a partial response, and 21 patients had a best response of stable disease. In patients with tumor biopsies treated at the MTD, decreased ribonucleotide reductase M2 expression correlated with response. Treatment with gemcitabine and oxaliplatin was well tolerated with primarily hematologic toxicity at the MTD. Study of biochemical correlates of response remain of interest althought current results remain exploratory.

Preclinical studies in our laboratory have demonstrated that prior exposure to hydroxyurea increases the percentage of cells in S phase, enhancing the cytotoxicity of subsequent gemcitabine treatment in human oropharyngeal KB cells. To evaluate the clinical implications of this time- and sequence-dependent potentiation, we performed a phase I trial of hydroxyurea given over 24 h followed by a 30-min infusion of gemcitabine in weeks 1 and 2 of a 3-week cycle. The dose of hydroxyurea was fixed at 500 mg orally every 6 h for four doses starting 24 h before each dose of gemcitabine. The initial dose level of gemcitabine was 250 mg/m(2) on days 2 and 9, and this was escalated stepwise to 1000 mg/m(2) on days 2 and 9. Gemcitabine pharmacokinetics were determined on days 2 and 9 of the first cycle. Of 27 patients enrolled (12 female, 15 male), 24 were evaluable for response and 23 were evaluable for toxicity. Their median age was 56 years (range 27-76 years). Tumor types included lung, head and neck, pancreas, breast, colon, prostate, stomach, ovary, esophagus, germ cell, thyroid, gallbladder, and unknown primary. A total of 80 cycles of treatment were completed. One patient (unknown primary) had an objective partial response lasting 21 months, and 12 patients had stable disease. All observed dose-limiting toxicities were related to myelosuppression. The gemcitabine maximum tolerated dose was established at 750 mg/m(2) on days 2 and 9. Hydroxyurea had no effect on the plasma pharmacokinetics of gemcitabine. These results suggest that hydroxyurea followed by gemcitabine can be safely administered and has activity on this schedule. We are presently developing a phase II trial of this regimen for patients with platinum-resistant head and neck cancer.

Purpose: The purpose of these sequential phase I studies was to evaluate the antiemetic efficacy and pharmacokinetics of high-dose continuous infusion prochlorperazine. Methods: A total of 52 patients with advanced cancer were treated in two sequential phase I studies utilizing high-dose prochlorperazine. In study 1, designed to investigate the antiemetic effects of dose-intensive prochlorperazine, various cisplatin-based multiagent chemotherapeutic regimens were administered in combination with escalating doses of prochlorperazine. In study 2, a fixed dose of cisplatin (60 mg/m2) was administered over 24 h as a continuous intravenous infusion in combination with infusional high-dose prochlorperazine. Antiemetic efficacy in the first trial was assessed in terms of the number of episodes of nausea, retching, and/or emesis during the 24 h following cisplatin administration. The pharmacokinetics of high-dose prochlorperazine were evaluated in eight patients treated in study 2 at the two dose levels below those at which dose-limiting toxicity was noted. Results: The maximally tolerated dose of prochlorperazine in combination with cisplatin (60 mg/m2 administered as a continuous infusion over 24 h) was 24 mg/h. The dose-limiting toxicity was grade 4 agitation and confusion noted in one patient treated at 26 mg/h. This patient died 3 days following cessation of chemotherapy due to the toxicity of the regimen in combination with the debilitating pulmonary effects of the disease. The mean end of infusion prochlorperazine level at the 24 mg/h dose level was 1.1 µM, a concentration previously reported to be consistent with the reversal of the multidrug resistance phenotype. Two partial responses were observed in study 2. Conclusions: We conclude that the antiemetic efficacy of high-dose infusional prochlorperazine does not appear to be improved over more convenient bolus administration. However, prochlorperazine levels consistent with those required in vitro for drug resistance reversal are attainable within the dose range having a tolerable toxicity profile.

Purpose: In recognition of the variety of available chemotherapeutic modulating agents and their potential to enhance the efficacy of platinum-based therapy, we embarked upon a phase I study to investigate the feasibility of combining fixed doses of carboplatinum (CBDCA) and etoposide (VP-16) with 24-h concurrent infusions of dipyridamole (DP), prochlorperazine (PCZ) and cyclosporine A (CSA) administered in escalating doses. Methods: Patients received intravenous VP-16 (200 mg/m2) and CBDCA (300 mg/m2), each over 30 min, starting at hour 6 of the modulator infusions. Resistance modulators were escalated sequentially to determine their respective maximally tolerated doses (MTDs). The pharmacokinetics (PK) of VP-16, CBDCA, and the three drug resistance (DR) modifiers were studied in eight patients. Results: A total of 59 patients were entered on study. The MTD was established at DP 5 mg/kg per day, PCZ 24 mg/h, and CSA 9.5 mg/kg per day. Dose-limiting toxicities included hypotension and severe sedation, presumably related to PCZ. No objective responses were seen. PK studies were performed when PCZ and DP doses were 24 mg/h and 3.3 mg/kg, and the CSA dose was either 8.5 mg/kg (five patients) or 9.5 mg/kg (three patients). The median clearance of VP-16 was 0.96 l/h per m2 (range 0.8–1.5 l/h per m2), which is lower than for VP-16 alone and similar to previously reported effects of CSA on VP-16 elimination. The median measured CBDCA AUC was 3.0 mg/ml · min (range 2.4–4.8 mg/ml · min). CBDCA AUC predicted by the Calvert formula using measured creatinine clearance underestimated the actual AUC in seven of the eight patients, in one case by as much as twofold. The median end of infusion PCZ and total DP plasma concentrations were 1.2 μM (range 0.5–2.2 μM) and 4.4 μM (range 1.3–5.9 μM), respectively, consistent with in vitro resistance modulatory levels. However, free DP was only 0.02 μM (range 0.004–0.04 μM). The median CSA level at 24 h of 1450 μg/l (range 1075–1640 μg/l) is in agreement with concentrations required for partial DR reversal in vitro, although it is much lower than levels achieved in our previous phase I study of CBDCA + CSA alone using similar doses of CSA. The CSA dose on the current trial was escalated beyond the MTD for the previous phase I study, suggesting that there may be an interaction between CSA and one of the other modulators. Conclusion: These results demonstrate that in vitro DR- reversing levels of two of the three agents used in this study can be achieved in vivo, and that this combination of DR modulators has significant effects on the pharmacokinetics of VP-16.

A group of 18 patients with advanced cancer were entered on a phase I study of a 120-h continuous intravenous infusion of hydroxyurea. The dose of hydroxyurea was escalated in cohorts of patients from 1 to 2 to 3.2 g/ m2 per day. The primary dose-limiting toxicity was neutropenia, often accompanied by leukopenia, thrombocytopenia and generalized skin rash. Prophylactic treatment of patients with dexamethasone and diphenhydramine hydrochloride prevented the skin rash, but not the hematopoietic toxicities. The pharmacokinetics of hydroxyurea were studied in all patients. The steady-state concentrations of hydroxyurea were linearly correlated with the dose (R2 = 0.71, n = 18, P0.0001). The mean +/- SE concentrations were 93 +/- 16, 230 +/- 6 and 302 +/- 27 microM at 1, 2 and 3.2 g/m2 per day, respectively. The mean +/- SE renal and nonrenal clearances of hydroxyurea were 2.14 +/- 0.18 and 3.39 +/- 0.28 l/h per m2 (n = 16), neither of which correlated with the dose. The concentration of hydroxyurea in plasma decayed monoexponentially with a mean +/- SE half-life of 3.25 +/- 0.18 h (n = 17). The steady-state concentration of hydroxyurea was200 microM in all nine patients treated at 2 g/m2 per day, a dose which was well tolerated for 5 days. We recommend this dose for phase II trials in combination with other antineoplastic agents.