Search

Topotecan is a novel semisynthetic derivative of the anticancer agent camptothecin and inhibits the intranuclear enzyme topoisomerase I. The lactone structure of topotecan, which is in equilibrium with the inactive ring-opened hydroxy acid, is essential for this activity. The open form predominates at physiological pH. We performed a pharmacokinetic study as part of a phase I study in patients with various types of solid tumors, where topotecan was administered in a 30-min infusion daily on 5 consecutive days every 3 weeks. The plasma kinetics of topotecan could be described best using an open two-compartment model with t1/2(alpha) and t1/2(beta) of 8.1 (range 0.3 to 40.7) min and 132 (range 49 to 286) min, respectively. The plasma concentration-time profiles of the metabolite, however, could be described using a one-compartment model with t1/2(formation) of 29.0 (range 5.6-99.5) min and t1/2 (elimination of 123.2 (range 32-265) min, respectively. The lactone was the predominate form during the first hour from the start of infusion, but was rapidly converted into its ring-opened structure. The elimination rate of topotecan was independent of the dose. There were linear relationships between the dose (mg m-2 day-1), the area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) of topotecan and its metabolite, the total AUC, peak plasma lactone concentrations, and the time period that the topotecan concentrations remained above 10 nM. Different models were used to correlate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic parameters. The percentage decrease in absolute neutrophil count (ANC) was related to these parameters and plots were well fitted by linear and sigmoidal Emax models. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To investigate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of irinotecan and cisplatin administered once every 3 weeks in a dose-escalating study in patients with solid tumors., Patients and Methods: Fifty-two cancer patients were treated with irinotecan administered as a 90-minute infusion at doses ranging from 175 to 300 mg/m(2) followed by cisplatin administered as a 3-hour intravenous infusion at doses ranging from 60 to 80 mg/m(2). After reaching the maximum-tolerated dose, the sequence of drug administration was revised. For pharmacokinetic analysis, serial plasma samples were obtained on days 1 through 3 of the first cycle. Forty-five patients were assessable for irinotecan pharmacokinetics, and 46 were assessable for cisplatin pharmacokinetics., Results: Irinotecan and cisplatin demonstrated linear pharmacokinetics comparable to that observed with single-agent administration, which suggests an absence of pharmacokinetic interaction. SN-38G constituted the major plasma metabolite of irinotecan, whereas 7-ethyl-10-[4-N-(1-piperidino)1-amino]-carbonyloxycamptothecine (NPC) was only a minor metabolite in plasma, possibly indicating a rapid conversion of NPC to SN-38. The terminal elimination phases of SN-38 and SN-38G were similar and relatively delayed when compared with the elimination of irinotecan. Maximal DNA adduct formation did not significantly differ from that observed with single-agent administration. The percentage decrease in WBC was significantly related to the areas under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUCs) of the lactone form of irinotecan (P =.0245) and SN-38 (P =. 0123). The severity of diarrhea was not significantly related to the AUCs of irinotecan and SN-38, nor to the systemic glucuronidation rate of SN-38., Conclusion: There was no apparent pharmacokinetic interaction between irinotecan and cisplatin in this study. Reversion of the administration sequence of the drugs did not seem to have any influence on the pharmacokinetics. The incidence and severity of delayed-type diarrhea was not related to any of the studied parameters.

Purpose: To assess the feasibility, pharmacokinetic interaction, and possible sequence-dependent effects of the irinotecan/cisplatin combination given every 3 weeks, and to assess the influence of additional granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) on the hematologic toxicity., Patients and Methods: Patients who had received no more than one prior combination chemotherapy regimen or two single-agent regimens were entered. Treatment consisted of a 90-minute irinotecan infusion followed by a 3-hour cisplatin infusion on day 1, with cycles repeated once every 3 weeks. After the maximum-tolerated dose was determined, the sequence of administration was reversed. In a separate cohort of six patients, we assessed the effect of G-CSF on the experienced hematologic toxicity and dose-intensity. Irinotecan doses ranged from 175 to 300 mg/m(2) and cisplatin doses ranged from 60 to 80 mg/m(2)., Results: Fifty-two patients entered the study; one was not eligible, and two were not assessable for response. Twenty-five patients were pretreated, and 26 were not. Fifty-one patients received a total of 223 courses. The dose-limiting toxicity was a combination of neutropenic fever, diarrhea, and fatigue at a dose level combining irinotecan 300 mg/m(2) with cisplatin 80 mg/m(2). Neutropenia was common (grades 3 to 4, 68%). Irinotecan pharmacokinetics were linear over the dose range studied. No sequence-dependent side effects were observed. Tumor responses included three complete responses and eight partial responses., Conclusion: For phase II studies, we recommend irinotecan 260 mg/m(2) combined with cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) once every 3 weeks for chemotherapy-naive patients in good physical condition, and irinotecan 200 mg/m(2) combined with cisplatin 80 mg/m(2) for other patients.

A phase I study was conducted to characterize the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), and pharmacokinetics of a single dose followed by three times weekly s.c. injections of recombinant human interleukin 12 (rHuIL-12). The study encompassed 28 patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. rHuIL-12 was administered on day 1, followed by an observation period of 7 days. Starting on day 8, repeated s.c. injections were administered 3 times a week for 2 weeks. The MTD of the initial injection was evaluated at dose levels of 0.1, 0.5, and 1.0 microg/kg. DLT was observed at 1.0 microg/kg and consisted of fever, perivasculitis of the skin, and leukopenia. The MTD of the subsequent repeated injections after 1 week of rest was studied at dose levels 0.5, 1.0, and 1.25 microg/kg. DLT at 1.25 microg/kg comprised deterioration of performance status, fever, vomiting, mental depression, and leukopenia. Other notable toxicities were oral mucositis and elevation of hepatic enzymes. Fever, leukopenia, and elevation of hepatic enzymes were more severe after the initial injection than after repeated injections at the same dose level. At dose level 0.5 microg/kg, the mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve decreased from 7.4 ng/h/ml after the first injection to 3.3 ng x h/ml (P = 0.034) after repeated administrations, and at dose level 1.0 microg/kg, it ranged from 31.8 ng/h/ml to 6.0 ng x h/ml (P = 0.041). One patient had a partial response and seven had stable disease. The MTD of a single s.c. injection of rHuIL-12 was 0.5 microg/kg, and the MTD of three subsequent administrations per week was 1.0 microg/kg. In comparison with a single administration, the three times weekly administrations at the same dose level was accompanied with a milder pattern of side effects and a reduction of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve.

BMS-181174, a new mitomycin C (MMC) analog, showed more activity than the parent compound in tumor xenografts. In a phase I study with a 5-30 min slow bolus administration, hematologic and vascular toxicity were observed as major side effects. A prolonged infusion was suggested to circumvent the vascular toxicity. In this phase I study BMS-181174 was administered as a 6 h infusion every 4 weeks; the doses studied were 3.2, 6.4, 11.5, 19.0, 32.0, 50.0, 75.0 and 100 mg/m2. Twenty-eight patients were enrolled in the study, the majority with colorectal cancer. Hematologic side effects consisted of thrombocytopenia, and mild leuko- and granulocytopenia. The most distressing non-hematologic side effect was vascular toxicity consisting of phlebosclerosis and phlebitis, becoming dose limiting at 100 mg/m2. One patient developed a hemolytic uremic syndrome at a cumulative dose of 350 mg/m2. Pharmacokinetic data are available for 24 patients. The AUC ranged from 3.35 to 41.49 (microg x h/ml) and was highly correlated with the dose administered (r = 0.83). The kinetics appeared to be linear. One patient with metastatic colon cancer had a partial response of liver metastases. BMS-181174 is a MMC analog with a toxicity profile comparable to that of the parent compound. As doses above 50 mg/m2 are complicated by vascular toxicity precluding multiple administrations, further exploration of BMS-181174 will not be performed.

In this study, 11 patients with solid tumors were randomized to receive irinotecan (CPT-11; 200 mg/m2) as a 90-min i.v. infusion, immediately followed by cisplatin (CDDP; 80 mg/m2) as a 3-h i.v. infusion in the first course and the reversed sequence in the second course or vice versa. No significant differences in any toxicity were observed between the treatment schedules (decrease in absolute neutrophil count, 74.7 +/- 18.3 versus 80.3 +/- 18.0%; P = 0.41). CPT-11 lactone clearance was similar to single agent data and not significantly different between study courses (60.4 +/- 17.1 versus 65.5 +/- 16.3 liter/h/m2; P = 0.66). The kinetic profiles of the major CPT-11 metabolites SN-38, SN-38 glucuronide, 7-ethyl-10-[4-N-(5-aminopentanoic acid)-1-piperidinolcarbonyloxycamptothecine (APC), and 7-ethyl-10-[4-N-(1-piperidino)-1-amino]carbonyloxycamptothecine (NPC) were also sequence independent (P > or = 0.20). In addition, CPT-11 had no influence on the clearance of nonprotein-bound CDDP (40.8 +/- 16.7 versus 50.3 +/- 18.6 liter/h/m2; P = 0.08) and the platinum DNA-adduct formation in peripheral leukocytes in either sequence (1.94 +/- 2.20 versus 2.42 +/- 1.62 pg Pt/microg DNA; P = 0.41). These data indicate that the toxicity of the combination CPT-11 and CDDP is schedule independent and that there is no mutual pharmacokinetic interaction.

This phase I study was performed to assess the feasibility of combining cisplatin/etoposide (VP-16) with the arotinoid Ro 40-8757 and to determine the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of Ro 40-8757 in this combination. Patients with non-small cell lung cancer were eligible. Treatment consisted of Ro 40-8757 p.o. day 1-21, cisplatin 100 mg/m2 i.v. on day 2 and VP-16 100 mg/m2 i.v. on day 2-4, repeated every 3 weeks. Eighteen patients were evaluable for toxicity and response. The doses of Ro 40-8757 ranged from 84 mg/m2 once daily to 42 mg/m2 thrice daily (tid). DLT consisting of delayed nausea/vomiting was reached at 42 mg/m2 tid. Consequently, the maximum tolerated dose was set at one dose level below the DLT, i.e. 28 mg/m2 tid. Skin toxicity occurred but was well manageable. Pharmacological analyses showed a small increase in the volume of distribution of cisplatin and VP-16 between the first and third course. However, no relationship with side effects was found. A response was achieved in 50% of patients. The combination of cisplatin/VP-16 with Ro 40-8757 appears to be feasible at a dose schedule of 28 mg/m2 tid. The response rate was at the upper rate of what can be expected with cisplatin and VP-16.

As a dose-response relationship has been suggested for cisplatin, it appeared attractive to explore high-dose-intensity regimens in non-small-cell lung cancer. In a phase I study of weekly administration of cisplatin combined with oral etoposide we achieved a cisplatin dose intensity of 52.5-60 mg/m2 per week in most patients. We subsequently explored this regimen in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer. Patients were treated with cisplatin infused at 70 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, 15 and 29, 36, 43 in combination with oral etoposide given at 50 mg on days 1-15 and 29-43. Patients showing stable disease or a better response were continued on treatment with oral etoposide given at 50 mg/m2 per day on days 1-21 every 28 days for a maximum of four cycles. In all, 22 patients with stage III disease and 31 patients with stage IV disease entered the study. The median number of cisplatin administration was 6 per patient; 17 patients reached the planned cisplatin dose intensity of 60 mg/m2 per week, 11 patients achieved 52.5 mg/m2 per week, and 7 patients reached 47 mg/m2 per week. Overall, 11 of 21 stage III patients had a partial response [response rate 51%, 95% confidence interval (CI) 36-81%], as did 9 of 28 patients with stage IV disease (32%; 95% CI 15-49%). Toxicity was mainly hematologic, with leukocytopenia being the most frequent cause of treatment delay. Nephrotoxicity of grade 1 was observed in seven patients. Two patients developed clinical hearing loss. With this schedule a high median cisplatin dose intensity of 52.5-60 mg/m2 per week was reached. The 51% response rate achieved in stage III disease makes this schedule attractive for further exploration; however, it is not recommended for routine use in stage IV disease.

The purpose of this study was to determine the mechanism of the pharmacodynamic interaction between docetaxel/paclitaxel and cisplatin. Cisplatin-induced DNA-adducts and cisplatin accumulation were quantitated in peripheral blood leukocytes (WBC). The WBC were obtained from patients treated with docetaxel or paclitaxel in phase I/II studies and were incubated in vitro with cisplatin. In addition, blank whole-blood samples were obtained from patients and healthy subjects and incubated in intro with cisplatin or docetaxel/paclitaxel and cisplatin. The cisplatin-induced DNA-adduct levels measured in WBC after treatment with docetaxel or paclitaxel were significantly lower than those determined in non-pretreated WBC. Docetaxel and paclitaxel reduced the intracellular accumulation of cisplatin in WBC by 46-47%. If the pharmacodynamic interaction between docetaxel/paclitaxel and cisplatin also occurs in other normal tissues such as bone marrow, it may well contribute to the sequence dependent toxicity that has been observed in clinical studies.

Topotecan is a novel semisynthetic derivative of the anticancer agent camptothecin and inhibits the intranuclear enzyme topoisomerase I. The lactone structure of topotecan, which is in equilibrium with the inactive ring-opened hydroxy acid, is essential for this activity. We performed a pharmacokinetics study as part of phase II clinical trials in patients with various types of solid tumors, giving topotecan at 1.5 mg/m2 per day by 30-min infusion for 5 consecutive days, with courses being repeated every 3 weeks. Previously validated limited-sampling models, using concentration measurements in samples obtained 2 h after infusion, were used to calculate the area under the plasma concentration-time curves (AUCs) for both chemical forms. Samples were obtained from a total of 36 patients over 136 treatment days. The mean AUC of the closed-ring form (AUC(closed)) was 8.74 (range 2.3-16.3 microM min per day, and the mean AUC of the ring-opened form (AUC(open)) was 11.5 (range 3.2-46.0) microM min per day (interpatient variability 34-61%). In each patient the AUC values achieved on the 1st day of administration were similar to and, thus, predictive for those achieved during the following days, with a day-to-day variation of 7.39% being recorded for the AUC(closed) and that of 12.6% for the AUC(open). There was no drug accumulation during the 5 consecutive treatment days of each cycle. However, despite the large interpatient pharmacokinetic variability, the importance of regular drug monitoring on this schedule can be questioned, as the pharmacodynamic variability was relatively small.

Background: A novel bioreductive alkylating indoloquinone compound, E09 [3-hydroxy-5-aziridinyl-1-methyl-2-(1H-indole-4,7-indione)- prop-F128b-en-alpha-ol], has been shown to have distinct antitumor activity against solid tumors, excellent activity under hypoxic conditions, but no notable bone marrow toxicity in preclinical models., Purpose: A phase I study was carried out to determine the toxicity, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacology, and antitumor response of E09., Methods: E09 was administered as a 5-minute intravenous infusion once every 3 weeks to 32 patients with solid tumors. The starting dose of 2.7 mg/m2 was one tenth of the mouse equivalent of lethal dose to 10% of animals (MELD10). Dose was escalated by 100% until the area under the curve (AUC) at the MELD10 was reached, following a Fibonacci-like schedule. The pharmacokinetics of E09 and its metabolite E05A with an open aziridine ring was determined using a new high-pressure liquid chromatographic method and noncompartmental calculation of kinetic parameters. The sigmoid Emax model was used to fit pharmacokinetic parameters to toxicity. The renal function and proteinuria were quantitated and were further evaluated by determining renal clearance ratios of immunoglobulin G (IgG) to albumin and pancreatic amylase to salivary amylase., Results: The 32 patients were treated with a total of 85 assessable courses of E09. The dose-limiting toxicity was proteinuria, which was accompanied by sodium and water retention. All symptoms were reversible on day 15 except in two patients, who developed acute renal failure. The ratios of IgG to albumin and pancreatic amylase to salivary amylase suggested a loss of glomerular negative charge consistent with a minimal change glomerulopathy. The pharmacokinetics of E09 showed its rapid elimination from the central compartment but with wide interpatient variation in the overall disposition of the drug. Total plasma clearance of E09 ranged from 3.2 to 24 L/min. The AUC of E09 was linearly related to the administered dose. The relationship between the AUC and proteinuria was best fitted by the sigmoid Emax model (r = .98). In two patients with adenocarcinoma of unknown primary site and in a third patient with bile duct cancer, a partial response was observed., Conclusions: The MTD of E09 was determined to be 27 mg/m2. The standard approach of drug administration is considered unsuitable because of potential renal toxicity and wide variability in the pharmacokinetics of E09. Individual dose adjustments based on plasma concentration measurements are recommended to combine maximally achievable exposure with tolerable toxicity.