Search

Purpose To evaluate the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetics of patupilone administered once every 3 weeks with proactive standardized diarrhea management in patients with resistant or refractory ovarian, fallopian, or peritoneal cancer. Patients and Methods Patients received patupilone (6.5 to 11.0 mg/m2) every 3 weeks via 20-minute infusion. Adverse events, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), MTD, and tumor response were determined. The tumor response was measured by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) and cancer antigen 125 levels. Results Forty-five patients were enrolled. Adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity, and grade 3 diarrhea (13%) was the most commonly reported serious adverse event. Grade 3 peripheral neuropathy was noted in two patients (4%). Diarrhea, peripheral neuropathy, and fatigue were the most common DLTs; however, these were uncommon in the first cycle and the MTD was therefore not reached in this study. Overall response (OR; complete and partial responses; median cycles, 8) per RECIST in patients with measurable disease (n = 36) was 19.5%. Median duration of disease stabilization (complete and partial responses and stable disease) was 15.8 months. These results appear improved from a previous study in a similar patient population using a weekly schedule (2.5 mg/m2/week; N = 53; OR, 5.7%). Conclusion Patupilone once every 3 weeks was well-tolerated at doses up to 11.0 mg/m2. Patupilone demonstrated promising antitumor activity in patients with drug-resistant/refractory disease. An ongoing phase III study in this patient population is testing the 10.0 mg/m2 dose.

There is growing concern that some cytotoxic regimens for cancer affect cognitive functioning. This study examined the prevalence of cognitive complaints and deficits in testicular cancer (TC) patients treated with the worldwide standard BEP (bleomycin, etoposide and cisplatin) chemotherapy.Seventy TC patients treated with BEP chemotherapy after surgery (S + CT) were examined with interviews and neuropsychological tests. These patients were compared with 57 TC patients treated with radiotherapy after surgery (S + RT) and with 55 TC patients that received surgery only (S). Patients were examined a median of 3 years after completion of treatment.Thirty two percent of the S + CT patients reported cognitive complaints compared with 32% of the S + RT patients and 27% of the S patients (p = 0.85). No differences in mean cognitive test performance were observed between the groups. On individual impairment scores, more S + CT patients showed cognitive dysfunction compared with S patients, but not compared with S + RT patients (S + CT versus S [p = 0.038, OR = 4.6, CI = 1.1-19.7], S + CT versus S + RT [p = 0.70, OR = 0.8, CI = 0.3-2.4] and S + RT versus S [p = 0.070, OR = 3.7, CI = 0.8-15.7). Cognitive complaints were not related to cognitive test performance, but to emotional distress and fatigue.Cognitive complaints are common among TC patients, independent of treatment modality. These complaints are related to emotional distress and fatigue and not to formal cognitive deficits. The finding of a small group of TC patients treated with chemotherapy exhibiting cognitive deficits should be confirmed in a prospective study before we can decide on its cause and relevance.

Purpose To evaluate the long-term risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) in survivors of testicular cancer (TC). Patients and Methods We compared CVD incidence in 2,512 5-year survivors of TC, who were treated between 1965 and 1995, with general population rates. Treatment effects on CVD risk were quantified in multivariate Cox regression analysis. Results After a median follow-up of 18.4 years, 694 cardiovascular events occurred, including 141 acute myocardial infarctions (MIs). The standardized incidence ratio (SIR) for coronary heart disease was 1.17 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.31), with 14 excess cases per 10,000 person-years. The SIR for MI was significantly increased in nonseminoma survivors with attained ages of less than 45 (SIR = 2.06) and 45 to 54 years (SIR = 1.86) but significantly decreased for survivors with attained ages of 55 years or older (SIR = 0.53). In Cox analysis, mediastinal irradiation was associated with a 3.7-fold (95% CI, 2.2- to 6.2-fold) increased MI risk compared with surgery alone, whereas infradiaphragmatic irradiation was not associated with an increased MI risk. Cisplatin, vinblastine, and bleomycin (PVB) chemotherapy (CT) was associated with a 1.9-fold (95% CI, 1.7- to 2.0-fold) increased MI risk, and bleomycin, etoposide, and cisplatin (BEP) CT was associated with a 1.5-fold (95% CI, 1.0- to 2.2-fold) increased CVD risk and was not associated with increased MI risk (hazard ratio = 1.2; 95% CI, 0.7 to 2.1). Recent smoking was associated with a 2.6-fold (95% CI, 1.8- to 3.9-fold) increased MI risk. Conclusion Nonseminomatous TC survivors experience a moderately increased MI risk at young ages. Physicians should be aware of excess CVD risk associated with mediastinal radiotherapy, PVB CT, and recent smoking. Intervention in modifiable cardiovascular risk factors is especially important in TC survivors. Whether BEP treatment increases CVD risk should be evaluated after more prolonged follow-up.

Purpose: To investigate dose escalation of bi-daily (b.i.d.) oral paclitaxel in combination with cyclosporin A in order to improve and prolong the systemic exposure to paclitaxel and to explore the maximum tolerated dose and dose limiting toxicity (DLT) of this combination. Patients and methods: A total of 15 patients received during course 1 two doses of oral paclitaxel (2×60, 2×90, 2×120, or 2×160 mg/m2) 7 h apart in combination with 15 mg/kg of cyclosporin A, co-administered to enhance the absorption of paclitaxel. During subsequent courses, patients received 3-weekly intravenous paclitaxel at a dose of 175 mg/m2 as a 3-h infusion. Results: Toxicities observed following b.i.d. dosing of oral paclitaxel were generally mild and included toxicities common to paclitaxel administration and mild gastrointestinal toxicities such as nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea, which occurred more often at the higher dose levels. Dose escalation of b.i.d. oral paclitaxel from 2×60 to 2×160 mg/m2 did not result in a significant increase in the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) of paclitaxel. The AUC after doses of 2×60, 90, 120, and 160 mg/m2 were 3.77±2.70, 4.57±2.43, 3.62±1.58, and 8.58±7.87 µM.h, respectively. The AUC achieved after intravenous administration of paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 was 17.95±3.94 µM.h. Conclusion: Dose increment of paclitaxel did not result in a significant additional increase in the AUC values of the drug. Dose escalation of the b.i.d. dosing regimen was therefore not continued up to DLT. As b.i.d. dosing appeared to result in higher AUC values compared with single-dose administration (data which we have published previously), we recommend b.i.d. dosing of oral paclitaxel for future studies. Although pharmacokinetic data are difficult to interpret, due to the limited number of patients at each dose level and the large interpatient variability, we recommend the dose level of 2×90 mg/m2 for further investigation, as this dose level showed the highest systemic exposure to paclitaxel combined with good safety.

Purpose: Carboplatin doses are often determined by using modified Calvert formulas. It has been observed that the area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC) for free carboplatin is lower than expected when modified formulas are used for carboplatin/paclitaxel chemotherapy combination regimens. By using limited-sampling models, the carboplatin AUC actually reached can easily be verified, and the dose adjusted accordingly. Methods: In this report, we describe the development and validation of a limited-sampling model for carboplatin from 77 pharmacokinetic curves, when carboplatin is used in combination with paclitaxel. Results: The following single-point model was selected as optimal: AUC carboplatin (min mg−1 ml−1) = 418 · c2.5 h(mg/ml) + 0.43 (min mg−1 ml−1), where c2.5 h is the concentration (mg/ml) of carboplatin 2.5 h after the start of a 30-min infusion. This model proved to be unbiased (mean prediction error = 3.4 ± 1.6%) and precise (root mean square error = 10.1 ± 1.5%). Conclusions: The proposed model can be very useful for ongoing and future carboplatin/paclitaxel studies aimed to optimise and individualise treatment.

To evaluate the pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel and cisplatin administered in combination with bleomycin and etoposide and Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor (G-CSF) in patients with advanced solid tumours.Patients were recruited to a phase I trial where escalating doses of paclitaxel (125 to 200 mg/m(2)) were administered in combination with etoposide 100 or 120 mg/m(2), and fixed dose of cisplatin 20 mg/m(2) and bleomycin 30 mg, with the concomitant use of G-CSF. Paclitaxel (3-h infusion) was followed by 1-h etoposide, 4-h cisplatin and 30-min bleomycin infusions, respectively. Pharmacokinetics sampling for paclitaxel analysis was performed in ten patients from dose levels II-V.The mean paclitaxel area under the plasma concentration-versus-time curves (AUC) for the 125-mg/m(2) dose level (II) was 7.0 +/- 3.6 h micromol(-1) l(-1), for the 175-mg/m(2) dose level (III) 10.6 +/- 2. 8 h micromol(-1) l(-1), for the 200-mg/m(2) dose level (IV) it was 16.0 +/- 5.0 h micromol(-1) l(-1), and for the 175-mg/m(2) dose level (V) it was 12.5 +/- 6.1 h micromol(-1) l(-1). The mean peak plasma concentration (C(max)) values for dose levels II-V were 1.9 +/- 1.1 micromol/l, 3.4 +/- 1.2 micromol/l, 4.3 +/- 1.0 micromol/l and 3.8 +/- 1.2 h micromol/l, respectively.In this study, relevant pharmacokinetic parameters of paclitaxel like AUC, C(max) and the paclitaxel plasma concentration above the pharmacologically relevant 0.1-micromol/l threshold concentration (t0.1 microM) when administered in combination with cisplatin, etoposide and bleomycin (PEB) were not statistically different from paclitaxel data of historical controls. However, given the trial design, pharmacokinetic interactions between the agents cannot be excluded.

Objective. Paclitaxel is an antineoplastic agent with significant activity against several tumour types. The major portion of the drug disposition (80-90%) in volves metabolism and biliary excretion. The purpose of this study was to investigate the relationships between the mean urinary paclitaxel excretion frac tion and the administered dose, creatinine clearance, or the measured paclitaxel area under the plasma concentration versus time curve. Design. The design used was a retrospective convenience sample study. Setting. The setting for this study was a hospi talised care center. Patients. A total of 103 24-hour urine collections from 60 patients treated with paclitaxel were used to investigate these relationships. Results. In this large series study, the paclitaxel urinary fraction was 5 ± 3% (mean ± SD) as a fraction of the administered paclitaxel dose. No correlations were found between the paclitaxel urinary excretion fraction and the administered dose, creatinine clear ance, and plasma concentration-time curve. In addi tion, the paclitaxel metabolites 6α-hydroxypaclitaxel, 3'- p-hydroxypaclitaxel and some unidentified com pounds were detected in the 24-hour urine samples of two patients, of whom one had a mild impaired renal function. Conclusions. Considering the low urinary ex cretion of paclitaxel, it is anticipated that patients with renal dysfunction require no dose adjustments. Metabolites were found in the urine.

BACKGROUND Changes in serum CA 125 from baseline do not reflect response to paclitaxel in relapsed ovarian carcinoma patients. Our study aimed to determine whether CA 125 changes relate to tumor response and overall survival during paclitaxel salvage treatment. METHODS Response data and CA 125 values of 77 platinum pretreated ovarian carcinoma patients were included in the study. Patients received 496 courses of paclitaxel in total (median 6; range: 2–18 courses). RESULTS Response group numbers on the basis of World Health Organization (WHO) criteria were: 7 partial response, 22 stable disease, and 48 progressive disease. CA 125 values at the moment of clinical response allocation, the median survival duration, and the 3-year survival rate did not differ among WHO defined response groups. For both the stable disease group and the responders, the slopes of the exponential CA 125 regression curves during paclitaxel treatment were negative. Response groups, as defined by CA 125 changes, i.e., halving or doubling of baseline values, after 4 courses were concordant with WHO defined response groups in only 27%, but predicted survival far better. CONCLUSIONS This study confirms that CA 125 changes in patients receiving paclitaxel treatment do not correlate with response allocations according to WHO criteria. In particular, patients with clinically and radiologically defined progression will often not show an increase in CA 125 concentrations from baseline. Those patients who do show doubling of CA 125 values, however, have a very poor prognosis. The CA 125 ratio, as determined after 4 courses of paclitaxel treatment, may be a better indicator of response than WHO defined response status. Cancer 1996;78:118-27.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of administering irinotecan as a continuous intravenous infusion for 14 to 21 days. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid tumors refractory to standard therapy received continuous infusions of irinotecan by means of an ambulatory infusion pump. The starting dosage was 12.5 mg/m2/d for 14 days every 3 weeks. After identification of the maximum-tolerated dose for the 14-day infusion schedule, the protocol was amended to prolong the infusion duration to 17 and 21 days. Pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and SN-38 and its glucuronide were determined using high-performance liquid chromatography and noncompartmental modeling. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients received 85+ courses. At the first dose level (12.5 mg/m2/d), cumulative grade 3 or 4 diarrhea and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia occurred in three of five patients. At a dosage of 10 mg/m2/d, 14-day administration resulted in grade 4 diarrhea in two of six patients and one episode of grade 4 vomiting occurred, whereas with 17-day administration, one episode of grade 3 nausea and two episodes of grade 3 or 4 diarrhea were observed in six patients. Increasing the number of days of infusion to 21 days was not feasible because of cumulative diarrhea. Hematologic toxicity was rare. The mean metabolic SN-38 area under the curve/irinotecan area under the curve ratio was 16% ± 6% compared with 3% to 5% after short infusion schedules involving therapeutic dosages. Partial responses were observed in two patients with extraovarian and colorectal cancer. CONCLUSION: The recommended dosage is 10 mg/m2/d for 14 days, repeated every 3 weeks. Enhanced metabolism of irinotecan to SN-38 may explain in part the low recommended dose for this schedule.

Objective. Extravasations of anticancer agents may give serious complications and specific therapy might be needed. Topotecan is a new cytotoxic drug and is used in many clinical studies. In our clinic two extravasations of topotecan occurred, and the clinical consequences are discussed. Clinical Features. The extravasations oc curred in two patients who were receiving topo tecan intravenously because of ovarian carcinoma stage III. The patients experienced some discom fort caused by the expansion of soft tissue. How ever, no serious complications were observed. Case Progress and Outcome. Both patients received all further courses of topotecan without any negative effects. Conclusion. In conclusion, besides stopping the injection, trying to aspirate the fluid, keeping the arm high, and cooling the swelling, we advise no specific measures to be taken after extravasa tion of topotecan.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), and pharmacokinetics of 9-aminocamptothecin (9-AC) in a colloidal dispersion (CD) formulation administered as a 30-minute intravenous (IV) infusion over 5 consecutive days every 3 weeks. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid tumors refractory to standard therapy were entered onto the study. The starting dose was 0.4 mg/m2/d. The MTD was assessed on the first cycle and was defined as the dose at which ≥ two of three patients or ≥ two of six patients experience DLT. Pharmacokinetic measurements were performed on days 1 and 5 of the first cycle and on day 4 of subsequent cycles using high-performance liquid chromatography. RESULTS: Thirty-one patients received 104+ treatment courses at seven dose levels. The DLT was hematologic. At a dose of 1.3 mg/m2/d, three of six patients experienced grade 3 thrombocytopenia. Grade 4 neutropenia that lasted less than 7 days was observed in four patients. At a dose of 1.1 mg/m2/d, four of nine patients had grade 4 neutropenia of brief duration, which was not dose limiting. Nonhematologic toxicities were relatively mild and included nausea/vomiting, diarrhea, obstipation, mucositis, fatigue, and alopecia. Maximal plasma concentrations and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) increased linearly with dose, but interpatient variation was wide. Lactone concentrations exceeded 10 nmol/L, the threshold for activity in preclinical tumor models, at all dose levels. Sigmoidal Emax models could be fit to the relationship between AUC and the degree of hematologic toxicity. A partial response was observed in small-cell lung cancer. CONCLUSION: 9-AC CD administered as a 30-minute IV infusion daily times 5 every three weeks is safe and feasible. The recommended phase II dose is 1.1 mg/m2/d.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the feasibility of administering topotecan in combination with paclitaxel and cisplatin without and with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) support as first-line chemotherapy in women with incompletely resected stage III and stage IV ovarian carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Starting doses were paclitaxel 110 mg/m2 administered over 24 hours (day 1), followed by cisplatin 50 mg/m2 over 3 hours (day 2) and topotecan 0.3 mg/m2/d over 30 minutes for 5 consecutive days (days 2 to 6). Treatment was repeated every 3 weeks. After encountering dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) without G-CSF support, the maximum-tolerated dose was defined as 5 μg/kg of G-CSF subcutaneously starting on day 6. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients received a total of 116 courses at four different dose levels. The DLT was neutropenia. At the first dose level, all six patients experienced grade 4 myelosuppression. G-CSF support permitted further dose escalation of cisplatin and topotecan. Nonhematologic toxicities, primarily fatigue, nausea/vomiting, and neurosensory neuropathy, were observed but were generally mild. Of 15 patients assessable for response, nine had a complete response, four achieved a partial response, and two had stable disease. CONCLUSION: Neutropenia was the DLT of this combination of paclitaxel, cisplatin, and topotecan. The recommended phase II dose is paclitaxel 110 mg/m2 (day 1), followed by cisplatin 75 mg/m2 (day 2) and topotecan 0.3 mg/m2/d (days 2 to 6) with G-CSF support repeated every 3 weeks.