Search

Purpose. 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. Experimental design. 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. Results. 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 μg/ml. The pharmacokinetic studies suggest that CSA does not increase CBDCA AUC. Conclusions. Steady-state levels of >1 μg/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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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 microM, 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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]