Search

BackgroundCurrent melphalan-based intravitreal regimens for retinoblastoma (RB) vitreous seeds cause retinal toxicity. We assessed the efficacy and toxicity of topotecan monotherapy compared with melphalan in our rabbit model and patient cohort.MethodsRabbit experiments: empiric pharmacokinetics were determined following topotecan injection. For topotecan (15 μg or 30 µg), melphalan (12.5 µg) or saline, toxicity was evaluated by serial electroretinography (ERG) and histopathology, and efficacy against vitreous seed xenografts was measured by tumour cell reduction and apoptosis induction. Patients: retrospective cohort study of 235 patients receiving 990 intravitreal injections of topotecan or melphalan.ResultsIntravitreal topotecan 30 µg (equals 60 µg in humans) achieved the IC90 across the rabbit vitreous. Three weekly topotecan injections (either 15 µg or 30 µg) caused no retinal toxicity in rabbits, whereas melphalan 12.5 µg (equals 25 µg in humans) reduced ERG amplitudes 42%–79%. Intravitreal topotecan 15 µg was equally effective to melphalan to treat WERI-Rb1 cell xenografts in rabbits (96% reduction for topotecan vs saline (p=0.004), 88% reduction for melphalan vs saline (p=0.004), topotecan vs melphalan, p=0.15). In our clinical study, patients received 881 monotherapy injections (48 topotecan, 833 melphalan). Patients receiving 20 µg or 30 µg topotecan demonstrated no significant ERG reductions; melphalan caused ERG reductions of 7.6 μV for every injection of 25 µg (p=0.03) or 30 µg (pConclusionsTaken together, these experiments suggest that intravitreal topotecan monotherapy for the treatment of RB vitreous seeds is non-toxic and effective.

Purpose To systematically evaluate and compare the effects of using small-gauge needles and vitrectors on the ability to obtain adequate diagnostic and prognostic uveal melanoma biopsy specimens. Design Comparative evaluation of biopsy instruments. Methods Survival of uveal melanoma cells was evaluated in vitro following needle aspiration. Five therapeutically enucleated eyes were sampled in triplicate for ex vivo diagnostic biopsy experiments with 25 gauge (25 G) needle, 27 gauge (27 G) needle, and 27 G vitrector. During surgery in 8 patients, paired diagnostic transscleral fine needle aspiration biopsies were performed using both 25 G and 27 G needles. A review of cytologic specimens was performed by a panel of 3 expert cytopathologists. A retrospective chart review was performed to evaluate 100 consecutive tumors undergoing prognostic biopsy for gene expression profiling to assess the relationship between needle gauge and prognostic adequacy. Results No significant cell shearing of uveal melanoma cells occurred in vitro with 25 G, 27 G, or 30 G needles. For ex vivo biopsy samples, diagnostic yield was 100% using 25 G needle (5/5) or 27 G vitrector (5/5) but 60% using a 27 G needle (3/5). For in vivo samples, no difference in diagnostic yield was found between 25 G (75%, 6/8) or 27 G (75%, 6/8) needle sizes. Of 100 molecular prognostic biopsy samples evaluated, 65 were obtained using 27 G needles; for these biopsies, the prognostic yield was 65/65 (100%). Conclusions For diagnostic biopsy of uveal melanoma, a larger-gauge needle or a 27 G vitrector may have better overall cellularity and diagnostic yield when compared to a 27 G needle. However, for much more common molecular prognostic testing, a 27 G needle provided adequate sample in 100% (65/65) of cases, and a larger needle provided no additional benefit.

Purpose Current melphalan-based regimens for intravitreal chemotherapy for retinoblastoma vitreous seeds are effective but toxic to the retina. Thus, alternative agents are needed. Based on the known biology of histone deacetylases (HDACs) in the retinoblastoma pathway, we systematically studied whether the HDAC inhibitor belinostat is a viable, molecularly targeted alternative agent for intravitreal delivery that might provide comparable efficacy, without toxicity. Methods In vivo pharmacokinetic experiments in rabbits and in vitro cytotoxicity experiments were performed to determine the 90% inhibitory concentration (IC90). Functional toxicity by electroretinography and structural toxicity by optical coherence tomography (OCT), OCT angiography, and histopathology were evaluated in rabbits following three injections of belinostat 350 µg (2× IC90) or 700 µg (4× IC90), compared with melphalan 12.5 µg (rabbit equivalent of the human dose). The relative efficacy of intravitreal belinostat versus melphalan to treat WERI-Rb1 human cell xenografts in rabbit eyes was directly quantified. RNA sequencing was used to assess belinostat-induced changes in RB cell gene expression. Results The maximum nontoxic dose of belinostat was 350 µg, which caused no reductions in electroretinography parameters, retinal microvascular loss on OCT angiography, or retinal degeneration. Melphalan caused severe retinal structural and functional toxicity. Belinostat 350 µg (equivalent to 700 µg in the larger human eye) was equally effective at eradicating vitreous seeds in the rabbit xenograft model compared with melphalan (95.5% reduction for belinostat, P < 0.001; 89.4% reduction for melphalan, P < 0.001; belinostat vs. melphalan, P = 0.10). Even 700 µg belinostat (equivalent to 1400 µg in humans) caused only minimal toxicity. Widespread changes in gene expression resulted. Conclusions Molecularly targeted inhibition of HDACs with intravitreal belinostat was equally effective as standard-of-care melphalan but without retinal toxicity. Belinostat may therefore be an attractive agent to pursue clinically for intravitreal treatment of retinoblastoma.

Purpose Through controlled comparative rabbit experiments and parallel patient studies, our purpose was to understand mechanisms underlying differences in efficacy and toxicity between intra-arterial chemotherapy (IAC) and intravenous chemotherapy (IVC). Methods In rabbits, ocular tissue drug levels were measured following IAC and IVC. Retinal toxicity was assessed using electroretinography, fluorescein angiography, optical coherence tomography (OCT) and OCT angiography. Efficacy to eradicate retinoblastoma orthotopic xenografts was compared. In IAC and IVC patients, we measured blood carboplatin pharmacokinetics and compared efficacy and toxicity. Results In rabbits receiving IAC, maximum carboplatin levels were 134 times greater in retina (P = 0.01) and 411 times greater in vitreous (P < 0.001), and total carboplatin (area under the curve) was 123 times greater in retina (P = 0.005) and 131 times greater in vitreous (P = 0.02) compared with IVC. Melphalan levels were 12 times greater (P = 0.003) in retina and 26 times greater in vitreous (P < 0.001) for IAC. Blood levels were not different. IAC melphalan (but not IV melphalan or IV carboplatin, etoposide, and vincristine) caused widespread apoptosis in retinoblastoma xenografts but no functional retinal toxicity or cytopenias. In patients, blood levels following IVC were greater (P < 0.001) but, when adjusted for treatment dose, were not statistically different. Per treatment cycle in patients, IVC caused higher rates of anemia (0.32 ± 0.29 vs. 0.01 ± 0.04; P = 0.0086), thrombocytopenia (0.5 ± 0.42 vs. 0.0 ± 0.0; P = 0.0042), and neutropenia (0.58 ± 0.3 vs. 0.31 ± 0.25; P = 0.032) but lower treatment success rates (P = 0.0017). Conclusions The greater efficacy and lower systemic toxicity with IAC appear to be attributable to the greater ocular-to-systemic drug concentration ratio compared with IVC. Translational Relevance Provides an overarching hypothesis for a mechanism of efficacy/toxicity to guide future drug development.

The use of intravitreal chemotherapy has revolutionized the treatment of advanced intraocular retinoblastoma, as intravitreal melphalan has enabled difficult-to-treat vitreous tumor seeds to be controlled, leading to many more eyes being saved. However, melphalan hydrochloride (MH) degrades rapidly in solution, increasing logistical complexity with respect to time between medication preparation and administration for intravitreal administration under anesthesia for retinoblastoma. A new propylene glycol-free melphalan (PGFM) formulation has greater stability and could therefore improve access and adoption of intravitreal chemotherapy, allowing more children to retain their eye(s). We compared the efficacy and toxicity of both formulations, using our rabbit xenograft model and clinical patient experience. Three weekly 12.5μg intravitreal injections of MH or PGFM (right eye), and saline (left eye), were administered to immunosuppressed rabbits harboring human WERI-Rb1 vitreous seed xenografts. Residual live cells were quantified directly, and viability determined by TUNEL staining. Vitreous seeds were reduced 91% by PGFM (p=0.009), and 88% by MH (p=0.004; PGFM vs. MH: p=0.68). All residual cells were TUNEL-positive (non-viable). In separate experiments to assess toxicity, three weekly 12.5μg injections of MH, PGFM, or saline were administered to non-tumor-bearing rabbits. Serial electroretinography, optical coherence tomography (OCT) and OCT-angiography were performed. PGFM and MH both caused equivalent reductions in electroretinography amplitudes, and loss of retinal microvasculature on OCT-angiography. The pattern of retinal degeneration observed on histopathology suggested that segmental retinal toxicity associated with all melphalan formulations was due to a vitreous concentration gradient-effect. Efficacy and toxicity were assessed for PGFM given immediately (within 1 hour of reconstitution) vs. four hours after reconstitution. Immediate- and delayed-administration of PGFM showed equivalent efficacy and toxicity. In addition, we evaluated efficacy and toxicity in patients (205 eyes) with retinoblastoma vitreous seeds, which were treated with a total of 833 intravitreal injections of either MH or PGFM as standard of care. Of these, we analyzed 118 MH and 131 PGFM monotherapy injections in whom serial ERG measurements were available to model retinal toxicity. Both MH and PGFM caused reductions in electroretinography amplitudes, but with no statistical difference between formulations. Comparing those patient eyes treated exclusively with PGFM versus those treated exclusively with MH, efficacy for tumor control and globe salvage was equivalent (PGFM vs. MH: 96.2% vs. 93.8%, p=0.56), but PGFM-treated eyes received fewer injections than MH-treated eyes (average 3.2±1.9 vs. 6.4±2.1 injections, p