Predictive factors for the development of irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome using ordered logistic regression analysis

Green tea extract prevents CPT-11-induced diarrhea by regulating the gut microbiota

Irinotecan (CPT-11) is an anticancer drug with indications for use in treating various cancers, but severe diarrhea develops as a side effect. We investigated the effects of green tea extract (GTE) on CPT-11-induced diarrhea, focusing on β-glucuronidase and intestinal UGT1A1. When CPT-11 was administered to rats alone, the fecal water content was approximately 3.5-fold higher in this group than in the control group, and diarrhea developed. The fecal water content in the GTE-treated group was significantly higher than that in the control group, but the difference was smaller than that between the group treated with CPT-11 alone and the control group, and diarrhea improved. When CPT-11 was administered alone, the abundances of Bacteroides fragilis and Escherichia coli, which are β-glucuronidase-producing bacteria, increased and interleukin-6 and interleukin-1β mRNA levels in the colon increased, but GTE suppressed these increases. CPT-11 decreased colon UGT1A1 and short-chain fatty acid levels; however, this decrease was suppressed in the GTE-treated group. The findings that GTE decreases the abundance of β-glucuronidase-producing bacteria and increases colon UGT1A1 levels, thereby decreasing the production of the active metabolite SN-38 in the intestinal tract, indicate that GTE ameliorates CPT-11-induced diarrhea.

Alleviation of Abdominal Pain due to Irinotecan-Induced Cholinergic Syndrome Using Loperamide: A Case Report

Irinotecan hydrochloride (irinotecan) is a chemotherapeutic agent used in the treatment of solid tumors. In addition to severe neutropenia and delayed diarrhea, irinotecan causes cholinergic syndrome, characterized by abdominal pain and acute diarrhea. The latter symptoms are frequently observed during and after irinotecan treatment. Here, we have discussed the case of a patient who completely recovered from abdominal pain following the administration of loperamide hydrochloride (loperamide) at a dose of 2 mg, before infusing irinotecan. In contrast, anticholinergic drugs were not as effective in alleviating symptoms. A 28-year-old man with stage IV rectal cancer with peritoneal metastasis was prescribed with fluorouracil, irinotecan, and levofolinate calcium (FOLFIRI), in addition to cetuximab. Anticholinergic drugs, such as scopolamine butylbromide (scopolamine) or atropine sulfate (atropine), were administered to treat abdominal pain that was considered as irinotecan-induced cholinergic syndrome, but monotherapy was not effective. Thereafter, oral loperamide (2 mg) with atropine (0.25 mg) was prescribed before irinotecan infusion. Consequently, the patient did not experience any abdominal pain during and after irinotecan treatment. Loperamide is an opioid receptor agonist and decreases the activity of the myenteric plexus of the intestinal wall. It also inhibits the release of both acetylcholine and prostaglandins, resulting in decreased inhibition of peristaltic movement. We assumed that its mechanism solely or in combination contributed to symptom relief. We hypothesized that the synergistic anticholinergic interaction between loperamide and atropine resulted in marked suppression of irinotecan-induced cholinergic syndrome compared to loperamide alone. Thus, loperamide may improve abdominal pain attributed to irinotecan-induced cholinergic syndrome.

Phase I study of liposomal irinotecan (LY01610) in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma

Purpose

This phase I trial was performed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), preliminary efficacy, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of LY01610, a novel liposome-encapsulated irinotecan, in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC).

Methods

This trial was conducted in two stages. In the dose-escalation stage, patients with advanced ESCC refractory or intolerant to previous chemotherapy received escalating doses of LY01610. A recommended dose based on patient tolerance was then expanded in the second stage. LY01610 was administered intravenously every 2 weeks, except that the first cycle in dose escalation was 3 weeks to allow observation of DLTs.

Results

Twenty-four patients were enrolled across 4 dose levels (30, 60, 90 and 120 mg/m²). The DLTs included vomiting and febrile neutropenia, and the MTD was 90 mg/m². The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were leukopenia in six patients (25.0%), anemia in six patients (25.0%) and neutropenia in five patients (20.8%). One patient achieved complete response, and four had partial response, including one patient receiving LY01610 at the starting dose of 30 mg/m². Compared with conventional irinotecan, the PK profile of LY01610 was characterized by increased and prolonged exposure of total irinotecan and the active metabolite SN-38 in plasma.

Conclusion

LY01610 demonstrated manageable toxicity and promising anti-tumor activity in patients with advanced ESCC. Future clinical development of LY01610 as single agent or in combination with other anti-cancer agents in treating ESCC patients is warranted.

Trial registration

NCT04088604 at ClinicalTrials.gov.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00280-021-04294-2.

Fluorouracil Supplemented With Oxaliplatin or Irinotecan for Solid Tumors: Indications From Clinical Characteristics and Health Outcomes of Patients

Fluorouracil combined with oxaliplatin (FOLFOX) and fluorouracil combined with irinotecan (FOLFIRI) are both first-line clinical chemotherapy regimens. However, clinicians' selection of FOLFIRI or FOLFOX medication regimens and their effects on patients' health outcomes are not clear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the impacts on patient characteristics of FOLFIRI or FOLFOX medication regimen selection and the effects of each regimen on patients' health outcomes in a real-world setting. Three thousand seven hundred and twenty-five patients were retrieved and 610 of them were eventually included in this study based on the inclusion and exclusion criteria. The percentages of the TNM stage, cetuximab, bevacizumab, and tumor metastases between the FOLFIRI and FOLFOX groups were different (P < 0.001). In the multivariate Cox proportional hazards model, a significantly higher non-convalescent incidence of the FOLFOX group was found as compared with the FOLFIRI group (HR = 2.211, 95% CI = 1.257–3.888, P = 0.006). In conclusion, the TNM stage, whether combined with cetuximab or bevacizumab, and whether there was tumor metastasis presented as the key factors affecting medication selection between the FOLFIRI and FOLFOX regimens. The FOLFIRI regimen exhibited better effects on patients' long-term health outcomes than did the FOLFOX regimen. This study was registered on the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ChiCTR2000029201).

Trial registration: ChiCTR2000029201.

High Doses of Δ9-Tetrahydrocannabinol Might Impair Irinotecan Chemotherapy: A Review of Potentially Harmful Interactions

This review proposes the hypothesis that the effectiveness of irinotecan chemotherapy might be impaired by high doses of concomitantly administered Δ⁹-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). The most important features shared by irinotecan and THC, which might represent sources of potentially harmful interactions are: first-pass hepatic metabolism mediated by cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzyme CYP3A4; glucuronidation mediated by uridine diphosphate glycosyltransferase (UGT) enzymes, isoforms 1A1 and 1A9; transport of parent compounds and their metabolites via canalicular ATP-binding cassette (ABC) transporters ABCB1 and ABCG2; enterohepatic recirculation of both parent compounds, which leads to an extended duration of their pharmacological effects; possible competition for binding to albumin; butyrylcholinesterase (BChE) inhibition by THC, which might impair the conversion of parent irinotecan into the SN-38 metabolite; mutual effects on mitochondrial dysfunction and induction of oxidative stress; potentiation of hepatotoxicity; potentiation of genotoxicity and cytogenetic effects leading to genome instability; possible neurotoxicity; and effects on bilirubin. The controversies associated with the use of highly concentrated THC preparations with irinotecan chemotherapy are also discussed. Despite all of the limitations, the body of evidence provided here could be considered relevant for human-risk assessments and calls for concern in cases when irinotecan chemotherapy is accompanied by preparations rich in THC.

Irinotecan-Associated Dysarthria in Patients with Pancreatic Cancer: A Single Site Experience

BACKGROUND Irinotecan, a topoisomerase I inhibitor, is a cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agent used to treat multiple malignancies, including those of colorectal, pancreatic, cervical, esophageal, gastric, and lung origin. Dysarthria, a state of difficult or unclear articulation of speech, has been reported as a rare side effect of irinotecan through multiple case reports and case series, but with limited published data aimed at understanding the underlying mechanism and effective management strategies. CASE REPORT We describe herein 3 cases of patients with pancreatic malignancy who experienced dysarthria while being treated with a chemotherapy regimen containing irinotecan at an ambulatory outpatient satellite chemotherapy site. All patients described received first-line FOLFIRINOX for pancreatic cancer and experienced dysarthria during their first infusion of irinotecan. In all cases, dysarthria was observed as a transient adverse drug reaction within the first 10 to 70 min of irinotecan infusion, which resolved rapidly upon pausing infusion without any long-term sequalae. All patients remained conscious and alert; physical and neurological examinations at dysarthria onset revealed no abnormalities. Some patients experienced distal extremity paresthesia, a known manifestation of oxaliplatin-induced acute neurotoxicity, and diaphoresis and nausea. Increased infusion time effectively prevented dysarthria during subsequent infusions. CONCLUSIONS Oncologists, pharmacists, nurses, and other care team members should be aware that irinotecan-associated dysarthria is a rare, mild, and self-limiting phenomenon to avoid inadvertently altering or withholding therapy. We suggest extending irinotecan infusion time, as opposed to dose reduction or treatment discontinuation, as a practical clinical management strategy for patients who develop recurrent dysarthria secondary to irinotecan infusion.

Irinotecan: 25 years of cancer treatment

Twenty-five years ago, the cytotoxic drug irinotecan (IRT) was first approved in Japan for the treatment of cancer. For more than two decades, the IRT prodrug has largely contributed to the treatment of solid tumors worldwide. Nowadays, this camptothecin derivative targeting topoisomerase 1 remains largely used in combination regimen, like FOLFIRI and FOLFIRINOX, to treat metastatic or advanced solid tumors, such as colon, gastric and pancreatic cancers and others. This review highlights recent discoveries in the field of IRT and its derivatives, including analogues of the active metabolite SN38 (such as FL118), the recently approved liposomal form Nal-IRI and SN38-based immuno-conjugates currently in development (such as sacituzumab govitecan). New information about the IRT mechanism of action are presented, including the discovery of a new protein target, the single-stranded DNA-binding protein FUBP1. Significant progress has been made also to better understand and manage the main limiting toxicities of IRT, chiefly neutropenia and diarrhea. The role of drug-induced inflammation and dysbiosis is underlined and strategies to limit the intestinal toxicity of IRT are discussed (use of β-glucuronidase inhibitors, plant extracts, probiotics). The detailed knowledge of the metabolism of IRT has enabled the identification of potential biomarkers to guide patient selection and to limit drug-induced toxicities, but no robust IRT-specific therapeutic biomarker has been approved yet. IRT is a versatile chemotherapeutic agent which combines well with a variety of anticancer drugs. It offers a large range of drug combinations with cytotoxic agents, targeted products and immuno-active biotherapeutics, to treat a variety of advanced solid carcinoma, sarcoma and cancers with progressive central nervous system diseases. A quarter of century after its first launch, IRT remains an essential anticancer drug, largely prescribed, useful to many patients and scientifically inspiring.

Prophylactic effect of scopolamine butylbromide, a competitive antagonist of muscarinic acetylcholine receptor, on irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome

Background/aim

Cholinergic syndrome frequently occurs within the first 24 h after irinotecan injection. We evaluated the prophylactic effect of scopolamine butylbromide on irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome.

Patients and methods

Fifty-nine patients who received irinotecan-based regimens at our outpatient chemotherapy clinic between April 2013 and May 2014 were enrolled. Patients who developed irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome were prophylactically administered scopolamine butylbromide at the next scheduled treatment. Risk factors for irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome were determined using logistic regression analysis.

Results

Irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome occurred in 50.8% of patients. Scopolamine butylbromide administration significantly reduced the incidence to 3.4% (P < 0.01). The irinotecan dose (≥ 150 mg/m²) was the only risk factor associated with irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome. The incidence of cholinergic syndrome in patients with this risk factor was 75%.

Conclusion

Scopolamine butylbromide was effective in preventing irinotecan-related cholinergic syndrome. It is recommended for patients receiving ≥ 150 mg/m² irinotecan who may develop cholinergic syndrome at high frequency.