Phase I/II trials of WR-2721 and cis-platinum

A pilot study of addition of amifostine to melphalan, carboplatin, etoposide, and cyclophosphamide with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in pediatric solid tumors-A pediatric blood and marrow transplant consortium study

Limited information is available regarding the use of amifostine in pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients. Melphalan, carboplatin, etoposide +/- cyclophosphamide is a commonly used preparatory regimen in pediatric solid tumor HSCT. Therefore, we decided to determine the feasibility of the addition of amifostine (750 mg/m b.i.d. x 4 d) to melphalan (200 mg/m), carboplatin (1200 mg/m), and etoposide (800 mg/m) (level 1) and escalating doses of cyclophosphamide (3000 mg/m and 3800 mg/m, levels 2 and 3, respectively) followed by autologous HSCT. Thirty-two patients with a variety of pediatric solid tumors were studied. Seventeen patients were accrued at level 1, 9 at level 2, and 6 at level 3. Major toxicities during the administration of the preparatory regimen were hypocalcemia, emesis, and hypotension. Hypocalcemia required aggressive calcium supplementation during the conditioning phase. No dose limiting toxicities were encountered at level 3. Amifostine at 750 mg/m b.i.d. for 4 days can be administered with a double alkylator regimen consisting of melphalan (200 mg/m), cyclophosphamide (up to 3800 mg/m), carboplatin (1200 mg/m), and etoposide (800 mg/m) with manageable toxicities.

Protecting against anthracycline-induced myocardial damage: a review of the most promising strategies

Over the last 40 years, great progress has been made in treating childhood and adult cancers. However, this progress has come at an unforeseen cost, in the form of emerging long-term effects of anthracycline treatment. A major complication of anthracycline therapy is its adverse cardiovascular effects. If these cardiac complications could be reduced or prevented, higher doses of anthracyclines could potentially be used, thereby further increasing cancer cure rates. Moreover, as the incidence of cardiac toxicity resulting in congestive heart failure or even heart transplantation dropped, the quality and extent of life for cancer survivors would improve. We review the proposed mechanisms of action of anthracyclines and the consequences associated with anthracycline treatment in children and adults. We summarise the most promising current strategies to limit or prevent anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity, as well as possible strategies to prevent existing cardiomyopathy from worsening.

Otoproteção da amifostina aos efeitos ototóxicos da cisplatina: estudo em cobaias albinas por emissões otoacústicas produtos de distorção e microscopia eletrônica de varredura

A Cisplatina é uma potente droga antineoplásica, largamente utilizada para o tratamento do câncer, tanto em adultos quanto em crianças. Dentre seus efeitos colaterais, a ototoxicidade se apresenta como um dos mais importantes e leva à perda auditiva irreversível, bilateral, para as altas freqüências (4KHz -8KHz). Estudos têm tentado identificar drogas que, associadas à cisplatina, possam atuar como otoprotetores. Sabe-se que o mecanismo da ototoxicidade pela cisplatina está relacionado a alterações nos mecanismos antioxidantes das células ciliadas, principalmente as células ciliadas externas da cóclea. A amifostina tem conhecida ação antioxidante, com conhecido efeito otoprotetor aos efeitos lesivos da radioterapia. OBJETIVO: Nossa proposta foi avaliar através de emissões otoacústicas, por produtos de distorção (EOAPD) e por microscopia eletrônica de varredura (MEV), a existência de possível efeito otoprotetor da amifostina no tratamento com cisplatina. FORMA DE ESTUDO: Experimental. MATERIAL E MÉTODO: O estudo foi realizado em cobaias albinas, que foram divididas em três grupos: Grupo 1: 6 animais -12 orelhas - cisplatina 8,0 mg/Kg/dia (via intraperitoneal) por três dias; Grupo 2: 6 animais - 12 orelhas - amifostina 100 mg/Kg/ dia (via intraperitoneal) e 90 minutos após, cisplatina 8,0 mg/Kg/dia (via intraperitoneal) por três dias; Grupo 3: 03 animais - 06 orelhas - amifostina 100 mg/Kg/dia (via intraperitoneal) por três dias. RESULTADO: Encontramos EOAPD presentes e células ciliadas externas presentes, sem lesão anatômica a MEV, nos grupos 2 e 3. Concluímos que a amifostina, por sua ação antioxidante, atua como otoprotetor a ototoxicidade pela cisplatina. No entanto, seu uso não é recomendável nos casos de tumores potencialmente curáveis, por não se saber exatamente a influência da cisplatina na eficácia da quimioterapia.

Amifostine otoprotection to cisplatin ototoxicity: a guinea pig study using otoacoustic emission distortion products (DPOEA) and scanning electron microscopy

Cisplatin is an antineoplastic drug for cancer treatment in children and adults. The side effects of cisplatin ototoxicity are significant: irreversible bilateral hearing damage to high frequencies (4 kHz - 8 kHz). Reports recognize some drugs that are associated with cisplatin to obtain an otoprotector effect. The ototoxicity mechanisms of cisplatin are related to injury of hair cell oxidation mechanism, especially of outer hair cells. Aim: Using otoacoustic emissions distortion products (DPOEA) and scanning electron microscopy we intended to verify the action of amifostine, a radioprotective drug that has well known antioxidant characteristics and otoprotector effects to cisplatin injury. Study design: Experimental. Material and Method: We used an experimental guinea pig model. The study was performed as follows: group 1: 6 animals, 12 ears, cisplatin 8.0 mg/Kg/day (IP), 3 days. Group 2: 6 animals, 12 ears, amifostine 100 mg/Kg/day (IP) and after 90 minutes, cisplatin 8.0 mg/Kg/day (IP), 3 days and group 3: 3 animals, 6 ears, amifostine 100 mg/Kg/day (IP), 3 days. Results: DPOEA were present before and after treatment in groups 2 and 3. The normal cilium architecture of outer hair cells was supported in all cochlear turns in groups 2 and 3. We concluded that amifostine has a potential otoprotector effect against cisplatin ototoxicity and could be used in clinical trials.

WR-2721 (Amifostine) ameliorates cisplatin-induced hearing loss but causes neurotoxicity in hamsters: dose-dependent effects

Chemoprotective agents reduce the toxic side effects of chemotherapy agents such as cisplatin. The conventional belief is that the chemoprotective agent WR-2721 (Amifostine), while protecting against most cisplatin-induced side effects, does not protect against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity (i.e., hearing loss). There is no knowledge, however, about the efficacy of high doses of WR-2721 (WR) in possibly protecting against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity. Thus, the dose-dependent effects of WR in possibly ameliorating cisplatin-induced ototoxicity were investigated. Hamsters were given a series of 5 cisplatin injections (3 mg/kg/injection once every other day, i.p.) either alone or in combination with 18, 40, 80, or 400 mg/kg/injection of the rescue agent WR ( n = 5 or 10/group). Other groups received either 80 mg/kg/injection WR alone ( n = 5) or were untreated ( n = 14). Ototoxicity was assessed by auditory brain stem responses (ABR). WR provided dose-dependent rescue from cisplatin's ototoxicity with no protection at the low dose of 18 mg/kg, moderate protection at 40 mg/kg, and nearly complete protection at 80 and 400 mg/kg. However, WR doses of 40 mg/kg or higher caused neurotoxicity as evidenced by prolongations in the ABR's interpeak latencies. Thus, high doses of WR provided the beneficial effect of protecting against cisplatin-induced ototoxicity, but had the harmful side effect of neurotoxicity. Previous failures to find chemoprotection from cisplatin-induced ototoxicity were likely due to the use of WR doses that were too small. The clinical implications of the beneficial and harmful effects of high doses of WR are discussed.

Comparative study between the interaction of dephosphorylated amifostine (WR-1065) and amoxicilline with pBR322 in absence and presence of cisplatin by AFM

The effect of the amoxicilline as a possible cisplatin-action protector on pBR322 DNA has been visually studied by atomic force microscopy in comparison with the modifications caused by the controversed cisplatin protector amifostine. Incubation of amoxicilline with the plasmid DNA showed aggregation and compaction of DNA. Cisplatin incubated in the same conditions with DNA produced kinks and super-coiling of the circular form. In the case of previous treatment of DNA with amoxicilline, the characteristic effect of cisplatin is only partially observed. The amoxicilline seemed to control the action of cisplatin on DNA. The initial effect of dephosphorylated amifostine (WR-1065) when this protector was incubated with the plasmid was also the formation of aggregates and the compaction of DNA. However, addition of cisplatin successively after 1 and 2 h showed the characteristic modification caused by cisplatin but only in a decreasing percentage of molecules of DNA. Both molecules, amoxicilline and WR-1065 seem to control the strong direct action of cisplatin on DNA. This effect can justify the role as protecting agent of amifostine on side effects caused by cisplatin and can open new possibilities to other agents like amoxicilline.

Limited access trial using amifostine for protection against cisplatin- and three-hour paclitaxel-induced neurotoxicity: a phase II study of the Gynecologic Oncology Group

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether amifostine (WR-2721) prevents or ameliorates clinically significant (grade 2 to 4) neurotoxicity associated with cisplatin and 3-hour paclitaxel chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The chemotherapy program consisted of intravenous paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 over 3 hours followed by amifostine 740 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 administered over 90 minutes beginning 15 minutes after amifostine administration. At baseline, before each treatment cycle, and for 3 months after completing chemotherapy, patients were evaluated for evidence of neurotoxicity and other treatment-related adverse effects using three methods: standard clinical evaluation (National Cancer Institute common toxicity criteria [CTC] grading), a neurotoxicity questionnaire to assess symptoms and limitations imposed by peripheral neuropathy, and vibration perception threshold (VPT) testing.

RESULTS

Four of 27 assessable patients developed grade 2 to 4 neurotoxicity based on clinical assessments and CTC grading. This number of neuropathic events exceeded the predetermined threshold level for a second stage of accrual and the study was closed.

CONCLUSION

Amifostine's level of activity in this trial was insufficient to warrant further study in a phase III trial. Based on the receiver operating characteristic analysis, it would appear that VPT measurements are less sensitive to the development of peripheral neuropathy than the neurotoxicity questionnaire. The questionnaire, referred to as the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy/Gynecologic Oncology Group-Neurotoxicity, may be used instead of VPT measurements in future studies of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy.

Amifostine pretreatment for protection against topotecan-induced hematologic toxicity: results of a multicenter phase III trial in patients with advanced gynecologic malignancies

OBJECTIVE

To determine if amifostine could reduce the hematologic toxicity associated with topotecan.

METHODS

Thirty patients with recurrent/refractory gynecologic malignancies were randomized to receive topotecan (TOPO) (1.5 mg/m(2)/day days 1-5) with or without amifostine (AMI/TOPO) (500 mg/m(2)/day days 1-5) every 3 weeks for six cycles. The primary study endpoints were the incidence of grade 3 and 4 neutropenia.

RESULTS

Fifteen patients were randomized to each arm for a total of 49 TOPO and 53 AMI/TOPO cycles. Patient characteristics and pretreatment ANC were similar between groups. Topotecan 1.5 mg/m(2)/day days 1-5 was initially administered to seven patients. Five developed neutropenic fevers, one an uncomplicated grade 4 neutropenia, and the other an uncomplicated grade 3 neutropenia. There were two treatment-related deaths due to sepsis (one in each treatment arm). The starting dose was thereafter reduced to 1.25 mg/m(2)/day days 1-5 every 21 days. No treatment related deaths occurred after this dose reduction. The incidence of combined grade 3/4 neutropenia was reduced from 67% (33/49 cycles) to 38% (20/53 cycles) with the addition of amifostine (P = 0.003; OR 0.29; 95% CI 0.12-0.71).

CONCLUSIONS

Topotecan at 1.5 mg/m(2)/day days 1-5 in heavily pretreated patients resulted in excessive toxicity not manageable with amifostine. At the reduced topotecan dose (1.25 mg/m(2) x 5 days), pretreatment with amifostine reduced the hematologic toxicity associated with topotecan chemotherapy in women with recurrent/refractory gynecologic malignancies.

Phase III multicenter randomized trial of amifostine as cytoprotectant in first-line chemotherapy in ovarian cancer patients

BACKGROUND

A phase III multicenter randomized trial has been designed in order to address whether amifostine (WR-2721, Ethyol), an organic thiophosphate cytoprotector, can protect ovarian cancer patients from toxicity induced by carboplatin-paclitaxel chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomly assigned to receive carboplatin [area under the curve (AUC) 5 mg.min/ml] and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2)) with (arm A) or without (arm B) amifostine (910 mg/m(2)) every 21 days for six cycles.

RESULTS

One-hundred and eighty-seven patients were accrued: 93 patients in arm A and 94 patients in arm B. There was no difference in terms of erythrocytopenia between the two arms; grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia was higher in arm A (3.3% versus 0.6%; P = 0.0010). There was no significant reduction of grade 3-4 leukopenia in arm A (11.8% versus 13.8%). The incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia was lower in arm A (31.3% versus 37.9%; P = 0.03), as was the incidence of severe mucositis (4.7% versus 15.4% in arm A versus arm B, respectively; P <0.0001). Finally, amifostine appears to be protective against neurotoxicity (grade 3-4 neurotoxicity 3.7% versus 7.2%; P = 0.02). With a median follow-up of 24 months (range 2-41), time to progression was similar between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

We showed that amifostine can exert some protection from the cumulative toxicity associated with this regimen. The results need to be confirmed in other randomized trials with this combination.

Phase I study of amifostine as a cytoprotector of the gemcitabine/cisplatin combination in patients with advanced solid malignancies

Our objective was to evaluate the role of amifostine as a cytoprotector in patients with solid tumors receiving the myelosuppressive regimen of gemcitabine/cisplatin combination. Patients with advanced solid tumors were randomized to gemcitabine-amifostine-cisplatin (GAP) or gemcitabine-cisplatin (GP) in Cycle 1 (C1) and then were crossed over to the other treatment in Cycle 2 (C2). Amifostine at 740 mg/m2, followed by gemcitabine and cisplatin, were given for 2 consecutive weeks, every 4 weeks. Two GP combinations were studied: G 1000 mg/m2 and P 40 mg/m2 days 1, 8 (high dose), and G 800 mg/m2 and P 30 mg/m2 days 1, 8 (low dose). Forty patients were enrolled. Of the 19 patients treated with high-dose GP, 11 (nine patients GP in C1 and GAP in C2, two patients GAP in C1 and GP in C2) completed 2 cycles of therapy. Of the eight non-evaluable patients, five patients dropped out due to toxicity or refusal after treatment with amifostine in C1. Of the 21 patients treated with low-dose GP, 15 (eight patients GP in C1 and GAP in C2, seven patients GAP in C1 and GP in C2) were likewise evaluable. The incidence of grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicities was similar for GP and GAP during the first 2 cycles of treatment, and there were no statistically significant differences in mean absolute neutrophil count, hemoglobin level and platelet levels between the cycles in each arm. We conclude that amifostine, at 740 mg/m2, does not lead to less myelosuppression when combined with gemcitabine/cisplatin chemotherapy regimens and may possibly contribute to subjective intolerance.

Radioprotective action of curcumin extracted from Curcuma longa LINN: inhibitory effect on formation of urinary 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine, tumorigenesis, but not mortality, induced by gamma-ray irradiation

PURPOSE

We evaluated the radioprotective action of curcumin [1,7-bis(4-hydroxy-3-methoxyphenyl)-1,6-heptadiene-3,5-dione] extracted from Curcuma longa LINN against the acute and chronic effects and the mortality induced by exposure to radiation using female rats.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

For the assay of 8-hydroxy-2'-deoxyguanosine (8-OHdG) in urine, a marker for acute effects, Wistar-MS virgin rats were fed the basal diet with exposure at 0 or 3 Gy to gamma-rays from a 60Co source as the control. Rats in the experimental groups received whole-body irradiation with 3 Gy and were fed a diet containing 1% (wt/wt) curcumin for 3 days before and/or 2 days after irradiation. The urine was collected for a 24-h period between 1 and 2 days after irradiation. Urine samples were used to determine the 8-OHdG level using an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay and the creatinine level by a modified Jaffé reaction. For long-term effects, rats at Day 17 of pregnancy were fed a diet containing curcumin for 3 days before and/or 3 days after irradiation with 1.5 Gy, and received a pellet of diethylstilbestrol as the promoter. The rats were examined for mammary and pituitary tumors for 1 year. To determine survival, virgin rats received whole-body irradiation with 9.6 Gy and were fed a diet containing curcumin for 3 days before and/or 3 days after irradiation. After irradiation, all rats were assessed daily for survival for 30 days.

RESULTS

Acutely in virgin rats irradiated with 3 Gy, the creatinine-corrected concentration and total amount of 8-OHdG in the 24-h urine samples were higher (approximately 1.3-fold) than the corresponding values in the nonirradiated controls. Adding curcumin to the diet for 3 days before and/or 2 days after irradiation reduced the elevated 8-OHdG levels by 50-70%. The evaluation of the protective action of curcumin against the long-term effects revealed that curcumin significantly decreased the incidence of mammary and pituitary tumors. However, the experiments on survival revealed that curcumin was not effective when administered for 3 days before and/or 3 days after irradiation (9.6 Gy).

CONCLUSION

These findings demonstrate that curcumin can be used as an effective radioprotective agent to inhibit acute and chronic effects, but not mortality, after irradiation.

Phase II trial of irinotecan in combination with amifostine in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Irinotecan is effective in patients with advanced colorectal carcinoma in both first-line and salvage settings but its use can be limited by serious side effects. Amifostine has been shown to reduce the incidence of cisplatin-induced cumulative renal toxicity in patients with advanced ovarian carcinoma and nonsmall cell lung carcinoma. In the current pilot Phase II trial, the authors examined the potential role of amifostine as a protective agent against irinotecan-induced diarrhea and myelosuppression and evaluated an every-2-weeks regimen as an alternative schedule for the administration of irinotecan in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal carcinoma.

METHODS

All patients received amifostine, 740 mg/m2, followed by irinotecan, 250 mg/m2, every 2 weeks. A 6-week cycle of chemotherapy (every 2 weeks for 3 treatments) was chosen to assess toxicity and response. The main objective of the current study was to evaluate the impact of amifostine on gastrointestinal and hematologic toxicity.

RESULTS

A total of 22 patients entered the current study. Six of these 22 patients (27%) had WHO Common Toxicity Criteria Grade 3 or 4 diarrhea, including 2 patients (9%) with Grade 4 diarrhea. Eight of 22 patients (36.3%) developed Grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (Grade 4 in 4 of the 22 patients [18%]). Dose reduction was required in 25% of the treatment cycles. Five of the 22 patients (23%) withdrew from the trial due to amifostine toxicity. Of the 15 patients who were evaluable for response, 4 patients (26.6%) had achieved a partial response and 9 (60%) had stable disease as their best response.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of irinotecan with amifostine in patients with previously treated metastatic colorectal carcinoma did not appear to reduce irinotecan toxicity. Amifostine did not appear to interfere with the cytotoxic effect of irinotecan. The results of the current study did demonstrate efficacy and safety of the every-2-weeks irinotecan schedule that was comparable to other established regimens and these results support its feasibility as a reasonable alternative in this disease setting.

Use of amifostine in the therapy of osteosarcoma in children and adolescents

Amifostine protects normal tissue from the cytotoxic damage induced by radiation and chemotherapy. In this study, 39 consecutive newly diagnosed children with osteosarcoma were assessed; 20 received amifostine and 19 did not. The chemotherapy regimen included an induction phase of three cycles of cisplatin (100 mg/m2), carboplatin (500 mg/m2), and doxorubicin (60 mg/m2), followed by surgery. Alternating cycles of cisplatin/ifosfamide (9 mg/m2), ifosfamide/doxorubicin, carboplatin/doxorubicin, and ifosfamide/carboplatin were administered every 3 weeks to complete 26 weeks of treatment. Amifostine was administered 15 minutes before the infusions of cisplatin and carboplatin in a total of 193 infusions. Side effects during infusions and renal, hearing, and bone marrow toxicities were evaluated and compared between the two groups. Hypotension was observed in 28 (14.5%) infusions. No patient required discontinuation of therapy. Fewer than two episodes of vomiting occurred in 130 (71%) infusions and two to five episodes occurred in 51 (28%) infusions, and no patient had grade 4 toxicity. There was no difference between the two groups regarding renal toxicity (creatinine clearance). Neutropenia and leukopenia were significantly less frequent in the amifostine group. No difference was observed in platelet and hearing toxicities. Amifostine was well tolerated in doses of 740 mg/m2 in children and adolescents, and myelotoxicity was less severe in the amifostine group. This was a pilot study for further evaluation in a larger randomized trial.

Alteration of radiation-induced hematotoxicity by amifostine

PURPOSE

To investigate whether amifostine can reduce radiation hematotoxicity.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Seventy-three patients undergoing radiotherapy for squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck at the university clinics of Freiburg, Heidelberg, and Erlangen were evaluated. All received 60 Gy (50-70 Gy) at 5 x 2 Gy fractions per week employing standard techniques. Thirty-five were randomized to receive 200 mg/m(2) amifostine i.v. 30 min before radiation; 38 served as control patients. Blood counts (total n = 501) were determined before, during, and while completing radiotherapy. Changes of leukocyte, platelet, and hemoglobin levels were determined and compared using the t test.

RESULTS

The blood hemoglobin level and the platelet count were not affected by irradiation, for either the amifostine-treated or control patients. Similarly, the leukocyte counts of amifostine-treated patients did not change during irradiation. However, control patients experienced a decrease in leukocyte count from 8.1 x 10(3)/mm(3) to 5.8 x 10(3)/mm(3) (difference: 2.3 x 10(3)/mm(3)). This seems to be line specific: Whereas amifostine does not affect lymphocyte count, a radiation-induced decrease of neutrophil granulocytes seems to be prevented.

CONCLUSION

Amifostine protects from radiation hematotoxicity, particularly affecting the granulocytopoiesis. These data confirm results from our former study.

A Phase II trial of cisplatin plus WR-2721 (amifostine) for metastatic breast carcinoma: an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Study (E8188)

BACKGROUND

Cisplatin has minimal antitumor activity when used as second- or third-line treatment of metastatic breast carcinoma. Older reports suggest an objective response rate of 8% when 60-120 mg/m2 of cisplatin is administered every 3-4 weeks. Although a dose-response effect has been observed with cisplatin, the dose-limiting toxicities associated with cisplatin (e.g., nephrotoxicity, ototoxicity, and neurotoxicity) have limited its use as a treatment for breast carcinoma. WR-2721 or amifostine initially was developed to protect military personnel in the event of nuclear war. Amifostine subsequently was shown to protect normal tissues from the toxic effects of alkylating agents and cisplatin without decreasing the antitumor effect of the chemotherapy. Early trials of cisplatin and amifostine also suggested that the incidence and severity of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity, ototoxicity, and neuropathy were reduced.

METHODS

A Phase II study of the combination of cisplatin plus amifostine was conducted in patients with progressive metastatic breast carcinoma who had received one, but not more than one, chemotherapy regimen for metastatic disease. Patients received amifostine, 910 mg/m2 intravenously over 15 minutes. After completion of the amifostine infusion, cisplatin 120 mg/m2 was administered over 30 minutes. Intravenous hydration and mannitol was administered before and after cisplatin. Treatment was administered every 3 weeks until disease progression.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients were enrolled in the study of which 7 (16%) were ineligible. A median of 2 cycles of therapy was administered to the 37 eligible patients. Six partial responses were observed for an overall response rate of 16%. Most patients (57%) stopped treatment because of disease progression. Neurologic toxicity was reported in 52% of patients. Seven different life-threatening toxicities were observed in patients while receiving treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

The combination of cisplatin and amifostine in this study resulted in an overall response rate of 16%. Neither a tumor-protective effect nor reduced toxicity to normal tissues was observed with the addition of amifostine to cisplatin in this trial.

Amifostine: chemotherapeutic and radiotherapeutic protective effects

Amifostine (Ethyoltrade mark, Alza Pharmaceuticals) is an inorganic thiophosphate cytoprotective agent known chemically as ethanethiol, 2-[3- aminopropyl)amino]dihydrogen phosphate. It is a prodrug of free thiol (WR-1065) that may act as a scavenger of free radicals generated in tissues exposed to cytotoxic drugs and binds to reactive metabolites of such drugs. Amifostine was originally developed as a radioprotective agent in a classified nuclear warfare project. Following declassification of the project it was evaluated as a cytoprotective agent against toxicity of the alkylating drugs and cisplatin. Differences in the alkaline phosphatase concentration of normal versus tumour tissues can result in greater conversion of amifostine in normal tissues. Inside the cell, WR-1065 provides an alternative target to DNA and RNA for the reactive molecules of alkylating or platinum agents and acts as a potent scavenger of the oxygen free radicals induced by ionizing radiation and some chemotherapy agents. Preclinical animal studies have demonstrated that the administration of amifostine protects against a variety of chemotherapy-related toxicities including cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity, cisplatin-induced neurotoxicity, cyclophosphamide- and bleomycin-induced pulmonary toxicity and the cytotoxicities (including cardiotoxicity) induced by doxorubicin and related chemotherapeutic agents. Amifostine has been shown to protect a variety of animal species from lethal doses of radiation. Amifostine gives haematological protection from cyclophosphamide, carboplatin, mitomycin C, fotemustine and radiotherapy; renal and peripheral nerve protection from cisplatin; mucosa, skin and salivary gland protection from radiotherapy. Multiple Phase I studies were carried out with amifostine in combination with chemotherapy for various neoplasms. Appropriate doses of amifostine were found to be 740 - 910 mg/m(2) in single-dose regimens and 340 mg/m(2) in multiple-dose regimens. In radioprotection, doses are generally 200 - 350 mg/m(2). For all these characteristics, amifostine has been recently approved and suggested in ASCO clinical practice guidelines as a radioprotector for head and neck cancer treatment and supportive agent during cisplatin-based chemotherapy, in lymphomas and solid tumours. Moreover, its spectrum of possible applications is enlarging. As data have been provided indicating that amifostine stimulates haematopoiesis, it has been employed with intriguing results in the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS).

Phase I/II dose escalation study of docetaxel and carboplatin combination supported with amifostine and GM-CSF in patients with incomplete response following docetaxel chemo-radiotherapy: additional chemotherapy enhances regression of residual cancer

Taxanes have been shown to interact with anti-apoptotic proteins. In the present study we investigated whether the addition of taxane in combination with DNA damaging drugs can further enhance tumor shrinkage in cases with incomplete response to radiotherapy. Since the dose of docetaxel in combination with carboplatin is not known, the above hypothesis was tested in the context of a dose escalation phase I study. Twenty-eight patients with locally advanced chest or pelvic tumors, showing residual disease on CT scans performed 40 d following docetaxel radio-chemotherapy, were recruited in a dose escalation protocol of docetaxel/carboplatin supported with amifostine and GM-CSF. The starting dose of docetaxel was 40 mg/m2 every 2 weeks. Carboplatin dose was calculated using the Calvert formula and was escalated in cohorts of 4 patients (starting dose AUC2 every two weeks; AUC0.5 increments up to AUC3). Thereafter the docetaxel dose was increased to 50 and 60 mg/m2, while carboplatin was escalated (by AUC0.5 increments) starting from AUC3 and AUC4 respectively. Amifostine (600 mg/m2) was administered i.v. before carboplatin and GM-CSF (480 microg) was injected s.c. on days 5, 6 and 10, 11 of each cycle. Six cycles were given and response was assessed 2 weeks after the end of chemotherapy. None out of four patients treated in the 6th dose level cohort (50 mg/m2 of docetaxel and AUC4 of carboplatin every 2 weeks) showed any grade 2-4 hematologic toxicity. Mild non-hematologic toxicity such as neuropathy, leg edema, pleural effusion, pyrexia, alopecia grade 2 and hypersensitivity was observed in 4-12% of patients. Out of four patients treated in a 7th cohort (docetaxel 60 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC4), one developed grade IV neutropenia and two developed grade 3 severe asthenia requiring treatment delay for 2 weeks. Out of 11 patients with PR following docetaxel radio-chemotherapy, 7 (63%) showed CR after docetaxel/carboplatin additional chemotherapy. Eight out of 17 patients with MR following docetaxel radio-chemotherapy showed PR (47%) and one showed CR (6%) after additional chemotherapy. High dose combined docetaxel (50 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC4) chemotherapy can be safely administered on a two-weekly basis if supported with amifostine and GM-CSF. Such an additional therapy may be important in patients with incomplete response after chemo-RT. Broad spectrum cytoprotection with amifostine and GM-CSF may also contribute to the reduction of incidence of neurosensory reactions and asthenia in patients treated with taxanes.

The sulfhydryl containing compounds WR-2721 and glutathione as radio- and chemoprotective agents. A review, indications for use and prospects

Radio- and chemotherapy for the treatment of malignancies are often associated with significant toxicity. One approach to reduce the toxicity is the concomitant treatment with chemoprotective agents. This article reviews two sulfhydryl compounds, namely the agent WR-2721 (amifostine), a compound recently registered for use in human in many countries, and the natural occurring compound glutathione (GSH). GSH is not registered as a chemoprotective agent. WR-2721 is an aminothiol prodrug and has to be converted to the active compound WR-1065 by membrane-bound alkaline phosphatase. WR-1065 and GSH both act as naturally occurring thiols. No protective effect on the tumour has been found when these compounds are administered intravenously. There is even in vitro evidence for an increased anti-tumour effect with mafosfamide after pretreatment with WR-2721, and in vivo after treatment with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Randomized clinical studies have shown that WR-2721 and GSH decrease cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity and that WR-2721 reduces radiation radiotherapy-induced toxicity. Side-effects associated with WR-2721 are nausea, vomiting and hypotension, GSH has no side-effects. An exact role of WR-2721 and GSH as chemoprotectors is not yet completely clear. Future studies should examine the protective effect of these drugs on mucositis, cardiac toxicity, neuro- and ototoxicity, the development of secondary neoplasms and their effect on quality of life.

Effects of amifostine on cisplatin induced DNA adduct formation and toxicity in malignant glioma and normal tissues in rat

The chemoprotective effect of amifostine (WR2721) was studied in a BDIX rat model with intracerebral BT4C glioma implants. Twenty-one rats were given cisplatin 5 mg/kg i.p., 21 were given amifostine 200 mg/kg i.p. + cisplatin 5 mg/kg i.p. Ten rats served as untreated controls. An immunohistochemical method for analysis of cisplatin-DNA adducts was used to elucidate the adduct formation in tumor, normal brain and kidney. Tumor volume and serum creatinine level were analysed 10 days after treatment. In animals pretreated with amifostine there was a delayed adduct formation rate in the normal brain, and in the kidney cortex the number of tubular cells with extremely high adduct level was reduced. No difference in adduct formation was seen in tumors. Tumor volume was significantly larger following amifostine + cisplatin (66% of controls) compared to cisplatin alone (38% of controls). Weight loss was, however, severe in rats given cisplatin alone. In the tumor growth study only 3 out of 11 rats treated with cisplatin 5 mg/kg alone survived until time of sacrifice at 10 days, whereas all those pretreated with amifostine survived. Mean serum creatinine was 48 micromol/l (controls), 146 micromol/l (cisplatin) and 59 micromol/l (amifostine + cisplatin). A marked reduction of histopathological renal changes was found when amifostine was added. Amifostine thus significantly reduced general and renal toxicity of cisplatin. The tumor growth retardation was stronger when cisplatin was given alone but this is probably related to general toxicity and malnutrition indirectly supported by the fact that amifostine did not significantly reduce cisplatin-DNA adduct formation in tumors. The results of the present study suggest that amifostine may have a role in increasing the therapeutic ratio of cisplatin, also in the treatment of malignant glioma.

Reducing the toxicity of anticancer therapy: new strategies

Cytoprotective agents offer opportunities to reduce the treatment-related toxicity of anticancer therapy and perhaps to increase the dose and dose intensity of radiation and chemotherapy. One such agent is amifostine, an organic thiophosphate. Amifostine selectively protects normal tissues and provides broad-spectrum protection for a variety of organs while remaining minimally toxic. Clinical studies have demonstrated that amifostine protects against myelotoxicity, nephrotoxicity, neurotoxicity, mucositis and esophagitis in patients treated with alkylating and platinum agents, paclitaxel and radiation therapy. In addition, preclinical studies suggest the possibility of protection against anthracycline-induced cardiotoxicity and radiation- and chemotherapy-induced mutagenicity. Preclinical and clinical studies have not demonstrated any diminution of antitumor efficacy. Amifostine is well tolerated in doses of 740 or 910 mg/m2. The most common side effects requiring treatment are transient hypotension, which responds to intravenous fluids, and nausea and vomiting, effectively treated with 5-HT3 antagonists and dexamethasone.

Pharmacokinetics of cisplatin with and without amifostine in tumour-bearing nude mice

Amifostine (Ethyol, WR-2721) is in use in the clinic as a protector against platinum-induced toxicities. We have previously reported that amifostine induced a potentiation of the antitumour activity of carboplatin in human ovarian cancer xenografts. An influence of amifostine on the pharmacokinetics of carboplatin, resulting in higher platinum concentrations in plasma and tissues of the tumour-bearing nude mice, was thought to be the cause of enhancement of the antitumour activity. Therefore, the pharmacokinetics of cisplatin were investigated in tumour-bearing nude mice treated with cisplatin alone or in combination with amifostine. A significant increase in the area under the curve (AUC) of the total platinum concentration in mice treated with amifostine was only observed in the kidney (from 355 to 398 nmol h/g), whereas in the other tissues and plasma no significant changes were measured. The selective protection of normal tissues by amifostine was confirmed by a decrease in the AUC of the cisplatin-DNA adduct levels in normal tissues. The decrease was only significant in the liver (282-240 fmol h/microgram DNA), whereas in tumour tissue a slight increase in the AUC of the cisplatin-DNA adducts could be detected (91.3-110.1 fmol h/microgram DNA). The minor influence of amifostine on the pharmacokinetics of cisplatin may be the reason why amifostine did not potentiate the antitumour activity of cisplatin. The influence of amifostine on cisplatin-DNA adduct levels in normal tissues versus tumour tissues is further evidence for the usefulness of this toxicity modulator in cancer patients.

Comparison of Five Agents in Protecting the Cochlea Against the Ototoxic Effects of Cisplatin in the Hamster

The purpose of this investigation was to study the ameliorating effects of four agents on cis-platin-induced ototoxicity. Hamsters were given a series of five cisplatin injections either alone or in combination with sodium thiosulfate (STS), diethyldihydrothiocarbamate (DDTC), and S-2(3-aminopropylamino) ethylphosphorothiolc acid (WR-2721), or fosfomycin. Ototoxicity was assessed anatomically by quantifying the extent of cochlear damage with the scanning electron microscope and physiologically with measures of the auditory brain stem response. When administered alone, cisplatin induced widespread loss of outer hair cells (OHCs) along much of the cochlea in the hamster, especially in the basal and middle turns, with an average survival of only 56% of the OHC population. In contrast, inner hair cells resisted cisplatin ototoxicity in the hamster. Thus the ameliorative effects of the different test agents were assessed by counting the number of surviving OHCs in each treatment group and comparing with cisplatin-treated controls. STS provided the most effective protection against the ototoxic effects of cisplatin, yielding 91% survival of OHCs. DDTC also reduced the ototoxic effects of cisplatin, yielding 68% survival of OHCs. Cotreatment with WR-2721 and fosfomycin yielded 45% and 52% OHC survival, respectively, and thus did not provide any chemoprotection. The results closely paralleled those based on auditory brain stem response recordings in that the magnitude of threshold shift was proportional to the amount of OHC loss; also, the amount of threshold shift at each frequency was in good agreement with the pattern of hair cell loss along the cochlear spiral. Thus both histologic and physiologic results suggest that STS and DDTC hold promise for ameliorating the ototoxic effects of cisplatin chemotherapy.

Phase II evaluation of cisplatin and WR2721 for refractory metastatic breast cancer

Cisplatin, as second-line therapy for metastatic breast cancer (MBC), has at best shown only modest response rates. At high doses, the toxicity profile of this drug may outweigh any potential benefits for MBC patients. We performed a phase II study to determine whether the investigational agent WR2721 would mitigate the toxicity of cisplatin in patients with MBC and to assess the antitumor response of cisplatin as salvage therapy. Thirteen women were enrolled in the study. Cisplatin was administered at a dose of 120 mg/m2 together with WR2721 at a dose of 910 mg/m2 intravenously every 21 days. Response was assessed at the end of two cycles, and toxicity was evaluated after each treatment cycle. No objective antitumor responses were noted. Three patients exhibited toxicity from cisplatin in the form of ototoxicity, nephrotoxicity, myelotoxicity, and persistent delayed nausea and vomiting necessitating discontinuation from the study. There was one death from renal failure. WR2721 itself caused significant but transient hypotension in 46% of the patients. In our experience, salvage chemotherapy with cisplatin in pretreated patients with MBC produced no objective responses. WR2721 did not prevent the occurrence of organ toxicity.

Hypotensive mechanisms of amifostine

Amifostine, a chemo- and radioprotective agent developed as adjunctive therapy for malignancies, induces hypotension after approximately 20% of patient administrations. This study examines the molecular mechanisms underlying hypotension induced by amifostine. Amifostine and its metabolite, WR-1065, induced dose-dependent hypotension in anesthetized rats that was not blocked by N(G)-methyl L arginine (L-NAME), an NO synthase inhibitor. WR-1065 but not amifostine induced concentration-dependent relaxation of isolated rat aortic rings in an endothelium-independent fashion. Relaxation was not associated with increases in cGMP or cAMP and could not be blocked by L-NAME or indomethacin. Similarly, neither amifostine or WR-1065 activated adenylyl, particulate guanylyl, or soluble guanylyl cyclases. WR-1065 relaxed rat aortic rings precontracted with norepinepherine, suggesting alpha-adrenergic blocking activity. However, neither amifostine nor WR-1065 altered the ability of prazosin or phentolamine to bind to alpha-adrenergic receptors. Further, WR-1065 had no effect on receptor-mediated increases in intracellular calcium in BAL 17 murine B lymphocytes in vitro. Thus, hypotension after administration of amifostine is mediated by WR-1065 and appears to result from direct relaxation of vascular smooth muscle. Smooth muscle relaxation induced by WR-1065 is not related to production of nitric oxide, prostaglandins, or cyclic nucleotides; alpha-adrenergic receptor antagonism; or interference with receptor-dependent increases in intracellular calcium. Administration of ephedrine, an efficacious adrenergic agonist, attenuated hypotension induced by amifostine in anesthetized rats and may be useful in alleviating hypotension associated with amifostine administration in patients.

Amifostine. A review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential as a radioprotector and cytotoxic chemoprotector

Amifostine (WR-2721) was originally developed as a radioprotective agent. In animals, it protects normal tissues from the damaging effects of irradiation and, as shown in more recent studies, of several cytotoxic agents. Protection of tumours is generally reduced compared with that of normal tissues in animals, suggesting that amifostine may increase the therapeutic window of cytotoxic therapies. Clinical data concerning amifostine suggest that cytotoxic chemotherapy-induced haematological toxicity and cisplatin-induced neurotoxicity, nephrotoxicity and ototoxicity are decreased upon administration of amifostine prior to cytotoxic drugs. Similarly, amifostine reduces damage to normal tissues caused by radiotherapy. Available data show that this protection is achieved without adversely affecting tumour response or patient survival. In 1 large trial, the reduction in cyclophosphamide- and cisplatin-related toxicities manifested as a decrease in the incidence and severity of neutropenia-related fever and sepsis and in the number of patients with ovarian cancer who discontinue therapy before completion of treatment, thus improving the tolerability of this antineoplastic regimen. In addition, the incidences of cisplatin-induced nephro- and neurotoxicity were reduced. Increased doses of cytotoxic therapy have also been administered when amifostine was given prior to therapy, which may increase tumour response. The predominant adverse effect associated with amifostine are hypotension, nausea and vomiting, somnolence and sneezing. Thus, amifostine is likely to be a useful adjuvant to the treatment of patients with malignancy, particularly those receiving cyclophosphamide plus cisplatin. discontinued therapy before completion of treatment, thus improving the tolerability of this antineoplastic regimen. In addition, the incidences of cisplatin-induced.

Hematopoietic stem cell compartment: acute and late effects of radiation therapy and chemotherapy

The bone marrow is an important dose-limiting cell renewal tissue for chemotherapy, wide-field irradiation, and autologous bone marrow transplantation. Over the past 5-10 years a great deal has been discovered about the hematopoietic stem cell compartment. Although the toxicity associated with prolonged myelosuppression continues to limit the wider use of chemotherapy and irradiation, ways are being discovered to circumvent this toxicity such as with the increasing use of cytokines. This review describes what is known of how chemotherapy and irradiation damage stem cells and the microenvironment, how cytokines protect hematopoietic cells from radiation damage and speed marrow recovery after chemotherapy or marrow transplantation, and how various types of blood marrow cells contribute to engraftment and long-term hematopoiesis after high doses of cytotoxic agents and/or total body irradiation.

Amifostine: potential for clinically useful cytoprotection

The ability to target malignant cells for cytotoxicity while sparing normal host tissues has proven to be limited. These limitations have resulted in unacceptable toxicity or insufficiently effective therapy. Continuing investigation of new, potentially useful cytotoxic agents must continue. An alternative approach, also worthy of study, is the selective protection of normal tissues. This approach, used in conjunction with available therapeutic agents, may open the therapeutic window and incrementally enhance the effectiveness of cytotoxic therapy. A variety of methods have been used to protect normal tissues selectively. Regional protection can be used for certain organ systems, such as the oral mucosa. Selective protection on a systemic level is more difficult but agents that seem to protect normal but not malignant tissues selectively are being developed. Among these is amifostine, which was originally selected by the U.S. defense department for study as a radioprotectant. Pre-clinical studies have suggested that amifostine is differentially concentrated in normal tissues but not in malignant tissues. Tissue-specific differences in the activity of alkaline phosphatase, which dephosphorylates amifostine to its active metabolite WR-1065, and in pH are thought to be involved in this relative specificity. Clinical studies indicate that amifostine can reduce the myelosuppression produced by cyclosphosphamide, the combination of cyclophosphamide and cisplatin, and, perhaps, carboplatin. The protective effects of amifostine on nonhematopoietic toxicities are being investigated. Future trials will investigate the integration of amifostine with cytokine-based supportive care in order to define the role of this potentially clinically useful cytoprotectant agent.

Neurotoxicity of antineoplastic agents

PURPOSE

to review the neurotoxicity associated with antineoplastic agents.

METHODS

four hundred articles, abstracts and book chapters were selected for review. One hundred and ninety (articles, book chapters and abstracts) were identified as representative of the important aspects of neurotoxicity to be presented in this review.

RESULTS

in general the dose, schedule and route of administration significantly determine the incidence and outcome of antineoplastic agents neurotoxicity. An updated and detailed review of neurotoxicity is provided with special attention to vinca alkaloids, cisplatin and biologic response modifiers. The neurotoxic side effects of some of the new approaches in cancer therapy and some of the investigational agents are discussed. Guidelines for the prevention and management of this toxicity are presented. In addition, suggestions are made in regard to the preclinical and clinical screening of new agents for neurotoxicity.

CONCLUSION

quality of life issues have become a focal point in many clinical trials. Neurotoxicity associated with antineoplastic therapy clearly has an impact on the short and long term quality of the life of cancer patients. A better understanding of this toxicity requires developing reliable and predictive models to screen new agents prior to their introduction into clinical trials; a more detailed and uniform grading system; and the prospective evaluation of neurotoxicity in clinical trials of new antineoplastic agents.

Phase I study of WR-2721 and carboplatin

Because WR-2721 reduces the toxicity of cisplatin and carboplatin in preclinical systems, we have treated 35 patients in a phase I study of WR-2721 and carboplatin. As the plasma half-life of WR-2721 is short relative to that of carboplatin, WR-2721 was administered in two divided doses. This schedule produced acceptable toxicity in 24 patients treated with carboplatin 400 mg/m2 and escalating doses of WR-2721. In the subsequent 11 patients, WR-2721 was fixed at 740 mg/m2/dose and the dose of carboplatin was escalated. With WR-2721, grade 3-4 thrombopenia (platelets < 50 x 10(9)/l) was produced in 4/5 patients treated with carboplatin 625 mg/m2 and in 1/6 patients treated with carboplatin 500 mg/m2. Carboplatin pharmacokinetic parameters in 4 patients were similar to those reported for carboplatin alone. These results suggest that WR-2721 might increase the maximum tolerated dose of carboplatin from 400 to 500 mg/m2.

Reduction of cisplatinum-induced renal toxicity in mice by tetrahydroindazolonecarboxylic acid (HIDA) [corrected]

The ability of tetrahydroindazolone carboxylic acid (HIDA) to reduce the toxicity of cis-diamminedichloroplatinum (cis-DDP) in CDF1 mice was investigated. Toxicity was assessed both in terms of mouse lethality occurring within 14 days after treatment and kidney damage estimated by measurement of plasma urea. The levels of plasma urea were found to increase from day 2 after intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection of cis-DDP, reaching a peak at day 5. This increase was also cis-DDP-dose dependent. An i.p. injection of HIDA reduced kidney damage only when given 2.5 h prior to cis-DDP and at HIDA doses of 100 mg/kg or larger. The protection ratio for this reduction was 1.10. HIDA also decreased mouse lethality from cis-DDP, resulting in a PR of 1.41. This protective effect of HIDA on cis-DDP toxicity may eventually have a clinical application.

Current research in side effects of high-dose chemotherapy

The toxicities of chemotherapy continue to hamper dose escalation of specific chemotherapeutic agents. The impact of dose intensification upon survival will be assessed as clinical studies continue. Strategies to support chemotherapy dose intensification include BMT, use of CSFs and antiemetic drug combinations. Advances in symptom management will hopefully enhance quality of life for patients, whereas the development of chemoprotectant agents may allow specific organ toxicities to be avoided.

Radiation and chemotherapy sensitizers and protectors

Radiosensitizers and radioprotectors are part of the chemical modifier approach to cancer therapy whereby the state of the tumor cells and/or normal tissues are modified such that a therapeutic gain is achieved using conventional radiation or chemotherapy. Radiosensitization can be achieved by the use of oxygen-mimetic compounds, agents that alter DNA sensitivity to irradiation, maneuvers that alter DNA repair processes, and manipulation of tissue oxygenation. Standard chemotherapeutic agents such as cisplatin can be utilized in a manner that optimizes the radiosensitization properties. Protection and sensitization can occur by altering the thiol status of the cell. The chemical modifiers field is both developing novel approaches to cancer treatment and increasing the understanding of basic cancer biology.

Cisplatin rescue therapy: experience with sodium thiosulfate, WR2721, and diethyldithiocarbamate

Cisplatin has a steep dose response curve for both antitumor and adverse effects. Therapeutic strategies aimed at reducing toxicity and allowing dose escalation of intravenous cisplatin, such as administration in hypertonic saline and pharmacokinetically based dosing schedules, have been partially successful in reducing nephrotoxicity and bone marrow suppression. However, new dose-limiting toxicities consisting of peripheral neuropathy and ototoxicity have emerged, which continue to restrict potential use of high dose cisplatin therapy. Intraperitoneal administration of high dose cisplatin also offers the potential of markedly increased local drug exposure if systemic toxicity can be avoided. Proposed chemoprotective agents, including sodium thiosulfate, WR2721, and diethyldithiocarbamate (DDTC) are being extensively examined as "rescue agents" for either regional or systemic administration of cisplatin. Although each agent offers unique advantages to be considered in developing successful rescue therapy, many questions remain regarding molecular and pharmacokinetic interactions with cisplatin, appropriate dosing schedules, and effects on antineoplastic activity. We present a review of current investigations of chemoprotectors for prevention of cisplatin-related toxicities.

Clinical trials of WR-2721 and cis-platinum

WR-2721 is an aminothiol compound; in the animal model it protects against the nephrotoxicity, neurotoxicity, and hematologic toxicity of cis-platinum. We initiated Phase I trials of WR-2721 and cis-platinum to determine toxicity when WR-2721 was given prior to escalating doses of cis-platinum. With mannitol diuresis and WR-2721, transient nephrotoxicity occurred in 9 of 30 (27%) patients treated with cis-platinum 150 mg/m2 and 7% of patients given with cis-platinum 120 mg/m2. Bone marrow suppression was mild and infrequent. Mild to moderate peripheral neuropathies occurred in 26% of patients courses following a mean cumulative cis-platinum dose of 725 mg/m2. Objective partial responses were observed in 53 of 118 (45%) patients with measurable disease. Antitumor responses were observed in 25 of 53 patients with metastatic melanoma, 12 of 22 patients with locally recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer, and 7 of 13 patients with metastatic breast cancer refractory to conventional chemotherapy. Controlled studies of WR-2721 and cis-platinum will be performed in the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group in these disease sites to better define the activity of this regimen and its toxicity.

Competition for polyamine uptake into rat lung slices by WR2721 and analogues

The objective of these studies was to determine whether a series of structurally related radioprotective agents could act as substrates for the recently identified polyamine system in the lung. We have shown that WR2721 (S-2(3-aminopropylamino)ethyl phosphorothioate), S-2(4-aminobutylamino)ethyl phosphorothioate (S-ABEP or WR2822) and S-2(7-aminoheptylamino)ethyl phosphorothioate (S-AHEP) competitively inhibit the uptake of putrescine into rat lung slices. The ability of the radioprotectors to act as substrates for the polyamine uptake system was expressed as the Ki for each compound. The Ki values for WR2721, S-ABEP and S-AHEP in the absence of dithiothreitol were 48, 57 and 7 mumol dm-3 compared to 155, 88 and 15 mumol dm-3 in the presence of dithiothreitol, indicating that the disulphide form may have a higher affinity for the transport system. By analogy with other substrates for the polyamine uptake system we have concluded that it should be possible to target radioprotectors to the alveolar epithelial type I and II cells and the Clara cells in the lung, as they prossess this uptake system, and thus protect these cells from oxidative stress.

Biochemical modulation of cisplatin toxicity

The biochemical modulation of cisplatin toxicity has contributed substantially to the safe and effective administration of cisplatin in the clinic. In most cases, however, the demonstration of clinical efficacy has preceded the understanding of mechanisms by which these agents provide protection to normal tissues. A number of protocols are now available to ameliorate cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity; these approaches have been so successful that renal toxicity is rarely of clinical significance today. However, the dramatic escalation in cisplatin dose engendered by the use of modulators has resulted in new dose-limiting toxicities involving the nervous system and the bone marrow. Although preliminary data suggests that certain modulators may reduce these toxicities, extensive clinical trials will be necessary to substantiate the beneficial effects in the clinic. Further clinical studies will also be necessary to determine the optimum scheduling for the newer agents and to provide convincing evidence of efficacy in man. Finally, modulator combinations (i.e. DDTC and hypertonic saline) have the potential to provide the broadest coverage of normal tissue protection and appear to merit more extensive clinical investigation. Cisplatin has demonstrated remarkable clinical efficacy at currently tolerated doses; further advances in the biochemical modulation of cisplatin toxicity should provide significant therapeutic gains for this important drug in the future.