The effect of monosialotetrahexosylganglioside (GM1) in prevention of oxaliplatin induced neurotoxicity: A retrospective study

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of GM1 ganglioside in healthy subjects and patients with multiple myeloma: Two dose-escalation studies

PURPOSE

This study aimed to assess the pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of GM1 in healthy Chinese subjects and patients with multiple myeloma.

METHODS

The data used in this study was derived from two dose-escalation trials: GM1-101, involving 70 healthy subjects, and GM1-201, which included 160 multiple myeloma patients. Population pharmacokinetics (PopPK) analysis was conducted on a subset of 90 participants using a nonlinear mixed-effects approach, and potential covariates were explored quantitatively. Observations of any abnormalities in vital signs, physical examinations, laboratory tests, and electrocardiograms during the study period, along with any spontaneously reported and directly observed adverse events, were documented for safety evaluation. Furthermore, neurotoxicity scales were used to assess the efficacy of GM1 as a prophylaxis for chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy and to perform exposure-response analyses in conjunction with pharmacokinetic parameters.

RESULTS

A one-compartment model with first-order elimination best characterized the pharmacokinetics of GM1. The clearance and volume of distribution, as estimated by the final model, were 0.0942 L/h and 3.27 L for GM1-A, and 0.0714 L/h and 2.82 L for GM1-B, respectively. Covariates such as sex, body weight, and albumin significantly influenced pharmacokinetic parameters, yet the variation in steady-state exposure between subjects and reference subjects was less than 45% within their 90% confidence interval. Adverse reactions related to GM1 occurred in 20 (28.6%) and 57 (35.6%) subjects in the GM1-101 and GM1-201 cohorts, respectively. The changes in TNSc and FACT-Ntx scores from baseline at the end of periods 4 and 6 were lower in each GM1 dose group compared to the blank control group. The 400 mg dose group of GM1 displayed greater effectiveness than other dose groups. However, exposure-response analysis revealed no significant modification in efficacy with increasing GM1 exposure.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides the first population pharmacokinetic analysis of GM1. GM1 exhibits a favorable safety profile among healthy subjects and patients with multiple myeloma. GM1 proved effective in mitigating chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy, but this study observed no significant correlation between its efficacy and exposure.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBERS

ChiCTR2000041283 and ChiCTR2000041283.

Ganglioside-monosialic acid (GM1) for prevention of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy: a meta-analysis with trial sequential analysis

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a dose-limiting side effect that largely remains an unresolved clinical issue, leading to long-term morbidity. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of Ganglioside-monosialic acid (GM1) in preventing CIPN.

METHODS

Systematic literature searches of PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and ClinicalTrials.gov were performed to identify randomized controlled trials and cohort studies that evaluated the efficacy of GM1 for preventing CIPN. Conventional meta-analysis with a random-effects model and trial sequential analysis (TSA) were performed.

RESULTS

A total of five studies involving 868 participants were included. The results showed that GM1 did not reduce the overall incidence of grade ≥ 2 CIPN when the common terminology criteria for adverse events (CTCAE) was used (OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.34-1.11). Subgroup analyses showed that GM1 could not reduce the risk of CTCAE grade ≥ 2 CIPN (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.35-1.13) and neurotoxicity criteria of Debiopharm (DEB-NTC) grade ≥ 2 CIPN (OR 0.25, 95% CI 0.01-7.10) in oxaliplatin-treated patients, despite that GM1 was associated with a reduced risk of CTCAE grade ≥ 2 CIPN in the taxane subgroup of one study (OR 0.003, 95% CI 0.00-0.05). These results were confirmed by the sub-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In TSA, the z-curve for the taxane subgroup crossed the upper trial sequential monitoring boundary (TSMB) but do not reach the required information size (RIS). The z-curves for the oxaliplatin subgroup remained in the nonsignificant area and did not reach the RIS. Further, GM1 did not influence the rate of response to chemotherapy and CTCAE grade ≥ 2 adverse events such as fatigue, nausea, diarrhea, and rash.

CONCLUSIONS

GM1 seemed to be well-tolerated and did not influence the anti-cancer effects of chemotherapeutic agents. Although the data did not confirm the effectiveness of GM1 in preventing oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neuropathy, GM1 might be able to prevent taxane-induced peripheral neuropathy. More studies are required in different ethnic populations receiving taxane-based chemotherapy to confirm these findings.

Monosialotetrahexosylganglioside in the treatment of chronic oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity: TJMUCH-GI-001, a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Chronic oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (OIPN) is the most troublesome and dose-limiting side effect of oxaliplatin. There is no effective treatment for chronic OIPN. We conducted a randomised controlled trial to investigate the efficacy of monosialotetrahexosylganglioside (GM1) in treating chronic OIPN.

METHODS

In this single-centre, double-blind, phase Ⅲ trial, gastrointestinal cancer patients with persistent chronic OIPN were randomised in 1:1 ratio to receive either GM1 or placebo at Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital, China. GM1 was dosed at 60 mg daily for every 3 weeks or 40 mg daily for every 2 weeks. Seven- and fourteen- day infusions were administered to concurrent oxaliplatin users and oxaliplatin discontinuation patients, respectively. The primary endpoint was the relief of neurotoxicity (≥30% improvement), measured by a newly developed patient reported outcome measure (MCIPN) based on prior questionnaires including the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Chemotherapy Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Questionnaire twenty-item scale. Visual analogue score (VAS) was used as another instrument for patients to evaluate the total Chronic OIPN treatment effect. VAS responders (≥30% improvement), double responders (≥30% improvement in both MCIPN and VAS), and high responders (≥50% improvement in the MCIPN total score) were also calculated. The secondary endpoints were safety and quality of life. The additional endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS), disease-free survival (DFS), overall survival (OS), and tumour response. (Trial registration number: NCT02486198 at ClinicalTrials.gov).

FINDINGS

Between May 2015 to December 2017, 145 patients were randomly assigned to receive either GM1 (n=73) and placebo (n=72). Majority of the patients in both arms (90% in GM1 and 83% in placebo) continued receiving oxaliplatin on the trial. More patients responded in the GM1 group than in the placebo group (MCIPN responders: 53% vs 14%, VAS responders: 49% vs 22%, double responders: 41% vs 7%, and high responders: 32% vs 13%, all P < ·01). Analyses were also performed in concurrent oxaliplatin users. The results were consistent with those of the whole group. No deleterious effects of GM1 on survival or tumour response were found. There were no ≥G3 GM1-related adverse events.

INTERPRETATION

In patients with chronic OIPN, the use of GM1 reduces the severity of chronic OIPN compared with placebo.

FUNDING

This work was supported by clinical trial development fund of Tianjin Medical University Cancer Institute and Hospital (No.C1706).

Ganglioside Monosialic Acid Alleviates Peripheral Neuropathy Induced by Utidelone Plus Capecitabine in Metastatic Breast Cancer From a Phase III Clinical Trial

Purpose

This study aimed to assess the efficacy of utidelone, a novel genetically engineered epothilone analog, combined with capecitabine in our center and, furthermore, to identify whether ganglioside monosialic acid (GM1) improved chemotherapy-induced peripheral neurotoxicity (CIPN).

Methods

Fifty-five eligible female patients with metastatic breast cancer were enrolled in our single-center phase III BG01-1323L trial. Utidelone combined with capecitabine-induced peripheral neuropathy was analyzed, and susceptible genes were detected in a germline panel by next-generation sequencing (NGS).

Results

In our single-center study, median progression-free survival and overall survival (OS) improved in the utidelone plus capecitabine group (mPFS: 238 vs. 189 days, P = 0.263; OS: 20.9 vs. 12.9 months, P = 0.326). The median time to severe CIPN reported was 29 days in grade 1, 49 days in grade 2, and 103 days in grade 3. Greatly longer improvement time was indicated in grade 1 (77 vs. 20 days in grade 2, 13 days in grade 3). In the combined group, 19 patients with G2 or G3 CIPN were assigned to the GM1 group and 9 patients to the control group. After intervention, the GM1 group was reported to demonstrate a statistically lower incidence of grade 3 CIPN [GM1 group: 1 of 19 (5.3%); control group: 4 of 9 (44.4%), P = 0.026]. However, there were no statistically significant differences in germline single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) between grade 3 and grade 1 CIPN cohorts.

Conclusion

Ganglioside monosialic acid potentially decreases severe utidelone plus capecitabine-induced peripheral neuropathy in metastatic breast cancer, and further investigation is needed to validate the manageable efficacy of GM1 in CIPN.

Clinical Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT02253459.

Antioxidant Supplementation in the Treatment of Neurotoxicity Induced by Platinum-Based Chemotherapeutics-A Review

Cancer represents one of the most pernicious public health problems with a high mortality rate among patients worldwide. Chemotherapy is one of the major therapeutic approaches for the treatment of various malignancies. Platinum-based drugs (cisplatin, oxaliplatin, carboplatin, etc.) are highly effective chemotherapeutic drugs used for the treatment of several types of malignancies, but their application and dosage are limited by their toxic effects on various systems, including neurotoxicity. Simultaneously, researchers have tried to improve the survival rate and quality of life of cancer patients and decrease the toxicity of platinum-containing drugs by combining them with non-chemotherapy-based drugs, dietary supplements and/or antioxidants. Additionally, recent studies have shown that the root cause for the many side effects of platinum chemotherapeutics involves the production of reactive oxygen species (ROS) in naive cells. Therefore, suppression of ROS generation and their inactivation with antioxidants represents an appropriate approach for platinum drug-induced toxicities. The aim of this paper is to present an updated review of the protective effects of different antioxidant agents (vitamins, dietary antioxidants and supplements, medicaments, medicinal plants and their bioactive compounds) against the neurotoxicity induced by platinum-based chemotherapeutics. This review highlights the high potential of plant antioxidants as adjuvant strategies in chemotherapy with platinum drugs.

Phase III randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind study of monosialotetrahexosylganglioside for the prevention of oxaliplatin-induced peripheral neurotoxicity in stage II/III colorectal cancer

Background

Monosialotetrahexosylganglioside (GM1) is a neuroprotective glycosphingolipid that repairs nerves. Oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy is neurotoxic. This study assessed the efficacy of GM1 for preventing oxaliplatin‐induced peripheral neurotoxicity (OIPN) in colorectal cancer (CRC) patients receiving oxaliplatin‐based chemotherapy.

Methods

In total, 196 patients with stage II/III CRC undergoing adjuvant chemotherapy with mFOLFOX6 were randomly assigned to intravenous GM1 or a placebo. The primary endpoint was the rate of grade 2 or worse cumulative neurotoxicity (NCI‐CTCAE). The secondary endpoints were chronic cumulative neurotoxicity (EORTCQLQ‐CIPN20), time to grade 2 neurotoxicity (NCI‐CTCAE or the oxaliplatin‐specific neuropathy scale), acute neurotoxicity (analog scale), rates of dose reduction or withdrawal due to OIPN, 3‐year disease‐free survival (DFS) and adverse events.

Results

There were no significant differences between the arms in the rate of NCI‐CTCAE grade 2 or worse neurotoxicity (GM1: 33.7% vs placebo: 31.6%; P = .76) or neuropathy measured by the EORTCQLQ‐CIPN20 or time to grade 2 neurotoxicity using NCI‐CTCAE and the oxaliplatin‐specific neuropathy scale. GM1 substantially decreased participant‐reported acute neurotoxicity (sensitivity to cold items [P < .01], discomfort swallowing cold liquids [P < .01], throat discomfort [P < .01], muscle cramps [P < .01]). The rates of dose reduction or withdrawal were not significantly different between the arms (P = .08). The 3‐year DFS rates were 85% and 83% in the GM1 and placebo arms, respectively (P = .19). There were no differences in toxicity between the arms.

Conclusion

Patients receiving GM1 were less troubled by the symptoms of acute neuropathy. However, we do not support the use of GM1 to prevent cumulative neurotoxicity. (http://ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02251977).

Recent Developments of Novel Pharmacologic Therapeutics for Prevention of Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a common and dose-limiting toxicity, negatively affecting both quality of life and disease outcomes. To date, there is no proven preventative strategy for CIPN. Although multiple randomized trials have evaluated a variety of pharmacologic interventions for the treatment of CIPN, only duloxetine has shown clear efficacy in a phase III study. The National Cancer Institute's Symptom Management and Health-Related Quality of Life Steering Committee has identified CIPN as a priority for translational research in cancer care. Promising advances in preclinical research have identified several novel preventative and therapeutic targets, which have the potential to transform the care of patients with this debilitating neurotoxicity. Here, we provide an overarching view of emerging strategies and therapeutic targets that are currently being evaluated in CIPN.

Integrative Herbal Medicine for Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy and Hand-Foot Syndrome in Colorectal Cancer: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objectives: To assess the clinical evidence for integrative herbal medicine therapy in the management of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) and hand-foot syndrome (HFS) resulting from treatments for colorectal cancer (CRC). Design: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were identified from major English and Chinese databases. Participants had been diagnosed with CRC by pathology and had received or were undergoing chemotherapy. Interventions included herbal medicines administered orally or topically. Controls were placebo, supportive care or conventional chemotherapy for CRC. Methods followed the Cochrane handbook. Meta-analyses were grouped by study design, outcome measure, severity, and chemotherapy. Random-effects models with 95% confidence intervals were used. Heterogeneity was assessed as I². Results: Sixty-three RCTs (4286 participants) were included. Five used a placebo in the control groups. Fifty-eight studies tested oral herbal medicine, and 5 tested topical herbal medicine. Data were available for CIPN (60 studies) and HFS (12 studies). Fifty-seven studies combined orally administered herbal medicine with chemotherapy compared with the same chemotherapy. For CIPN, 33 studies used World Health Organization (WHO) criteria, 7 used Levi’s criteria, and 10 used the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE). These were analyzed separately. For grades III + IV CIPN, there was a significant reduction in the integrative groups for WHO (relative risk [RR] 0.42 [0.23, 0.77], I² = 0%) and Levi’s (RR 0.28 [0.11, 0.69], I² = 0%) but not NCI-CTCAE (RR 0.65 [0.37, 1.13], I² = 26.4%). Hand and foot baths showed no differences for Levi’s grades III + IV CIPN but a significant reduction in all grades (RR 0.69 [0.50, 0.95], I² = 68.8%). For HFS (all grades) there was a significant reduction in the integrative groups for WHO (RR 0.62 [0.41, 0.96], I² = 22%) but not for NCI-CTCAE (RR 0.93 [0.55, 1.55], I² = 75.7%). Sensitivity analyses explored sources of heterogeneity. Conclusions: Integrative herbal therapy appeared to reduce CIPN and HFS in people receiving chemotherapy for CRC. However, the strength of the evidence was limited by lack of blinding in most studies, potential for bias, and relatively short study durations.

Penetration of blood-brain barrier and antitumor activity and nerve repair in glioma by doxorubicin-loaded monosialoganglioside micelles system

For the treatment of glioma and other central nervous system diseases, one of the biggest challenges is that most therapeutic drugs cannot be delivered to the brain tumor tissue due to the blood–brain barrier (BBB). The goal of this study was to construct a nanodelivery vehicle system with capabilities to overcome the BBB for central nervous system administration. Doxorubicin as a model drug encapsulated in ganglioside GM1 micelles was able to achieve up to 9.33% loading efficiency and 97.05% encapsulation efficiency by orthogonal experimental design. The in vitro study demonstrated a slow and sustainable drug release in physiological conditions. In the cellular uptake studies, mixed micelles could effectively transport into both human umbilical vein endothelial cells and C6 cells. Furthermore, biodistribution imaging of mice showed that the DiR/GM1 mixed micelles were accumulated sustainably and distributed centrally in the brain. Experiments on zebrafish confirmed that drug-loaded GM1 micelles can overcome the BBB and enter the brain. Among all the treatment groups, the median survival time of C6-bearing rats after administering DOX/GM1 micelles was significantly prolonged. In conclusion, the ganglioside nanomicelles developed in this work can not only penetrate BBB effectively but also repair nerves and kill tumor cells at the same time.

Oxaliplatin-induced neurotoxicity is mediated through gap junction channels and hemichannels and can be prevented by octanol

Oxaliplatin-induced neurotoxicity (OIN) is a common complication of chemotherapy without effective treatment. In order to clarify the mechanisms of both acute and chronic OIN, we used an ex-vivo mouse sciatic nerve model. Exposure to 25 μM oxaliplatin caused a marked prolongation in the duration of the nerve evoked compound action potential (CAP) by nearly 1200% within 300 min while amplitude remained constant for over 20 h. This oxaliplatin effect was almost completely reversed by the gap junction (GJ) inhibitor octanol in a concentration-dependent manner. Further GJ blockers showed similar effects although with a narrower therapeutic window. To clarify the target molecule we studied sciatic nerves from connexin32 (Cx32) and Cx29 knockout (KO) mice. The oxaliplatin effect and neuroprotection by octanol partially persisted in Cx29 better than in Cx32 KO nerves, suggesting that oxaliplatin affects both, but Cx32 GJ channels more than Cx29 hemichannels. Oxaliplatin also accelerated neurobiotin uptake in HeLa cells expressing the human ortholog of Cx29, Cx31.3, as well as dye transfer between cells expressing the human Cx32, and this effect was blocked by octanol. Oxaliplatin caused no morphological changes initially (up to 3 h of exposure), but prolonged nerve exposure caused juxtaparonodal axonal edema, which was prevented by octanol. Our study indicates that oxaliplatin causes forced opening of Cx32 channels and Cx29 hemichannels in peripheral myelinated fibers leading to disruption of axonal K(+) homeostasis. The GJ blocker octanol prevents OIN at very low concentrations and should be further studied as a neuroprotectant.

Interventions for preventing neuropathy caused by cisplatin and related compounds

BACKGROUND

Cisplatin and several related antineoplastic drugs used to treat many types of solid tumours are neurotoxic, and most patients completing a full course of cisplatin chemotherapy develop a clinically detectable sensory neuropathy. Effective neuroprotective therapies have been sought.

OBJECTIVES

To examine the efficacy and safety of purported chemoprotective agents to prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related drugs.

SEARCH METHODS

On 4 March 2013, we searched the Cochrane Neuromuscular Disease Group Specialized Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, LILACS, and CINAHL Plus for randomised trials designed to evaluate neuroprotective agents used to prevent or limit neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related drugs among human patients.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs in which the participants received chemotherapy with cisplatin or related compounds, with a potential chemoprotectant (acetylcysteine, amifostine, adrenocorticotrophic hormone (ACTH), BNP7787, calcium and magnesium (Ca/Mg), diethyldithiocarbamate (DDTC), glutathione, Org 2766, oxcarbazepine, or vitamin E) compared to placebo, no treatment, or other treatments. We considered trials in which participants underwent evaluation zero to six months after completing chemotherapy using quantitative sensory testing (the primary outcome) or other measures including nerve conduction studies or neurological impairment rating using validated scales (secondary outcomes).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors assessed each study, extracted the data and reached consensus, according to standard Cochrane methodology.

MAIN RESULTS

As of 2013, the review includes 29 studies describing nine possible chemoprotective agents, as well as description of two published meta-analyses. Among these trials, there were sufficient data in some instances to combine the results from different studies, most often using data from secondary non-quantitative measures. Nine of the studies were newly included at this update. Few of the included studies were at a high risk of bias overall, although often there was too little information to make an assessment. At least two review authors performed a formal review of an additional 44 articles but we did not include them in the final review for a variety of reasons.Of seven eligible amifostine trials (743 participants in total), one used quantitative sensory testing (vibration perception threshold) and demonstrated a favourable outcome in terms of amifostine neuroprotection, but the vibration perception threshold result was based on data from only 14 participants receiving amifostine who completed the post-treatment evaluation and should be regarded with caution. Furthermore the change measured was subclinical. None of the three eligible Ca/Mg trials (or four trials if a single retrospective study was included) described our primary outcome measures. The four Ca/Mg trials included a total of 886 participants. Of the seven eligible glutathione trials (387 participants), one used quantitative sensory testing but reported only qualitative analyses. Four eligible Org 2766 trials (311 participants) employed quantitative sensory testing but reported disparate results; meta-analyses of three of these trials using comparable measures showed no significant vibration perception threshold neuroprotection. The remaining trial reported only descriptive analyses. Similarly, none of the three eligible vitamin E trials (246 participants) reported quantitative sensory testing. The eligible single trials involving acetylcysteine (14 participants), diethyldithiocarbamate (195 participants), oxcarbazepine (32 participants), and retinoic acid (92 participants) did not perform quantitative sensory testing. In all, this review includes data from 2906 participants. However, only seven trials reported data for the primary outcome measure of this review, (quantitative sensory testing) and only nine trials reported our objective secondary measure, nerve conduction test results. Additionally, methodological heterogeneity precluded pooling of the results in most cases. Nonetheless, a larger number of trials reported the results of secondary (non-quantitative and subjective) measures such as the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria (NCI-CTC) for neuropathy (15 trials), and these results we pooled and reported as meta-analysis. Amifostine showed a significantly reduced risk of developing neurotoxicity NCI-CTC (or equivalent) ≥ 2 compared to placebo (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.61). Glutathione was also efficacious with an RR of 0.29 (95% CI 0.10 to 0.85). In three vitamin E studies subjective measures not suitable for combination in meta analysis each favoured vitamin E. For other interventions the qualitative toxicity measures were either negative (N-acetyl cysteine, Ca/Mg, DDTC and retinoic acid) or not evaluated (oxcarbazepine and Org 2766).Adverse events were infrequent or not reported for most interventions. Amifostine was associated with transient hypotension in 8% to 62% of participants, retinoic acid with hypocalcaemia in 11%, and approximately 20% of participantss withdrew from treatment with DDTC because of toxicity.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

At present, the data are insufficient to conclude that any of the purported chemoprotective agents (acetylcysteine, amifostine, calcium and magnesium, diethyldithiocarbamate, glutathione, Org 2766, oxcarbazepine, retinoic acid, or vitamin E) prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of platin drugs among human patients, as determined using quantitative, objective measures of neuropathy. Amifostine, calcium and magnesium, glutathione, and vitamin E showed modest but promising (borderline statistically significant) results favouring their ability to reduce the neurotoxicity of cisplatin and related chemotherapies, as measured using secondary, non-quantitative and subjective measures such as the NCI-CTC neuropathy grading scale. Among these interventions, the efficacy of only vitamin E was evaluated using quantitative nerve conduction studies; the results were negative and did not support the positive findings based on the qualitative measures. In summary, the present studies are limited by the small number of participants receiving any particular agent, a lack of objective measures of neuropathy, and differing results among similar trials, which make it impossible to conclude that any of the neuroprotective agents tested prevent or limit the neurotoxicity of platinum drugs.