Treosulfan chemotherapy for recurrent malignant glioma

Complications from pharmacotherapy

The pharmacotherapy management of cancers of the nervous system has significant overlap with systemic solid cancers that may utilize similar drugs or agents. There is however a unique aspect related to central nervous system (CNS) cancers where therapies directed against a malignant process may have enhanced toxicities or toxicities unique to the CNS. In addition, many agents used to treat CNS malignancies have unique CNS toxicities that may require a specific intervention. This chapter attempts to review conventional and biologic therapies utilized for CNS malignancies and characterize expected and, if known, unique toxicities.

Transport of treosulfan and temozolomide across an in-vitro blood-brain barrier model

In vitro, treosulfan (TREO) has shown high effectiveness against malignant gliomas. However, a first clinical trial for newly diagnosed glioblastoma did not show any positive effect. Even though dosing and timing might have been the reasons for this failure, it might also be that TREO does not reach the brain in sufficient amount. Surprisingly, there are no published data on TREO uptake into the brain of patients, despite extensive research on this compound. An in-vitro blood-brain barrier (BBB) model consisting of primary porcine brain capillary endothelial cells was used to determine the transport of TREO across the cell monolayer. Temozolomide (TMZ), the most widely used cytotoxic drug for malignant gliomas, served as a reference. An HPLC-ESI-MS/MS procedure was developed to detect TREO and TMZ in cell culture medium. Parallel to the experimental approach, the permeability of TREO and the reference substance across the in-vitro BBB was estimated on the basis of their physicochemical properties. The detection limit was 30 nmol/l for TREO and 10 nmol/l for TMZ. Drug transport was measured in two directions: influx, apical-to-basolateral (A-to-B), and efflux, basolateral-to-apical (B-to-A). For TREO, the A-to-B permeability was lower (1.6%) than the B-to-A permeability (3.0%). This was in contrast to TMZ, which had higher A-to-B (13.1%) than B-to-A (7.2%) permeability values. The in-vitro BBB model applied simulated the human BBB properly for TMZ. It is, therefore, reasonable to assume that the values for TREO are also meaningful. Considering the lack of noninvasive, significant alternative methods to study transport across the BBB, the porcine brain capillary endothelial cell model was efficient to collect first data for TREO that explain the disappointing clinical results for this drug against cerebral tumors.

Can in-vitro chemoresponse assays help find new treatment regimens for malignant gliomas?

Various in-vitro chemosensitivity and resistance assays (CSRAs) have been demonstrated to be helpful decision aids for non-neurological tumors. Here, we evaluated the performance characteristics of two CSRAs for glioblastoma (GB) cells. The chemoresponse of fresh GB cells from 30 patients was studied in vitro using the ATP tumor chemoresponse assay and the chemotherapy resistance assay (CTR-Test). Both assay platforms provided comparable results. Of seven different chemotherapeutic drugs and drug combinations tested in vitro, treosulfan plus cytarabine (TARA) was the most effective, followed by nimustine (ACNU) plus teniposide (VM26) and temozolomide (TMZ). Whereas ACNU/VM26 and TMZ have proven their clinical value for malignant gliomas in large randomized studies, TARA has not been successful in newly diagnosed gliomas. This seeming discrepancy between in vitro and clinical result might be explained by the pharmacological behavior of treosulfan. Our results show reasonable agreement between two cell-based CSRAs. They appear to confirm the clinical effectiveness of drugs used in GB treatment as long as pharmacological preconditions such as overcoming the blood-brain barrier are properly considered.

Treosulfan is an effective inducer of cell death in myeloma cell lines and primary myeloma cells from patients

Multiple myeloma is a non-curable haematological disease involving transformed plasma cells. High rates of complete remission can be achieved with autologous peripheral blood stem cell transplantation. Treosulfan is an alkylating substance that has been used in the treatment of ovarian carcinomas for many years. It has a favourable side-effect profile even at high-dose protocols. Thus, the objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of treosulfan on myeloma cells. The treatment of the myeloma cell lines, NCI-H929 and U266, with treosulfan led to apoptosis in both cell lines in a dose- and time-dependent manner. The induction of apoptosis was accompanied by cleavage of caspases -3 and -9 as well as downregulation of the antiapoptotic protein Mcl-1 and upregulation of the inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases, p21WAF1/CIP1. Furthermore, 100 micro mol/l treosulfan was capable of inducing cell death in 63.6 +/- 23.9% of primary myeloma cells, whereas treatment with the same concentration of melphalan showed 59.7 +/- 26% cell death. These in vitro concentrations were at least 10-fold lower than achievable plasma levels, even at conventional doses of treosulfan. Our results suggest that treosulfan might be an appropriate candidate for novel treatment protocols for patients with multiple myeloma.

Neoadjuvant gemcitabine/treosulfan chemotherapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma: a phase II study

The median survival for patients with glioblastoma is 12 months. The authors evaluated whether preirradiation gemcitabine/treosulfan (GeT) chemotherapy followed by standard radiotherapy improved outcome in patients with glioblastoma. Seventeen patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma were enrolled in a prospective, unicenter trial of preirradiation GeT chemotherapy. Chemotherapy included up to 4 cycles of intravenous gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 body surface) and treosulfan (3500 mg/m2 body surface) on days 1 and 8 of 28 days treatment cycles. Involved field radiotherapy (60 Gy in 30 fractions) was given after chemotherapy or earlier in the case of disease progression or drug intolerance. There was no specific treatment-related neurotoxicity reported, but in 3 of 17 patients (18%) chemotherapy was stopped because of World Health Organization (WHO) IV hematological toxicity. With GeT chemotherapy alone, there was a median progression-free survival of 12 weeks and a progression-free survival rate at 4 months of 29%. In 16 of 17 patients who subsequently received a full course of radiotherapy, the median progression-free survival from the time of diagnosis was 8 months, and the progression-free survival rate at 12 months was 25% (4 of 16 patients). The median overall survival was 12 months. Neither age nor extent of the residual postoperative tumor predicted the duration of progression-free survival after chemotherapy alone or after chemotherapy followed by radiotherapy. The combination of gemcitabine and treosulfan produced significant hematological toxicity in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma. The schedule used in the present study did not confer any significant survival advantage compared with standard involved field radiotherapy alone.