No relation between docetaxel administration route and high-grade diarrhea incidence

Oral administration of docetaxel in combination with the CYP3A4 inhibitor ritonavir is used in clinical trials to improve oral bioavailability of docetaxel. Diarrhea was the most commonly observed and dose-limiting toxicity. This study combined preclinical and clinical data and investigated incidence, severity and cause of oral docetaxel-induced diarrhea. In this study, incidence and severity of diarrhea in patients were compared to exposure to orally administered docetaxel. Intestinal toxicity after oral or intraperitoneal administration of docetaxel was further explored in mice lacking Cyp3a and mice lacking both Cyp3a and P-glycoprotein. In patients, severity of diarrhea increased significantly with an increase in AUC and Cmax (P = .035 and P = .025, respectively), but not with an increase in the orally administered dose (P = .11). Furthermore, incidence of grade 3/4 diarrhea after oral docetaxel administration was similar as reported after intravenous docetaxel administration. Intestinal toxicity in mice was only observed at high systemic exposure to docetaxel and was similar after oral and intraperitoneal administration of docetaxel. In conclusion, our data show that the onset of severe diarrhea after oral administration of docetaxel in humans is similar after oral and intravenous administration of docetaxel and is caused by the concentration of docetaxel in the systemic blood circulation. Mouse experiments confirmed that intestinal toxicity is caused by a high systemic exposure and not by local intestinal exposure. Severe diarrhea in patients after oral docetaxel is reversible and is not related to the route of administration of docetaxel.

A Population Pharmacokinetic Model of Oral Docetaxel Coadministered With Ritonavir to Support Early Clinical Development

Oral administration of docetaxel is an attractive alternative for conventional intravenous (IV) administration. The low bioavailability of docetaxel, however, hinders the application of oral docetaxel in the clinic. The aim of the current study was to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model for docetaxel and ritonavir based on the phase 1 studies and to support drug development of this combination treatment. PK data were collected from 191 patients who received IV docetaxel and different oral docetaxel formulations (drinking solution, ModraDoc001 capsule, and ModraDoc006 tablet) coadministered with ritonavir. A PK model was first developed for ritonavir. Subsequently, a semiphysiological PK model was developed for docetaxel, which incorporated the inhibition of docetaxel metabolism by ritonavir. The uninhibited intrinsic clearance of docetaxel was estimated based on data on IV docetaxel as 1980 L/h (relative standard error, 11%). Ritonavir coadministration extensively inhibited the hepatic metabolism of docetaxel to 9.3%, which resulted in up to 12-fold higher docetaxel plasma concentrations compared to oral docetaxel coadministered without ritonavir. In conclusion, a semiphysiological PK model for docetaxel and ritonavir was successfully developed. Coadministration of ritonavir resulted in increased plasma concentrations of docetaxel after administration of the oral formulations of ModraDoc. Furthermore, the oral ModraDoc formulations showed lower variability in plasma concentrations between and within patients compared to the drinking solution. Comparable exposure could be reached with the oral ModraDoc formulations compared to IV administration.

Development of a Tumour Growth Inhibition Model to Elucidate the Effects of Ritonavir on Intratumoural Metabolism and Anti-tumour Effect of Docetaxel in a Mouse Model for Hereditary Breast Cancer

In a mouse tumour model for hereditary breast cancer, we previously explored the anti-cancer effects of docetaxel, ritonavir and the combination of both and studied the effect of ritonavir on the intratumoural concentration of docetaxel. The objective of the current study was to apply pharmacokinetic (PK)-pharmacodynamic (PD) modelling on this previous study to further elucidate and quantify the effects of docetaxel when co-administered with ritonavir. PK models of docetaxel and ritonavir in plasma and in tumour were developed. The effect of ritonavir on docetaxel concentration in the systemic circulation of Cyp3a knock-out mice and in the implanted tumour (with inherent Cyp3a expression) was studied, respectively. Subsequently, we designed a tumour growth inhibition model that included the inhibitory effects of both docetaxel and ritonavir. Ritonavir decreased docetaxel systemic clearance with 8% (relative standard error 0.4%) in the co-treated group compared to that in the docetaxel only-treated group. The docetaxel concentration in tumour tissues was significantly increased by ritonavir with mean area under the concentration-time curve 2.5-fold higher when combined with ritonavir. Observed tumour volume profiles in mice could be properly described by the PK/PD model. In the co-treated group, the enhanced anti-tumour effect was mainly due to increased docetaxel tumour concentration; however, we demonstrated a small but significant anti-tumour effect of ritonavir addition (p value <0.001). In conclusion, we showed that the increased anti-tumour effect observed when docetaxel is combined with ritonavir is mainly caused by enhanced docetaxel tumour concentration and to a minor extent by a direct anti-tumour effect of ritonavir.