Phase I study of 3-week schedule of irinotecan combined with cisplatin in patients with advanced solid tumors

Individualization of Irinotecan Treatment: A Review of Pharmacokinetics, Pharmacodynamics, and Pharmacogenetics

Since its clinical introduction in 1998, the topoisomerase I inhibitor irinotecan has been widely used in the treatment of solid tumors, including colorectal, pancreatic, and lung cancer. Irinotecan therapy is characterized by several dose-limiting toxicities and large interindividual pharmacokinetic variability. Irinotecan has a highly complex metabolism, including hydrolyzation by carboxylesterases to its active metabolite SN-38, which is 100- to 1000-fold more active compared with irinotecan itself. Several phase I and II enzymes, including cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase (UGT) 1A, are involved in the formation of inactive metabolites, making its metabolism prone to environmental and genetic influences. Genetic variants in the DNA of these enzymes and transporters could predict a part of the drug-related toxicity and efficacy of treatment, which has been shown in retrospective and prospective trials and meta-analyses. Patient characteristics, lifestyle and comedication also influence irinotecan pharmacokinetics. Other factors, including dietary restriction, are currently being studied. Meanwhile, a more tailored approach to prevent excessive toxicity and optimize efficacy is warranted. This review provides an updated overview on today’s literature on irinotecan pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacogenetics.

Renal function as a predictor of irinotecan-induced neutropenia

Although approximately half of the administered dose of irinotecan is recovered in urine, scarce data are available on the association of renal function with irinotecan pharmacokinetics and toxicity. Here, these relationships are investigated in 187 patients treated with irinotecan in a three-weekly schedule. No significant effects on irinotecan pharmacokinetics were found in these patients. However, in 131 patients treated with the registered dose, categorized renal function was related to hematological toxicity. The incidence of grade 3-4 neutropenia decreased as function of creatinine clearance, particularly in nonsmoking patients (P < 0.01). Patients with slower creatinine clearance (35-66 ml/min) had a four-times higher risk of grade 3-4 neutropenia (58% vs. 14%; P < 0.001). This study suggests that pretreatment renal function values are associated with irinotecan-induced neutropenia. A confirmatory analysis is warranted to determine whether measures of renal function should be incorporated in future attempts toward individualized treatment with irinotecan.

Integrated pharmacogenetic prediction of irinotecan pharmacokinetics and toxicity in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer

To define an integrated pharmacogenetic model for predicting irinotecan pharmacokinetic (PK) and severe toxicity, we evaluated multivariate analysis using 15 polymorphisms within seven genes with putative influence on metabolism and transport of irinotecan. A total of 107 NSCLC patients treated with irinotecan were evaluated for PK and genotyped for the UGT1A1*6, UGT1A1*28, UGT1A9*22, ABCB11236C>T, 2677G>T/A, 3435C>T, ABCC2-24C>T, 1249G>A, 3972C>T, ABCG234G>A, 421C>A, and SLCO1B1 -11187G>A, 388A>G, and 521T>C, and CYP3A5*3 polymorphisms. Multivariate linear and logistic regression analyses including genotypes and clinicopathologic factors were performed. SN-38 AUC was significantly correlated with ANCs (r=-0.3, p=0.009) and grade 4 neutropenia (p=0.01). The UGT1A1*6/*6, UGT1A9*1/*1 or *1/*22, and SLCO1B1 521TC or CC genotypes, and female-gender were predictive for higher AUC(SN-38) in multivariate analysis. Among them, SLCO1B1 521TC or CC and UGT1A1*6/*6 genotypes were independently predictive for grade 4 neutropenia in multivariate analysis (OR=3.8 and 7.4, respectively). Although no significant association was observed between PK parameters and grade 3 diarrhea, UGT1A9*1/*1, ABCC23972CC, and ABCG234GA or AA genotypes were independently predictive for grade 3 diarrhea in multivariate analysis (OR=6.3, 5.6, and 5.1, respectively). Patient selection based on integrated pharmacogenetic model would be helpful for predicting irinotecan-PK and severe toxicities in NSCLC patients.

Cigarette smoking and irinotecan treatment: pharmacokinetic interaction and effects on neutropenia

PURPOSE

Several constituents of cigarette smoke are known to interact with drug metabolizing enzymes and potentially affect treatment outcome with substrate drugs. The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of cigarette smoking on the pharmacokinetics and adverse effects of irinotecan.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A total of 190 patients (49 smokers, 141 nonsmokers) treated with irinotecan (90-minute intravenous administration on a 3-week schedule) were evaluated for pharmacokinetics. Complete toxicity data were available in a subset of 134 patients receiving 350 mg/m2 or 600 mg flat-fixed dose irinotecan.

RESULTS

In smokers, the dose-normalized area under the plasma concentration-time curve of irinotecan was significantly lower (median, 28.7 v 33.9 ng x h/mL/mg; P = .001) compared with nonsmokers. In addition, smokers showed an almost 40% lower exposure to SN-38 (median, 0.54 v 0.87 ng x h/mL/mg; P < .001) and a higher relative extent of glucuronidation of SN-38 into SN-38G (median, 6.6 v 4.5; P = .006). Smokers experienced considerably less hematologic toxicity. In particular, the incidence of grade 3 to 4 neutropenia was 6% in smokers versus 38% in nonsmokers (odds ratio [OR], 0.10; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.43; P < .001). There was no significant difference in incidence of delayed-onset diarrhea (6% v 15%; OR, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.07 to 1.57; P = .149).

CONCLUSION

This study indicates that smoking significantly lowers both the exposure to irinotecan and treatment-induced neutropenia, indicating a potential risk of treatment failure. Although the underlying mechanism is not entirely clear, modulation of CYP3A and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase isoform 1A1 may be part of the explanation. The data suggest that additional investigation is warranted to determine whether smokers are at increased risk for treatment failure.

Pooled efficacy analysis from a phase I-II study of biweekly irinotecan in combination with gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and cisplatin in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer

Development of treatments to improve the outcomes achieved with single-agent gemcitabine therapy for metastatic pancreatic cancer remains a research priority. G-FLIP (gemcitabine, 5-fluorouracil, leucovorin and cisplatin) is a four-drug regimen designed to maximize sequence-dependent synergy, while attempting to minimize toxicity among the four drugs. The dose-limiting toxicities and maximum tolerated dose of irinotecan as part of the G-FLIP regimen have been published. For phase II testing, G-FLIP consisted of sequential gemcitabine 500 mg/m2 at a fixed rate of 10 mg/m2/min, irinotecan 120 mg/m2, bolus 5-fluorouracil 400 mg/m2 and leucovorin 300 mg, followed by a 24-h 5-fluorouracil infusion of 1500 mg/m2 on day 1 and cisplatin 35 mg/m2 on day 2. Cycles were repeated every 14 days. Thirty-three patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer (22 men and 11 women) were treated and 31 were evaluable. Median patient age was 63 years (range 44-78 years) and median Karnofsky performance status score was 70-80. Estimated median time to disease progression was 171 days (6.1 months) and Kaplan-Meir-estimated median overall survival was 229 days (8.1 months). Twelve- and 18-month survivals were 33 and 21%, respectively. As per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors criteria, 13 patients had stable disease, seven (22%) attained a partial response, and 10 (32%) had disease progression. One patient attained a complete response and two were not evaluable (one withdrew consent and one died suddenly, each after cycle 1). Treatment generally was well tolerated. Grade 3-4 toxicities/patient were thrombocytopenia (3.1%), leukopenia (15%), neutropenia (21%), neutropenic fever (3%), fatigue (18%) and thrombosis (12.5%). Common grade 1-2 toxicities per patient included nausea/vomiting (69%), diarrhea (45%), constipation (21%) and fatigue (39%). In conclusion, G-FLIP is a feasible outpatient regimen with acceptable toxicity for metastatic pancreatic cancer patients. Disease control rate (stable disease rate plus partial or complete responses) and 1-year survival outcomes are encouraging.

Human primary renal cells as a model for toxicity assessment of chemo-therapeutic drugs

Chemo-therapeutic drugs act on cancerous and normal cells non-selectively and often cause organ impairments during treatment. Improving safety or reducing toxicity becomes an important challenge for developing better anticancer drugs. In the present study, effects of selected anticancer drugs (camptothecin, doxorubicin, colchicine, paclitaxel, cisplatin, and carboplatin) on cell viability and proliferation was investigated. The anti-proliferative activity of each drug on cancer cells (human hepatoma HepG2) and human primary renal proximal tubule cells (hRPTECs and LLC-PK1) was determined with the [(3)H]thymidine incorporation assay. Results indicated all six drugs blocked cell proliferation in cancer and normal cells. When the anti-proliferation potency was ranked in hRPTECs based on EC50 values, camptothecin is the most potent, followed by doxorubicin, paclitaxel, colchicine, cisplatin and carboplatin. Cytotoxicity of drugs to hRPTECs was assessed with the ATP bioluminescence assay. Doxorubicin and cisplatin were known to induce nephrotoxicity in vivo and they were indeed cytotoxic to hRPTECs in our study with EC50 values at 11.2 and 39.6 microM. All other drugs are not cytotoxic in the concentrations tested. These drugs typically displayed separation of EC50s between potency (anti-proliferation) and cytotoxicity. The dose separation provides a concentration range for each drug to act on cell proliferation without induction of significant cytotoxicity. Our results suggest that hRPTEC system can serve as an in vitro model for assessing potential nephrotoxicity of chemo-therapeutic drugs.

A pilot study on the safety of combining chrysin, a non-absorbable inducer of UGT1A1, and irinotecan (CPT-11) to treat metastatic colorectal cancer

PURPOSE

Recently, it was shown that chrysin causes upregulation of UGT1A1 in Caco-2 intestinal cells. Therefore, we proposed that oral chrysin may reduce irinotecan (CPT-11) induced diarrhoea by shifting the SN-38G/SN-38 equilibrium towards the inactive SN-38G in the gastrointestinal mucosa. The purpose of this study was to examine the safety of combining single agent CPT-11 with chrysin.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Twenty patients with previously treated advanced colorectal cancer were administered chrysin twice daily for 1 week preceding and succeeding treatment with single agent CPT-11 (350 mg/m(2) over 90 min every 3 weeks). Loperamide usage and bowel frequency/consistency were recorded by patients into a study diary and blood samples were collected for CPT-11 pharmacokinetic analysis.

RESULTS

There were no observable toxicities that could be attributed to chrysin use. The grades and frequency of delayed diarrhoea were mild, with only 10% of patients experiencing grade 3 toxicity. Loperamide usage was also modest with a median of 1-5 tablets per cycle (range: 0-22). Pharmacokinetic results revealed a mass ratio of plasma SN-38G/SN-38, which was very similar to historical controls (7.15 +/- 5.67, n = 18).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings, combined with the observation of clinical activity and grade 3/4 neutropenia in 25% of patients, suggest that combining chrysin with CPT-11 may be a safe and potentially useful means of preventing diarrhoea, although this needs to be further investigated in the setting of a randomised trial.

Irinotecan in combination with 5-fluorouracil and folinic acid or with cisplatin in patients with advanced gastric or esophageal-gastric junction adenocarcinoma: results of a randomized phase II study

BACKGROUND

To identify the most effective of two combinations, irinotecan/5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/folinic acid (FA) and irinotecan/cisplatin, in the treatment of advanced gastric cancer, for investigation in a phase III trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive irinotecan [80 mg/m2 intravenously (i.v.)], FA (500 mg/m2 i.v.) and a 22-h infusion of 5-FU (2000 mg/m2 i.v.), weekly for 6 weeks with a 1-week rest, or irinotecan (200 mg/m2 i.v.) and cisplatin (60 mg/m2 i.v.), on day 1 for 3 weeks.

RESULTS

A total of 115 patients were eligible for analysis in the per-protocol population. The overall response rate in the irinotecan/5-FU/FA arm (n=59) was 42.4%, with a complete response rate of 5.1%. Corresponding figures for the irinotecan/cisplatin arm (n=56) were 32.1% and 1.8%, respectively. The median time to progression was 6.5 months (irinotecan/5-FU/FA) and 4.2 months (irinotecan/cisplatin) (P < 0.0001), with median survival times of 10.7 and 6.9 months, respectively (P=0.0018). The major toxicity was grade 3/4 neutropenia, which was more pronounced with irinotecan/cisplatin than with irinotecan/5-FU/FA (65.7% versus 27%). Diarrhea was the main grade 3/4 non-hematological toxicity with both irinotecan/5-FU/FA (27.0%) and irinotecan/cisplatin (18.1%).

CONCLUSIONS

Both combinations were active, with acceptable safety profiles. Irinotecan/5-FU/FA was selected as the most effective combination for investigation in a phase III trial in advanced gastric cancer.

Flat-fixed dosing of irinotecan: influence on pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic variability

PURPOSE

In a previous analysis, it was shown that body-surface area (BSA) is not a predictor of irinotecan pharmacokinetic parameters. Here, we prospectively evaluated the effects of administering a flat-fixed irinotecan dose to cancer patients, regardless of BSA.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Twenty-six cancer patients (12 females) received a fixed irinotecan dose of 600 mg, given as a 90-min i.v. infusion. Plasma concentrations of irinotecan and its metabolites SN-38 (7-ethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin) and SN-38G (SN-38 glucuronide) were measured during the first cycle and analyzed using nonlinear mixed-effect modeling. Data were compared with those obtained in 47 cancer patients (19 females) who received irinotecan at a BSA-normalized dose of 350 mg/m(2).

RESULTS

The interindividual variability in irinotecan clearance (25.9% versus 25.1%; P = 0.93), in relative extent of conversion to SN-38 (47.8% versus 42.7%; P = 0.24), and in relative extent of SN-38 glucuronidation (71.2% versus 72.4%; P = 0.95) were not significantly different between the two dose groups. Variance differences in irinotecan-mediated hematological side effects were also similar between the 600 mg and 350 mg/m(2) groups (P > 0.14).

CONCLUSIONS

These findings suggest that flat-fixed dosing of irinotecan does not result in increased pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic variability and could be safely used to supplant current dosing strategies based on BSA.

Prediction of irinotecan pharmacokinetics by use of cytochrome P450 3A4 phenotyping probes

BACKGROUND

Irinotecan is a topoisomerase I inhibitor that has been approved for use as a first- and second-line treatment for colorectal cancer. The response to irinotecan is variable, possibly because of interindividual variation in the expression of the enzymes that metabolize irinotecan, including cytochrome P450 3A4 (CYP3A4) and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase 1A1 (UGT1A1). We prospectively explored the relationships between CYP3A phenotype, as assessed by erythromycin metabolism and midazolam clearance, and the metabolism of irinotecan and its active metabolite SN-38.

METHODS

Of the 30 white cancer patients, 27 received at least two treatments with irinotecan administered as one 90-minute infusion (dose, 600 mg) with 3 weeks between treatments, and three received only one treatment. Before the first and second treatments, patients underwent an erythromycin breath test and a midazolam clearance test as phenotyping probes for CYP3A4. Erythromycin metabolism was assessed as the area under the curve for the flux of radioactivity in exhaled CO2 within 40 minutes after administration of [N-methyl-14C]erythromycin. Midazolam and irinotecan were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography. Genomic DNA was isolated from blood and screened for genetic variants in CYP3A4 and UGT1A1. All statistical tests were two-sided.

RESULTS

CYP3A4 activity varied sevenfold (range = 0.223%-1.53% of dose) among patients, whereas midazolam clearance varied fourfold (range = 262-1012 mL/min), although intraindividual variation was small. Erythromycin metabolism was not statistically significantly associated with irinotecan clearance (P = .090), whereas midazolam clearance was highly correlated with irinotecan clearance (r = .745, P<.001). In addition, the presence of a UGT1A1 variant with a (TA)7 repeat in the promoter (UGT1A1*28) was associated with increased exposure to SN-38 (435 ng x h/mL, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 339 to 531 ng x h/mL in patients who are homozygous for wild-type UGT1A1; 631 ng x h/mL, 95% CI = 499 to 762 ng . h/mL in heterozygous patients; and 1343 ng x h/mL, 95% CI = 0 to 4181 ng x h/mL in patients who are homozygous for UGT1A1*28) (P = .006).

CONCLUSION

CYP3A4 phenotype, as assessed by midazolam clearance, is statistically significantly associated with irinotecan pharmacokinetics. Evaluation of midazolam clearance combined with UGT1A1*28 genotyping may assist with optimization of irinotecan chemotherapy.

Phase II Study of Activated Charcoal to Prevent Irinotecan-Induced Diarrhea

Purpose

The dose-limiting toxicity of irinotecan (CPT-11; Camptosar) is delayed-onset diarrhea, with an incidence at the grade 3 to 4 level of 20% to 35%. SN38, its active moiety, is responsible by a direct effect on mucosal topoisomerase-I. The aim of this study was to assess whether activated charcoal (AC), possibly by adsorbing free lumenal SN38, can reduce irinotecan-induced diarrhea (CID) and optimize its dose-intensity.

Patients and Methods

Patients with advanced colorectal cancer receiving irinotecan 125 mg/m2intravenously once a week for 4 weeks every 6 weeks were studied. In cycle 1, patients received irinotecan plus AC (5 mL aqueous Charcodote [1,000 mg AC] plus 25 mL water) given the evening before the irinotecan dose and then tid for 48 hours after the dose. In cycle 2, no AC was given. National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria diarrhea grade, irinotecan dose-intensity, and loperamide consumption were recorded prospectively in both cycles.

Results

Twenty-eight patients had completed cycle 1 with AC; 24 subsequently completed cycle 2 without AC. Grade 3 to 4 diarrhea was 7.1% v 25%, and grade 0 diarrhea was 46.4% v 20.8% in cycles 1 and 2, respectively. Median percent planned dose delivered was 98% v 70% in cycles 1 and 2, respectively. In cycles 1 and 2, respectively, 25% v 54% patients took more than 10 loperamide tablets. AC was well tolerated with excellent compliance.

Conclusion

The administration of AC with irinotecan reduced the incidence of grade 3 to 4 diarrhea and antidiarrheal medication consumption and increased irinotecan dose-intensity. Prophylactic AC may have a role in reducing dose-limiting CID and optimizing irinotecan therapy.

A novel combination of cisplatin, irinotecan, and capecitabine in patients with advanced cancer

BACKGROUND

We conducted a dose escalation study combining cisplatin, irinotecan, and capecitabine (CIC), aiming to establish the maximum tolerated doses (MTD), side effect profile, and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of this novel regimen.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Intravenous cisplatin and irinotecan were to be administered on days 1 and 8, and oral capecitabine on days 1-14 of a 3-week cycle. The study was conducted in three parts. Part A: escalating doses of irinotecan (40 --> 80 mg/m2) and capecitabine (1000 --> 3300 mg/d) combined with a fixed dose of cisplatin (30 mg/m2). Part B: escalating doses of irinotecan (MTD-A --> MTD-A + 40 mg/m2) with fixed doses of cisplatin (20 mg/m2) and capecitabine (MTD-A level). Part C: escalating doses of capecitabine (1300 mg/d-->2600 mg/d) with fixed doses of cisplatin (20 mg/m2) and irinotecan (60 mg/m2).

RESULTS

Of 51 eligible patients 27 (53%) were male, median age was 58 years and 88% had PS 0-1. Major primary disease sites were colorectal (24%), unknown (14%), stomach (14%), and pancreas (12%). MTD-A was cisplatin 30 mg/m2, irinotecan 60 mg/m2, capecitabine 1000 mg/d and MTD-B was cisplatin 20 mg/m2, irinotecan 90 mg/m2, capecitabine 1000 mg/d. An MTD was not formally established for part C. DLTs consisted of infection with neutropenia (1), diarrhea and fatigue (1), hypokalemia (1), diarrhea and febrile neutropenia (1) and C2 delay of > or = 2 weeks or 25% dose reduction in C1 due to neutropenia or thrombocytopenia (6). Seven patients had a partial response to treatment (four colorectal, one SCLC, one NSCLC, one unknown primary), twenty seven SD (53%), twelve PD (24%) and five NE (10%).

CONCLUSION

CIC was associated with moderate toxicity and only modest antitumor activity. We conclude that this regimen has insufficient activity to justify further study in the phase II setting.

ABCG2 pharmacogenetics: ethnic differences in allele frequency and assessment of influence on irinotecan disposition

PURPOSE

The ATP-binding cassette transporter ABCG2 (breast cancer resistance protein) is an efflux protein that plays a role in host detoxification of various xenobiotic substrates, including the irinotecan metabolite 7- ethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin (SN-38). The ABCG2 421C>A polymorphism has been associated with reduced protein expression and altered function in vitro. The aim of this study was to evaluate the ethnic distribution and potential functional consequence of the ABCG2 421C>A genotype in cancer patients treated with irinotecan.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

ABCG2 genotyping was performed using Pyrosequencing on DNA from 88 American Caucasians, 94 African Americans, 938 Africans, and 95 Han Chinese, as well as in 84 European Caucasian patients treated with irinotecan undergoing additional blood sampling for pharmacokinetic studies.

RESULTS

Significant differences in allele frequencies were observed between the given world populations (P < 0.001), the variant allele being most common in the Han Chinese population with a frequency as high as 34%. The mean area under the curve of irinotecan and SN-38 were 19,851 and 639 ng x hour/mL, respectively. The frequency of the variant allele (10.7%) was in line with results in American Caucasians. No significant changes in irinotecan pharmacokinetics were observed in relation to the ABCG2 421C>A genotype, although one of two homozygous variant allele carriers showed extensive accumulation of SN-38 and SN-38 glucuronide.

CONCLUSIONS

The ABCG2 421C>A polymorphism appears to play a limited role in the disposition of irinotecan in European Caucasians. It is likely that the contribution of this genetic variant is obscured by a functional role of other polymorphic proteins.

Phase I dose-finding study of biweekly irinotecan in combination with fixed doses of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin, gemcitabine and cisplatin (G-FLIP) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer or other solid tumors

This phase I trial was initiated based on encouraging clinical data with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU)/leucovorin (LV), gemcitabine and cisplatin (G-FLIP) in the therapy of solid tumors. In this trial, G-FLIP has been modified to facilitate outpatient administration and to optimize sequence-dependent synergistic activity. Treatment consisted of biweekly (once every 14 days) cycles of sequential gemcitabine 500 mg/m, irinotecan per dose escalation schedule, bolus 5-FU 400 mg/m and LV 300 mg on day 1 followed by a 24-h 5-FU infusion 1500 mg/m, followed by cisplatin 35 mg/m on day 2. The irinotecan starting dose was 80 mg/m and escalated by 20 mg/m in cohorts of three patients until the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined. Twenty-three patients were enrolled (13 men/10 women) with the following cancers: 11 pancreatic, five gallbladder, three squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck, one hepatocellular carcinoma, one melanoma, one gastric, and one breast cancer. Median patient age was 63 years (range 44-78) and median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) was 80. Patients received a median of 8 cycles (range 1-16) over five irinotecan dose levels (80, 100, 120, 140 and 160 mg/m). Dose-limiting toxicity consisting of grade 3 nausea/vomiting despite aggressive anti-emetic therapy occurred in one patient at dose level 1 and three patients at dose level 3. Grade 3-4 hematological toxicities per patient consisted of thrombocytopenia (3%), anemia (6%), thrombosis (23%), neutropenia (16%) and neutropenic fever (10%). Of 18 patients evaluable for response, one complete response (pancreatic) and eight partial responses (three gallbladder, two pancreatic, two head and neck, and one breast) were attained. Seven patients had disease stabilization (five pancreatic, one hepatocellular and one gastric) for a median of 16 weeks (range 10-22). Median time to disease progression among all 23 patients enrolled to the phase I portion of the trial was 20.5 weeks (range 4-37). We conclude that G-FLIP is a novel outpatient chemotherapy regimen with acceptable toxicity at the maximum tolerated irinotecan dose of 120 mg/m. The phase II trial of G-FLIP using an irinotecan dose of 120 mg/m for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer is ongoing.

Phase I study of cisplatin, irinotecan, and epirubicin administered every 3 weeks in patients with advanced solid tumours

This phase I study was conducted to determine the recommended phase II doses, safety profile, and antitumour activity of a combination regimen of cisplatin, irinotecan, and epirubicin administered every 3 weeks in patients with advanced solid tumours. Cisplatin and epirubicin were given at fixed doses of 50 and 60 mg m(-2), respectively. The irinotecan dose was escalated at 10 mg m(-2) increments from a starting dose level of 70 mg m(-2). Epirubicin, irinotecan, and their metabolites were measured with HPLC methods. In all, 35 patients received 141 courses of treatment. Irinotecan dose was escalated in seven cohorts up to 130 mg m(-2), and then finally de-escalated to 110 mg m(-2). The dose-limiting toxicity was neutropenic fever. Nonhaematologic toxicities included mild to moderate nausea/vomiting, diarrhoea and fatigue. Of 34 patients with evaluable disease, one patient had a complete response and nine patients had partial response, yielding an overall response rate of 29.4%. Pharmacokinetic parameters of epirubicin were not affected by the sequence of drug administration. However, the AUCs of irinotecan and its metabolites were increased significantly when irinotecan and epirubicin were administered concurrently. This combination regimen has promising broad antitumour activity, and will be further evaluated in phase II studies in multiple tumour types.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of intravenous irinotecan plus oral ciclosporin in patients with fuorouracil-refractory metastatic colon cancer

PURPOSE

To assess the safety and toxicity profile of escalating doses of intravenous irinotecan, in combination with a fixed dose of oral ciclosporin (Cs) and to determine the pharmacokinetic profile of irinotecan and its metabolites.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with fluorouracil-refractory metastatic colorectal cancer received escalating doses of intravenous irinotecan from 40 to 125 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks in combination with a fixed dose of oral Cs (5 mg/kg bid for 3 days). Pharmacokinetic analysis of plasma irinotecan and its metabolites SN38 and SN38G was performed during paired cycles with and without Cs.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven patients were treated. Dose-limiting toxicity of grade 4 neutropenia was seen at an irinotecan dose of 125 mg/m(2). There was no grade 4 diarrhea, and only one patient experienced grade 3 diarrhea. Toxicities caused by Cs were generally mild. Pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated that irinotecan clearance was reduced from 13.4 to 5.8 L/h/m(2) and area under the curve (AUC)(0-tn) was increased 2.2-fold by the coadministration of Cs. Similar significant increases in AUC(0-24h) were seen for both SN38 and SN38G (2.2-fold and 2.3-fold, respectively) in the presence of Cs. Antitumor activity was seen at every irinotecan dose level.

CONCLUSION

The maximum tolerated irinotecan dose and recommended dose for phase II studies is 100 mg/m(2) every 2 weeks. Dose-limiting diarrhea was not seen during this study, supporting the hypothesis that pharmacokinetic modulation of irinotecan by Cs may improve its therapeutic index. Further studies using this combination are warranted.

Impact of body-size measures on irinotecan clearance: alternative dosing recommendations

PURPOSE

To evaluate relationships between various body-size measures and irinotecan (CPT-11) clearance and metabolism in cancer patients, and to provide future dosing recommendations for this agent.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Pharmacokinetic data were obtained from 82 adult patients (50 men, 32 women; median age, 54 years) receiving CPT-11 as a 90-minute intravenous infusion (dose range, 175 to 350 mg/m(2)). In each patient, plasma samples were collected at timed intervals in the first administration of a 3-week schedule, and CPT-11 and its metabolite, SN-38, were measured by a liquid chromatographic assay.

RESULTS

The mean (+/- SD) CPT-11 clearance was 33.6 +/- 10.8 L/h, with an interindividual variability (IIV) of 32.1%. When clearance was adjusted for body-surface area (BSA), the IIV was similar (34.0%). In addition, in a multiple linear regression analysis, none of the studied measures (BSA, lean body mass, [adjusted] ideal body weight, and body mass index) was a significant covariate (P >.13; r(2) <.014) in our population. Similarly, BSA did not significantly contribute to variability in the relative extent of conversion to SN-38 (P =.26).

CONCLUSION

BSA is not a predictor of CPT-11 clearance or SN-38 pharmacokinetics and does not contribute to reducing kinetic variability. These findings provide a rationale for the conduct of a comparative phase III study between BSA-based dosing and flat or fixed dosing of CPT-11.

Body-surface area-based dosing does not increase accuracy of predicting cisplatin exposure

PURPOSE

Most anticancer drugs are dosed based on body-surface area (BSA) to reduce interindividual variability of drug effects. We evaluated the relevance of this concept for cisplatin by analyzing cisplatin pharmacokinetics obtained in prospective studies in a large patient population.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were obtained from 268 adult patients (163 males/105 females; median age, 54 years [range, 21 to 74 years]) with advanced solid tumors treated in phase I/II trials with cisplatin monotherapy or combination chemotherapy with etoposide, irinotecan, topotecan, or docetaxel. Cisplatin was administered either weekly (n = 93) or once every 3 weeks (n = 175) at dose levels of 50 to 100 mg/m(2) (3-hour infusion). Analysis of 485 complete courses was based on measurement of total and non-protein-bound cisplatin in plasma by atomic absorption spectrometry.

RESULTS

No pharmacokinetic interaction was found between cisplatin and the anticancer drugs used in combination therapies. A linear correlation was observed between area under the curves of unbound and total cisplatin (r = 0.63). The mean plasma clearance of unbound cisplatin (CL(free)) was 57.1 +/- 14.7 L/h (range, 31.0 to 116 L/h), with an interpatient variability of 25.6%. BSA varied between 1.43 and 2.40 m(2) (mean, 1.86 +/- 0.19 m(2)), with an interpatient variability of 10.4%. When CL(free) was corrected for BSA, interindividual variability remained in the same order (23.6 v 25.6%). Only a weak correlation was found between CL(free) and BSA (r = 0.42). Intrapatient variability in CL(free), calculated from 90 patients was 12.1% +/- 7.8% (range, 0.30% to 32.7%).

CONCLUSION

In view of the high interpatient variability in CL(free) relative to variation in observed BSA, no rationale for continuing BSA-based dosing was found. We recommend fixed-dosing regimens for cisplatin.

Novel combination chemotherapy in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer

Treatment of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) remains a vexing problem and long-term survival beyond 5 years is extremely rare. Five new agents, paclitaxel, docetaxel, vinorelbine, gemcitabine and irinotecan, have been introduced for the treatment of NSCLC and investigated extensively both preclinically and clinically. Monotherapy with one of these agents has produced survival benefits over the best supportive care in Phase III studies. Combination chemotherapy with a new agent and platinum produced a higher response rate than conventional cisplatin-based chemotherapy and improved survival was observed in some randomised trials. There was little difference in efficacy and toxicity between the chemotherapeutic regimens with a new agent and a platinum in Phase III trials, suggesting the clinical utility of these regimens is similar. Many trials have focused on regimens containing two new agents, with or without platinum. Preliminary results of Phase III trials of three drug combinations versus two drug combinations suggested the former to be more promising, in terms of response rates and survival. Whether the era of platinum-based chemotherapy in the treatment of NSCLC should continue or not must be determined by Phase III trials, evaluating the use of a platinum agent with one of the new agent combinations. These aggressive chemotherapeutic combinations will hopefully improve survival and quality of life for patients with advanced NSCLC.

Pharmacokinetic, metabolic, and pharmacodynamic profiles in a dose-escalating study of irinotecan and cisplatin

PURPOSE

To investigate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of irinotecan and cisplatin administered once every 3 weeks in a dose-escalating study in patients with solid tumors.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Fifty-two cancer patients were treated with irinotecan administered as a 90-minute infusion at doses ranging from 175 to 300 mg/m(2) followed by cisplatin administered as a 3-hour intravenous infusion at doses ranging from 60 to 80 mg/m(2). After reaching the maximum-tolerated dose, the sequence of drug administration was revised. For pharmacokinetic analysis, serial plasma samples were obtained on days 1 through 3 of the first cycle. Forty-five patients were assessable for irinotecan pharmacokinetics, and 46 were assessable for cisplatin pharmacokinetics.

RESULTS

Irinotecan and cisplatin demonstrated linear pharmacokinetics comparable to that observed with single-agent administration, which suggests an absence of pharmacokinetic interaction. SN-38G constituted the major plasma metabolite of irinotecan, whereas 7-ethyl-10-[4-N-(1-piperidino)1-amino]-carbonyloxycamptothecine (NPC) was only a minor metabolite in plasma, possibly indicating a rapid conversion of NPC to SN-38. The terminal elimination phases of SN-38 and SN-38G were similar and relatively delayed when compared with the elimination of irinotecan. Maximal DNA adduct formation did not significantly differ from that observed with single-agent administration. The percentage decrease in WBC was significantly related to the areas under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUCs) of the lactone form of irinotecan (P =.0245) and SN-38 (P =. 0123). The severity of diarrhea was not significantly related to the AUCs of irinotecan and SN-38, nor to the systemic glucuronidation rate of SN-38.

CONCLUSION

There was no apparent pharmacokinetic interaction between irinotecan and cisplatin in this study. Reversion of the administration sequence of the drugs did not seem to have any influence on the pharmacokinetics. The incidence and severity of delayed-type diarrhea was not related to any of the studied parameters.