Literature DB >> 11604553

Adaptive intrapatient dose escalation of cisplatin in patients with advanced head and neck cancer.

J H Schellens1, A S Planting, J Ma, M Maliepaard, A de Vos, M de Boer Dennert, J Verweij.   

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to explore the feasibility and toxicity of intrapatient dose adjustment using predefined levels of exposure to cisplatin, with the ultimate goal to further improve the antitumor activity of the treatment. The primary parameter for adaptive dosing was the level of platinum DNA adducts in peripheral white blood cells (WBC) and the secondary parameter the area under the curve (AUC) of unbound platinum in plasma, which were determined during the applied courses. Target levels had been defined in a previously performed pharmacologic study. The concept of adaptive dosing was tested in 16 patients with locally advanced head and neck (H/N) cancer who would receive six weekly courses of cisplatin at a starting dose level of 80 mg/m(2), which was previously investigated in a phase II study. Forty-seven percent of patients received a dose increase varying from 10 to 40%. Only two patients had exposure levels significantly below the defined target levels for DNA adducts and AUC. The majority of patients reached the defined target levels by modest dose increases of 10-20% during course 2. Relevant but reversible ototoxicity (temporary grade 3 in two patients) and renal toxicity (temporary grade 2 in two other patients) were observed. The pattern and severity of the toxicity was comparable to that encountered in the previous phase II study in H/N cancer patients. We conclude that the strategy of intrapatient dose adjustment for cisplatin is practically feasible in a research setting even when a short turn around time of 1 week is the limit for reporting results. Although in some patients the dose increase that had to be applied to reach target levels was substantial (up to 40%), this approach in H/N cancer patients is not expected to improve the response rate significantly, because these significantly underdosed patients represented only a small percentage of the investigated population. The great majority of patients needed only limited (10-20%) dose increases which very likely will not improve the response rate to a clinically significant extent. The outlined concept is currently being explored in other tumor types and schedules of cisplatin.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11604553     DOI: 10.1097/00001813-200109000-00004

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anticancer Drugs        ISSN: 0959-4973            Impact factor:   2.248


  10 in total

Review 1.  Individualised cancer chemotherapy: strategies and performance of prospective studies on therapeutic drug monitoring with dose adaptation: a review.

Authors:  Milly E de Jonge; Alwin D R Huitema; Jan H M Schellens; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; Jos H Beijnen
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 6.447

2.  Cisplatin dose adjustment in patients with renal impairment, which recommendations should we follow?

Authors:  Youssef Bennis; Amandine Savry; Magali Rocca; Laurence Gauthier-Villano; Pascale Pisano; Bertrand Pourroy
Journal:  Int J Clin Pharm       Date:  2014-01-17

Review 3.  Toxicity patterns of cytotoxic drugs.

Authors:  Etienne Chatelut; Jean-Pierre Delord; Pierre Canal
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.850

Review 4.  Personalized medicine for targeted and platinum-based chemotherapy of lung and bladder cancer.

Authors:  George D Cimino; Chong-xian Pan; Paul T Henderson
Journal:  Bioanalysis       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 2.681

5.  Genetic Variations and Cisplatin Nephrotoxicity: A Systematic Review.

Authors:  Zulfan Zazuli; Susanne Vijverberg; Elise Slob; Geoffrey Liu; Bruce Carleton; Joris Veltman; Paul Baas; Rosalinde Masereeuw; Anke-Hilse Maitland-van der Zee
Journal:  Front Pharmacol       Date:  2018-09-27       Impact factor: 5.810

6.  Paeoniflorin protects spiral ganglion neurons from cisplatin-induced ototoxicity: Possible relation to PINK1/BAD pathway.

Authors:  Xiaoyu Yu; Rongjun Man; Yanan Li; Qianqian Yang; Hongrui Li; Huiming Yang; Xiaohui Bai; Haiyan Yin; Jianfeng Li; Haibo Wang
Journal:  J Cell Mol Med       Date:  2019-06-17       Impact factor: 5.310

7.  c-Myb protects cochlear hair cells from cisplatin-induced damage via the PI3K/Akt signaling pathway.

Authors:  Chuan Bu; Lei Xu; Yuechen Han; Man Wang; Xue Wang; Wenwen Liu; Renjie Chai; Haibo Wang
Journal:  Cell Death Discov       Date:  2022-02-24

8.  Oxaliplatin-DNA adduct formation in white blood cells of cancer patients.

Authors:  A C Pieck; A Drescher; K G Wiesmann; J Messerschmidt; G Weber; D Strumberg; R A Hilger; M E Scheulen; U Jaehde
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  2008-05-27       Impact factor: 7.640

9.  Conjunctive therapy of cisplatin with the OCT2 inhibitor cimetidine: influence on antitumor efficacy and systemic clearance.

Authors:  J A Sprowl; L van Doorn; S Hu; L van Gerven; P de Bruijn; L Li; A A Gibson; R H Mathijssen; A Sparreboom
Journal:  Clin Pharmacol Ther       Date:  2013-07-17       Impact factor: 6.875

10.  PRDX1 activates autophagy via the PTEN-AKT signaling pathway to protect against cisplatin-induced spiral ganglion neuron damage.

Authors:  Wenwen Liu; Lei Xu; Xue Wang; Daogong Zhang; Gaoying Sun; Man Wang; Mingming Wang; Yuechen Han; Renjie Chai; Haibo Wang
Journal:  Autophagy       Date:  2021-04-12       Impact factor: 16.016

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.