BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to investigate the disposition of gemcitabine, epirubicin, paclitaxel, 2',2'-difluorodeoxyuridine and epirubicinol, and characterize the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of treatment in patients with breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The drug dispostion in 15 patients who received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, epirubicin 90 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (GEP) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle, was compared with that of patients treated with epirubicin 90 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (EP, n = 6) and epirubicin 90 mg/m2 alone (n = 6). Drug and metabolite levels in plasma and urine were assessed by high-performance liquid chromatography and parameters of drug exposure were related to hematological toxicity by a sigmoid-maximum effect (Emax) model. RESULTS: Paclitaxel administration significantly increased the epirubicinol area under the concentration-time curve, from 357+/-146 (epirubicin) to 603+/-107 (EP) and 640+/-81 h x ng/ml (GEP), and reduced the renal clearance of epirubicin and epirubicinol by 38 and 52.2% and 34.5 and 53% in GEP- and EP-treated patients, respectively, compared with epirubicin alone. Gemcitabine had no apparent effect on paclitaxel and epirubicin pharmacokinetics, and renal clearance of epirubicin and epirubicinol. The only pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship observed was between neutropenia and the time spent above the threshold plasma level of 0.1 micromol/l (tC0.1) of paclitaxel, with the time required to obtain a 50% decrease in neutrophil count (Et50) of GEP being 7.8 h, similar to that of EP. CONCLUSIONS: Paclitaxel and/or its vehicle, Cremophor EL, interferes with the disposition and renal excretion of epirubicin and epirubicinol; gemcitabine has no affect on epirubicin and paclitaxel plasma pharmacokinetics and renal excretion of epirubicin, while neutropenia is not enhanced by gemcitabine.
BACKGROUND: The objectives of this study were to investigate the disposition of gemcitabine, epirubicin, paclitaxel, 2',2'-difluorodeoxyuridine and epirubicinol, and characterize the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profile of treatment in patients with breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The drug dispostion in 15 patients who received gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2, epirubicin 90 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (GEP) on day 1 of a 21-day cycle, was compared with that of patients treated with epirubicin 90 mg/m2 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 (EP, n = 6) and epirubicin 90 mg/m2 alone (n = 6). Drug and metabolite levels in plasma and urine were assessed by high-performance liquid chromatography and parameters of drug exposure were related to hematological toxicity by a sigmoid-maximum effect (Emax) model. RESULTS:Paclitaxel administration significantly increased the epirubicinol area under the concentration-time curve, from 357+/-146 (epirubicin) to 603+/-107 (EP) and 640+/-81 h x ng/ml (GEP), and reduced the renal clearance of epirubicin and epirubicinol by 38 and 52.2% and 34.5 and 53% in GEP- and EP-treated patients, respectively, compared with epirubicin alone. Gemcitabine had no apparent effect on paclitaxel and epirubicin pharmacokinetics, and renal clearance of epirubicin and epirubicinol. The only pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship observed was between neutropenia and the time spent above the threshold plasma level of 0.1 micromol/l (tC0.1) of paclitaxel, with the time required to obtain a 50% decrease in neutrophil count (Et50) of GEP being 7.8 h, similar to that of EP. CONCLUSIONS:Paclitaxel and/or its vehicle, Cremophor EL, interferes with the disposition and renal excretion of epirubicin and epirubicinol; gemcitabine has no affect on epirubicin and paclitaxel plasma pharmacokinetics and renal excretion of epirubicin, while neutropenia is not enhanced by gemcitabine.
Authors: Barbara Mayer; Svetlana Karakhanova; Nathalie Bauer; Li Liu; Yifan Zhu; Pavel P Philippov; Jens Werner; Alexandr V Bazhin Journal: Naunyn Schmiedebergs Arch Pharmacol Date: 2017-08-04 Impact factor: 3.000
Authors: Jan Gerard Maring; Floris M Wachters; Monique Slijfer; J Marina Maurer; H Marike Boezen; Donald R A Uges; Elisabeth G E de Vries; Harry J M Groen Journal: Eur J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2010-03-06 Impact factor: 2.953