Literature DB >> 15139794

Pharmacokinetic optimisation of treatment with oral etoposide.

Giuseppe Toffoli1, Giuseppe Corona, Barbara Basso, Mauro Boiocchi.   

Abstract

Etoposide is a derivative of podophyllotoxin widely used in the treatment of several neoplasms, including small cell lung cancer, germ cell tumours and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. Prolonged administration of etoposide aims for continuous inhibition of topoisomerase II, the intracellular target of etoposide, thus preventing tumour cells from repairing DNA breaks. However, the clinical advantages of extended schedules as compared with conventional short-term infusions remain unclear. Oral administration of etoposide represents the most feasible and economic strategy to maintain effective concentrations of drug for extended times. Nevertheless, the efficacy of oral etoposide therapy is contingent on circumventing pharmacokinetic limitations, mainly low and variable bioavailability. Inhibition of small bowel and hepatic metabolism of etoposide with specific cytochrome P450 inhibitors or inhibition of the intestinal P-glycoprotein efflux pump have been attempted to increase the bioavailability of oral etoposide, but the best results were obtained with daily oral administration of low etoposide doses (50-100 mg/day for 14-21 days). Saturable absorption of etoposide was reported for doses greater than 200 mg/day, whereas lower doses were associated with increased bioavailability, although they were characterised by high inter- and intrapatient variability. Pharmacokinetic parameters such as plasma trough concentration between two oral administrations (C(24,trough)), drug exposure time above a threshold value and area under the plasma concentration-time curve have been correlated with the pharmacodynamic effect of oral etoposide. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic relationships indicate that severe toxicity is avoided when peak plasma concentrations do not exceed 3-5 mg/L and C(24,trough) is under the threshold limit of 0.3 mg/L. To maintain effective etoposide plasma concentrations during prolonged oral administration, pharmacokinetic variability must be monitored in each patient, taking account of factors from many pharmacokinetic studies of etoposide, including absorption, distribution, protein binding, metabolism and elimination. Dosage reduction is generally useful to avoid haematological toxicity in patients with renal dysfunction (creatinine clearance <50 mL/min). The need for dosage adjustment based on liver function in patients with liver dysfunction is not completely defined, but generally is not indicated in patients with minor liver dysfunction. Adaptive dosage adjustment based on individual pharmacokinetic parameters, estimated using limited sampling strategies and population pharmacokinetic models, is more appropriate. This approach has been used with success in different clinical trials to increase the etoposide dosage, without significantly increasing toxicity. Various pharmacodynamic models have been proposed to guide etoposide oral dosage. However, they lack precision and accuracy and need to be refined by considering other predictor variables in order to extend their application in current clinical practice.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15139794     DOI: 10.2165/00003088-200443070-00002

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet        ISSN: 0312-5963            Impact factor:   6.447


  171 in total

1.  Low-dose oral etoposide: a new role for an old drug?

Authors:  M L Slevin
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1990-10       Impact factor: 44.544

2.  Carboplatin and etoposide pharmacokinetics in patients with testicular teratoma.

Authors:  D R Newell; R A Eeles; L A Gumbrell; F E Boxall; A Horwich; A H Calvert
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 3.333

3.  Structure-activity study of the inhibition of microtubule assembly in vitro by podophyllotoxin and its congeners.

Authors:  J D Loike; C F Brewer; H Sternlicht; W J Gensler; S B Horwitz
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1978-09       Impact factor: 12.701

4.  Optimization of oral etoposide dosage in elderly patients with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma using the fraction of dose absorbed measured for each patient.

Authors:  A el-Yazigi; A Ezzat; J Berry; D A Raines; A Yusuf; S al-Rawithi; E S Legayada
Journal:  J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2000-02       Impact factor: 3.126

5.  Patient preference and pharmacokinetics of oral modulated UFT versus intravenous fluorouracil and leucovorin: a randomised crossover trial in advanced colorectal cancer.

Authors:  M M Borner; P Schoffski; R de Wit; F Caponigro; G Comella; A Sulkes; G Greim; G J Peters; K van der Born; J Wanders; R F de Boer; C Martin; P Fumoleau
Journal:  Eur J Cancer       Date:  2002-02       Impact factor: 9.162

Review 6.  Pharmacokinetic considerations of oral chemotherapy in elderly patients with cancer.

Authors:  J Andrew Skirvin; Stuart M Lichtman
Journal:  Drugs Aging       Date:  2002       Impact factor: 3.923

7.  A randomized trial of two etoposide schedules in small-cell lung cancer: the influence of pharmacokinetics on efficacy and toxicity.

Authors:  P I Clark; M L Slevin; S P Joel; R J Osborne; D I Talbot; P W Johnson; R Reznek; T Masud; W Gregory; P F Wrigley
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1994-07       Impact factor: 44.544

Review 8.  Podophyllotoxin derivative VP 16-213.

Authors:  A M Arnold
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1979       Impact factor: 3.333

9.  Predicting etoposide toxicity: relationship to organ function and protein binding.

Authors:  S P Joel; R Shah; P I Clark; M L Slevin
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1996-01       Impact factor: 44.544

10.  Weekly oral etoposide in patients with Kaposi's sarcoma associated with human immunodeficiency virus infection: a phase I multicenter trial of the AIDS Clinical Trials Group.

Authors:  J Paredes; J O Kahn; W P Tong; M L Feldstein; S Lin; J M Bennett; C E Metroka; L Ratner; S E Krown
Journal:  J Acquir Immune Defic Syndr Hum Retrovirol       Date:  1995-06-01
View more
  21 in total

1.  Population pharmacokinetics of the BEACOPP polychemotherapy regimen in Hodgkin's lymphoma and its effect on myelotoxicity.

Authors:  Stefan Wilde; Alexander Jetter; Stephan Rietbrock; Dirk Kasel; Andreas Engert; Andreas Josting; Beate Klimm; Georg Hempel; Stefanie Reif; Ulrich Jaehde; Ute Merkel; Dagmar Busse; Matthias Schwab; Volker Diehl; Uwe Fuhr
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 2.  Oral anticancer drugs: mechanisms of low bioavailability and strategies for improvement.

Authors:  Frederik E Stuurman; Bastiaan Nuijen; Jos H Beijnen; Jan H M Schellens
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 6.447

3.  The Ameliorated Pharmacokinetics of VP-16 in Wistar Rats: A Possible Role of P-Glycoprotein Inhibition by Pharmaceutical Excipients.

Authors:  Naseem Akhtar; Abdul Ahad; Mohd Faiyaz Khan; Ayman Allaham; Sushama Talegaonkar
Journal:  Eur J Drug Metab Pharmacokinet       Date:  2017-04       Impact factor: 2.441

4.  A validated stability-indicating LC method for estimation of etoposide in bulk and optimized self-nano emulsifying formulation: Kinetics and stability effects.

Authors:  Naseem Akhtar; Sushama Talegaonkar; Roop Kishan Khar; Manu Jaggi
Journal:  Saudi Pharm J       Date:  2012-01-24       Impact factor: 4.330

5.  Phase I study of temozolomide combined with oral etoposide in children with malignant glial tumors.

Authors:  Antonio Ruggiero; Daniela Rizzo; Giorgio Attinà; Ilaria Lazzareschi; Palma Maurizi; Vita Ridola; Stefano Mastrangelo; Roberta Migliorati; Patrizia Bertolini; Cesare Colosimo; Riccardo Riccardi
Journal:  J Neurooncol       Date:  2013-05-12       Impact factor: 4.130

6.  Development and evaluation of sustained-release etoposide-loaded poly(ε-caprolactone) implants.

Authors:  Ana Gabriela Reis Solano; Adriana de Fátima Pereira; Flavia Carmo Horta Pinto; Letícia Gonçalves Resende Ferreira; Leandro Augusto de Oliveira Barbosa; Silvia Ligório Fialho; Patrícia Santiago de Oliveira Patricio; Armando da Silva Cunha; Gisele Rodrigues da Silva; Gérson Antônio Pianetti
Journal:  AAPS PharmSciTech       Date:  2013-05-11       Impact factor: 3.246

Review 7.  Camptothecin and podophyllotoxin derivatives: inhibitors of topoisomerase I and II - mechanisms of action, pharmacokinetics and toxicity profile.

Authors:  Jörg T Hartmann; Hans-Peter Lipp
Journal:  Drug Saf       Date:  2006       Impact factor: 5.606

Review 8.  Oral vinorelbine in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer: rationale and implications for patient management.

Authors:  Richard J Gralla; Ulrich Gatzemeier; Vittorio Gebbia; Rudolf Huber; Mary O'Brien; Christian Puozzo
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 9.  Boosting the oral bioavailability of anticancer drugs through intentional drug-drug interactions.

Authors:  Eric D Eisenmann; Zahra Talebi; Alex Sparreboom; Sharyn D Baker
Journal:  Basic Clin Pharmacol Toxicol       Date:  2021-06-28       Impact factor: 4.080

10.  Oral treatment with etoposide in small cell lung cancer - dilemmas and solutions.

Authors:  Renata Rezonja; Lea Knez; Tanja Cufer; Ales Mrhar
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 2.991

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.