PURPOSE: The shortening of infusion time from 3 to 1 hour decreases the systemic exposure (area under the curve, AUC) of total and unbound paclitaxel but increases the AUC of its vehicle Cremophor EL, whereas the time above total paclitaxel concentrations of 0.05 micromol/L (T >0.05) remains almost constant. As both Cremophor EL and paclitaxel are neurotoxic, we evaluated their pharmacodynamic effects on the development of peripheral neuropathy as the most important nonhematologic toxicity. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:Patients with advanced cancer of different origin were randomized to receive a maximum of 12 weekly-given 1- or 3-hour infusions of 100 mg/m2 paclitaxel (Taxol). Twenty-four patients were assessable for both pharmacokinetics and peripheral neuropathy development evaluated by a clinical scoring system including sensory symptoms, strength, tendon reflexes, and vibratory sense. RESULTS:Patients with peripheral neuropathy development (n=14) received more weeks of therapy (P=0.056) and showed significantly higher T(>0.05) (P=0.022) and overall systemic drug exposures (weeks of therapy x AUC) for total paclitaxel (P=0.002) and unbound paclitaxel (P=0.003) than those without peripheral neuropathy. In Kaplan-Meier analyses, T(>0.05) > or = 10.6 hours (P=0.023), AUC of total paclitaxel > or = 4.7 microg/mL x hour (P = 0.047), and AUC of unbound paclitaxel > or = 0.375 microg/mL x hour (P = 0.095) were identified as being potential factors for peripheral neuropathy development. In a Cox regression analysis, only T(>0.05) > or = 10.6 hours remained as an independent risk factor (relative risk, 18.43; P = 0.036) after adjusting for prior vincamycin (relative risk, 11.28; P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: From the results obtained in this study, it is concluded that exposure to paclitaxel but not Cremophor EL is associated with peripheral neuropathy development.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: The shortening of infusion time from 3 to 1 hour decreases the systemic exposure (area under the curve, AUC) of total and unbound paclitaxel but increases the AUC of its vehicle Cremophor EL, whereas the time above total paclitaxel concentrations of 0.05 micromol/L (T >0.05) remains almost constant. As both Cremophor EL and paclitaxel are neurotoxic, we evaluated their pharmacodynamic effects on the development of peripheral neuropathy as the most important nonhematologic toxicity. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:Patients with advanced cancer of different origin were randomized to receive a maximum of 12 weekly-given 1- or 3-hour infusions of 100 mg/m2 paclitaxel (Taxol). Twenty-four patients were assessable for both pharmacokinetics and peripheral neuropathy development evaluated by a clinical scoring system including sensory symptoms, strength, tendon reflexes, and vibratory sense. RESULTS:Patients with peripheral neuropathy development (n=14) received more weeks of therapy (P=0.056) and showed significantly higher T(>0.05) (P=0.022) and overall systemic drug exposures (weeks of therapy x AUC) for total paclitaxel (P=0.002) and unbound paclitaxel (P=0.003) than those without peripheral neuropathy. In Kaplan-Meier analyses, T(>0.05) > or = 10.6 hours (P=0.023), AUC of total paclitaxel > or = 4.7 microg/mL x hour (P = 0.047), and AUC of unbound paclitaxel > or = 0.375 microg/mL x hour (P = 0.095) were identified as being potential factors for peripheral neuropathy development. In a Cox regression analysis, only T(>0.05) > or = 10.6 hours remained as an independent risk factor (relative risk, 18.43; P = 0.036) after adjusting for prior vincamycin (relative risk, 11.28; P = 0.038). CONCLUSIONS: From the results obtained in this study, it is concluded that exposure to paclitaxel but not Cremophor EL is associated with peripheral neuropathy development.
Authors: Marie-Rose B S Crombag; Stijn L W Koolen; Sophie Wijngaard; Markus Joerger; Thomas P C Dorlo; Nielka P van Erp; Ron H J Mathijssen; Jos H Beijnen; Alwin D R Huitema Journal: Pharm Res Date: 2019-10-15 Impact factor: 4.200
Authors: Daniel L Hertz; Kelley M Kidwell; Kiran Vangipuram; Feng Li; Manjunath P Pai; Monika Burness; Jennifer J Griggs; Anne F Schott; Catherine Van Poznak; Daniel F Hayes; Ellen M Lavoie Smith; N Lynn Henry Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2018-04-27 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Alexandre Chan; Daniel L Hertz; Manuel Morales; Elizabeth J Adams; Sharon Gordon; Chia Jie Tan; Nathan P Staff; Jayesh Kamath; Jeong Oh; Shivani Shinde; Doreen Pon; Niharkia Dixit; James D'Olimpio; Cristina Dumitrescu; Margherita Gobbo; Kord Kober; Samantha Mayo; Linda Pang; Ishwaria Subbiah; Andreas S Beutler; Katherine B Peters; Charles Loprinzi; Maryam B Lustberg Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-07-30 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Markus Joerger; Stefanie Kraff; Alwin D R Huitema; Gary Feiss; Berta Moritz; Jan H M Schellens; Jos H Beijnen; Ulrich Jaehde Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2012-09-01 Impact factor: 6.447
Authors: Mary Cianfrocca; Sandra Lee; Jamie Von Roenn; Michelle A Rudek; Bruce J Dezube; Susan E Krown; Joseph A Sparano Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2011-01-05 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Shailly Mehrotra; Manish R Sharma; Elizabeth Gray; Kehua Wu; William T Barry; Clifford Hudis; Eric P Winer; Alan P Lyss; Deborah L Toppmeyer; Alvaro Moreno-Aspitia; Thomas E Lad; Mario Valasco; Beth Overmoyer; Hope Rugo; Mark J Ratain; Jogarao V Gobburu Journal: AAPS J Date: 2017-06-15 Impact factor: 4.009
Authors: William C Speed; Soonmo Peter Kang; David P Tuck; Lyndsay N Harris; Kenneth K Kidd Journal: Pharmacogenomics J Date: 2009-04-21 Impact factor: 3.550