PURPOSE: This phase I study determined the maximal-tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities, pharmacokinetics, and recommended dose of erlotinib with docetaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with head and neck cancer were enrolled. Patients were orally given erlotinib (50 mg) daily plus 35 mg/m² of docetaxel intravenously weekly × 3 every 4 weeks. Dose escalation of erlotinib was in 50-mg increments until toxicity. Pharmacokinetics were studied with LC-MS/MS, standard, and population pharmacokinetic methods. RESULTS: Ninety-five courses were successfully given (median 3, range 1-6). The most frequent side effects were diarrhea, fatigue, skin rash, anemia, and hypoalbuminemia. Dose de-escalation for both erlotinib and docetaxel was due to skin rash, neutropenia and/or severe infection with docetaxel to 25 mg/m² and erlotinib to starting dose of 50 mg and re-escalation of docetaxel to 35 mg/m². Responses were observed in 4/26 evaluable patients (100 mg erlotinib). In 24 patients, the mean Cmax and AUC erlotinib values increased with dose and following cumulative dosing (days 7 and 8 vs. day 1, p < 0.05). The CL/F (~7 L/h), V/F (~140 L), and t1/2 (~20 h) for erlotinib were similar to the reported. The mean AUC ratio of metabolite OSI-420 to erlotinib following repetitive dosing at 100 mg (+ or - docetaxel) showed a ~50% increase (p < 0.02), possibly suggesting self-enzyme induction. Population pharmacokinetic studies showed no significant covariate affecting erlotinib pharmacokinetics. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of erlotinib and docetaxel was associated with significant toxicity, which limited the amount of administered erlotinib. Dosing for phase II trials was docetaxel 35 mg/m² and erlotinib 50 mg. The reason for excessive toxicity is not clear, but not due to change in pharmacokinetics.
PURPOSE: This phase I study determined the maximal-tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities, pharmacokinetics, and recommended dose of erlotinib with docetaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight patients with head and neck cancer were enrolled. Patients were orally given erlotinib (50 mg) daily plus 35 mg/m² of docetaxel intravenously weekly × 3 every 4 weeks. Dose escalation of erlotinib was in 50-mg increments until toxicity. Pharmacokinetics were studied with LC-MS/MS, standard, and population pharmacokinetic methods. RESULTS: Ninety-five courses were successfully given (median 3, range 1-6). The most frequent side effects were diarrhea, fatigue, skin rash, anemia, and hypoalbuminemia. Dose de-escalation for both erlotinib and docetaxel was due to skin rash, neutropenia and/or severe infection with docetaxel to 25 mg/m² and erlotinib to starting dose of 50 mg and re-escalation of docetaxel to 35 mg/m². Responses were observed in 4/26 evaluable patients (100 mg erlotinib). In 24 patients, the mean Cmax and AUC erlotinib values increased with dose and following cumulative dosing (days 7 and 8 vs. day 1, p < 0.05). The CL/F (~7 L/h), V/F (~140 L), and t1/2 (~20 h) for erlotinib were similar to the reported. The mean AUC ratio of metabolite OSI-420 to erlotinib following repetitive dosing at 100 mg (+ or - docetaxel) showed a ~50% increase (p < 0.02), possibly suggesting self-enzyme induction. Population pharmacokinetic studies showed no significant covariate affecting erlotinib pharmacokinetics. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of erlotinib and docetaxel was associated with significant toxicity, which limited the amount of administered erlotinib. Dosing for phase II trials was docetaxel 35 mg/m² and erlotinib 50 mg. The reason for excessive toxicity is not clear, but not due to change in pharmacokinetics.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: C Kouroussis; S Agelaki; D Mavroudis; J Souglakos; S Kakolyris; K Kalbakis; N Vardakis; D Reppa; D Hatzidaki; G Samonis; V Georgoulias Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2000 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: C Couteau; N Chouaki; S Leyvraz; D Oulid-Aissa; A Lebecq; C Domenge; V Groult; S Bordessoule; F Janot; M De Forni; J P Armand Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 1999-10 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: M A Phelps; T E Stinchcombe; J S Blachly; W Zhao; L J Schaaf; S L Starrett; L Wei; M Poi; D Wang; A Papp; J Aimiuwu; Y Gao; J Li; G A Otterson; W J Hicks; M A Socinski; M A Villalona-Calero Journal: Clin Pharmacol Ther Date: 2014-04-29 Impact factor: 6.875
Authors: A J M Nieuweboer; M Smid; A-J M de Graan; S Elbouazzaoui; P de Bruijn; F A L M Eskens; P Hamberg; J W M Martens; A Sparreboom; R de Wit; R H N van Schaik; R H J Mathijssen Journal: Pharmacogenomics J Date: 2015-09-08 Impact factor: 3.550
Authors: Andrea Gruber; Martin Czejka; Philipp Buchner; Marie Kitzmueller; Nairi Kirchbaumer Baroian; Christian Dittrich; Azra Sahmanovic Hrgovcic Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2018-02-16 Impact factor: 3.333