IMPORTANCE: Treatment of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) uses a multidisciplinary approach often limited by the toxicity and drug resistance of platinum agents. OBJECTIVES: To test whether a nanocarrier-conjugated cisplatin boosting locoregional drug delivery improves tumor efficacy while decreasing systemic toxicity over systemic cisplatin in a murine model of locally advanced HNSCC. DESIGN: A randomized, controlled, in vivo study compared standard cisplatin with nanocarrier (hyaluronan [HA])-conjugated cisplatin (HA-cisplatin) each at 50% of the maximum tolerated doses in a murine model of locally advanced HNSCC (10 mice/arm, each injected with 1 × 106 MDA-1986 HNSCC cells, with phosphate-buffered saline and HA-only control arms). Mice were treated for 3 weeks and observed for 3 additional weeks. SETTING: Academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Forty female Nu/Nu mice. Randomization and treatment arms were initiated once tumor volumes reached 30 mm3. INTERVENTION: Injection with MDA-1986 HNSCC cells followed by 3 weeks of treatment with cisplatin, HA-cisplatin, phosphate-buffered saline, or HA only. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Animal weights and tumor volumes were measured 3 times each week (modified RECIST [Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors]). At necropsy, animal kidneys were examined for nephrotoxic effects and cochleae were examined for ototoxic effects. RESULTS: The mice treated with HA-cisplatin showed superior tumor efficacy (1 with complete clinical response, 3 with partial response, 1 with stable disease, and 5 with progressive disease) compared with standard cisplatin (no animals with complete clinical response, 1 with partial response, 1 with stable disease, and 8 with progressive disease), which was statistically significant (P = .003). All control animals developed progressive disease. Weight loss and body score were surrogate measures of treatment toxicity. The HA-cisplatin group had the least weight loss (mean [SD], 10.8% [4.7%]) compared with the cisplatin group (13.6% [5.6%]; P = .25). Body score dropped to 2 or less in all cisplatin-treated mice but not in any HA-cisplatin-treated mice, which also lacked any histologic signs of nephrotoxic or ototoxic effects. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Nanoconjugated HA-cisplatin significantly improves tumor efficacy with lower toxicity compared with standard cisplatin in locally advanced HNSCC in vivo, justifying additional translational studies.
IMPORTANCE: Treatment of locally advanced head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC) uses a multidisciplinary approach often limited by the toxicity and drug resistance of platinum agents. OBJECTIVES: To test whether a nanocarrier-conjugated cisplatin boosting locoregional drug delivery improves tumor efficacy while decreasing systemic toxicity over systemic cisplatin in a murine model of locally advanced HNSCC. DESIGN: A randomized, controlled, in vivo study compared standard cisplatin with nanocarrier (hyaluronan [HA])-conjugated cisplatin (HA-cisplatin) each at 50% of the maximum tolerated doses in a murine model of locally advanced HNSCC (10 mice/arm, each injected with 1 × 106 MDA-1986 HNSCC cells, with phosphate-buffered saline and HA-only control arms). Mice were treated for 3 weeks and observed for 3 additional weeks. SETTING: Academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: Forty female Nu/Nu mice. Randomization and treatment arms were initiated once tumor volumes reached 30 mm3. INTERVENTION: Injection with MDA-1986 HNSCC cells followed by 3 weeks of treatment with cisplatin, HA-cisplatin, phosphate-buffered saline, or HA only. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Animal weights and tumor volumes were measured 3 times each week (modified RECIST [Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors]). At necropsy, animal kidneys were examined for nephrotoxic effects and cochleae were examined for ototoxic effects. RESULTS: The mice treated with HA-cisplatin showed superior tumor efficacy (1 with complete clinical response, 3 with partial response, 1 with stable disease, and 5 with progressive disease) compared with standard cisplatin (no animals with complete clinical response, 1 with partial response, 1 with stable disease, and 8 with progressive disease), which was statistically significant (P = .003). All control animals developed progressive disease. Weight loss and body score were surrogate measures of treatment toxicity. The HA-cisplatin group had the least weight loss (mean [SD], 10.8% [4.7%]) compared with the cisplatin group (13.6% [5.6%]; P = .25). Body score dropped to 2 or less in all cisplatin-treated mice but not in any HA-cisplatin-treated mice, which also lacked any histologic signs of nephrotoxic or ototoxic effects. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Nanoconjugated HA-cisplatin significantly improves tumor efficacy with lower toxicity compared with standard cisplatin in locally advanced HNSCC in vivo, justifying additional translational studies.
Authors: Jay S Cooper; Thomas F Pajak; Arlene A Forastiere; John Jacobs; Bruce H Campbell; Scott B Saxman; Julie A Kish; Harold E Kim; Anthony J Cmelak; Marvin Rotman; Mitchell Machtay; John F Ensley; K S Clifford Chao; Christopher J Schultz; Nancy Lee; Karen K Fu Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-05-06 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: J P Corey; D D Caldarelli; J C Hutchinson; L D Holinger; S G Taylor; J L Showel; J A Kooser Journal: Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 1986-04
Authors: David J Adelstein; Jerrold P Saxton; Lisa A Rybicki; Ramon M Esclamado; Benjamin G Wood; Marshall Strome; Pierre Lavertu; Robert R Lorenz; Marjorie A Carroll Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-03-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Christoph Schrader; Andreas Boehm; Anett Reiche; Andreas Dietz; Andreas Diet; Christian Mozet; Gunnar Wichmann Journal: Anticancer Res Date: 2012-08 Impact factor: 2.480
Authors: David J Adelstein; Yi Li; George L Adams; Henry Wagner; Julie A Kish; John F Ensley; David E Schuller; Arlene A Forastiere Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-01-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Michael W Sim; Patrick T Grogan; Chitra Subramanian; Carol R Bradford; Thomas E Carey; M Laird Forrest; Mark E Prince; Mark S Cohen Journal: Laryngoscope Date: 2015-12-21 Impact factor: 3.325
Authors: Ti Zhang; Shuang Cai; Chad Groer; Wai Chee Forrest; Qiuhong Yang; Eva Mohr; Justin Douglas; Daniel Aires; Sandra M Axiak-Bechtel; Kimberly A Selting; Jeffrey A Swarz; Deborah J Tate; Jeffrey N Bryan; M Laird Forrest Journal: J Pharm Sci Date: 2016-05-04 Impact factor: 3.534
Authors: Shuang Cai; Ti Zhang; W C Forrest; Qiuhong Yang; Chad Groer; Eva Mohr; Daniel J Aires; Sandra M Axiak-Bechtel; Brian K Flesner; Carolyn J Henry; Kimberly A Selting; Deborah Tate; Jeffrey A Swarz; Jeffrey N Bryan; M Laird Forrest Journal: Am J Vet Res Date: 2016-09 Impact factor: 1.156
Authors: Suniti Misra; Vincent C Hascall; Ilia Atanelishvili; Ricardo Moreno Rodriguez; Roger R Markwald; Shibnath Ghatak Journal: Int J Cell Biol Date: 2015-09-10