BACKGROUND: In preclinical models, the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole enhances the antitumor activity of chemotherapeutic agents by improving drug distribution and by inhibiting autophagy. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors (n = 24) received doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) and escalating doses of pantoprazole (80, 160, 240 and 360 mg) administered intravenously prior to doxorubicin. Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic studies. An optional biopsy was performed to evaluate doxorubicin concentration and pharmacodynamic markers of drug activity. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients participated in the study (17 in the dose escalation phase and 7 in the dose expansion). Three patients experienced a dose limiting toxicity (grade 3 fatigue in the three cases), one patient at dose level 3 (pantoprazole 240 mg) and two patients at dose level 4 (pantoprazole 360 mg). Dose level 4 was considered to exceed the maximum tolerated dose. The recommended phase II dose was pantoprazole 240 mg and doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2). The most commonly observed toxicities included fatigue, neutropenia and leukopenia. Two patients achieved a confirmed partial response. Median maximum serum concentration of pantoprazole was 84.3 μM at 1-2 h after injection of pantoprazole 240 mg. No drug-drug interaction was observed. A single on-treatment tumor biopsy showed a sharply decreasing gradient in doxorubicin concentration and associated activity markers with increasing distance from tumor blood vessels. CONCLUSION: Administration of high doses of pantoprazole in combination with doxorubicin is feasible. The recommended phase II dose of pantoprazole, 240 mg, will be evaluated in combination with docetaxel as first line in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer.
BACKGROUND: In preclinical models, the proton pump inhibitor pantoprazole enhances the antitumor activity of chemotherapeutic agents by improving drug distribution and by inhibiting autophagy. METHODS:Patients with advanced solid tumors (n = 24) received doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) and escalating doses of pantoprazole (80, 160, 240 and 360 mg) administered intravenously prior to doxorubicin. Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic studies. An optional biopsy was performed to evaluate doxorubicin concentration and pharmacodynamic markers of drug activity. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients participated in the study (17 in the dose escalation phase and 7 in the dose expansion). Three patients experienced a dose limiting toxicity (grade 3 fatigue in the three cases), one patient at dose level 3 (pantoprazole 240 mg) and two patients at dose level 4 (pantoprazole 360 mg). Dose level 4 was considered to exceed the maximum tolerated dose. The recommended phase II dose was pantoprazole 240 mg and doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2). The most commonly observed toxicities included fatigue, neutropenia and leukopenia. Two patients achieved a confirmed partial response. Median maximum serum concentration of pantoprazole was 84.3 μM at 1-2 h after injection of pantoprazole 240 mg. No drug-drug interaction was observed. A single on-treatment tumor biopsy showed a sharply decreasing gradient in doxorubicin concentration and associated activity markers with increasing distance from tumor blood vessels. CONCLUSION: Administration of high doses of pantoprazole in combination with doxorubicin is feasible. The recommended phase II dose of pantoprazole, 240 mg, will be evaluated in combination with docetaxel as first line in patients with castration-resistant prostate cancer.
Authors: Mark Stein; Hongxia Lin; Chandrika Jeyamohan; Dmitri Dvorzhinski; Murugesan Gounder; Kevin Bray; Simantini Eddy; Susan Goodin; Eileen White; Robert S Dipaola Journal: Prostate Date: 2010-09-15 Impact factor: 4.104
Authors: J Lankelma; H Dekker; F R Luque; S Luykx; K Hoekman; P van der Valk; P J van Diest; H M Pinedo Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 1999-07 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Efthimios Sivridis; Michael I Koukourakis; Savvas E Mendrinos; Antonios Karpouzis; Aliki Fiska; Constantinos Kouskoukis; Alexandra Giatromanolaki Journal: Melanoma Res Date: 2011-06 Impact factor: 3.599
Authors: Aaron R Hansen; Ian F Tannock; Arnoud Templeton; Eric Chen; Andrew Evans; Jennifer Knox; Amy Prawira; Srikala S Sridhar; Susie Tan; Francisco Vera-Badillo; Lisa Wang; Bradly G Wouters; Anthony M Joshua Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-04-05
Authors: Q Tan; A M Joshua; J K Saggar; M Yu; M Wang; N Kanga; J Y Zhang; X Chen; B G Wouters; I F Tannock Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2015-02-03 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Mengzhu Zheng; Shanshan Luan; Suyu Gao; Li Cheng; Bin Hao; Jiacheng Li; Yao Chen; Xuemei Hou; Lixia Chen; Hua Li Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-06-13
Authors: Kassidy A Hebert; Sergio Jaramillo; Wangjie Yu; Min Wang; Ratna Veeramachaneni; Vlad C Sandulache; Andrew G Sikora; Mark D Bonnen; Ananth V Annapragada; David Corry; Farrah Kheradmand; Raj K Pandita; Michelle S Ludwig; Tej K Pandita; Shixia Huang; Cristian Coarfa; Sandra L Grimm; Dimuthu Perera; George Miles; Yohannes T Ghebre Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2021-07-06
Authors: Tanmay M Shekhar; Mark A Miles; Ankita Gupte; Scott Taylor; Brianna Tascone; Carl R Walkley; Christine J Hawkins Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2016-06-07