PURPOSE: This multicenter, open-label, dose-escalating, phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and preliminary tumor response of a nanoparticulate formulation of paclitaxel (Nanotax®) administered intraperitoneally for multiple treatment cycles in patients with solid tumors predominantly confined to the peritoneal cavity for whom no other curative systemic therapy treatment options were available. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with peritoneal malignancies received Nanotax® in a modified dose-escalation approach utilizing an accelerated titration method. All patients enrolled had previously received chemotherapeutics and undergone surgical procedures, including 33 % with optimal debulking. Six doses (50-275 mg/m(2)) of Cremophor-free Nanotax® were administered intraperitoneally for one to six cycles (every 28 days). RESULTS: Intraperitoneal (IP) administration of Nanotax® did not lead to increases in toxicity over that typically associated with intravenous (IV) paclitaxel. No patient reported ≥Grade 2 neutropenia and/or ≥Grade 3 neurologic toxicities. Grade 3 thrombocytopenia unlikely related to study medication occurred in one patient. The peritoneal concentration-time profile of paclitaxel rose during the 2 days after dosing to peritoneal fluid concentrations 450-2900 times greater than peak plasma drug concentrations and remained elevated through the entire dose cycle. Best response assessments were made in 16/21 patients: Four patients were assessed as stable or had no response and twelve patients had increasing disease. Five of 21 patients with advanced cancers survived longer than 400 days after initiation of Nanotax® IP treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to IV paclitaxel administration, Cremophor-free IP administration of Nanotax® provides higher and prolonged peritoneal paclitaxel levels with minimal systemic exposure and reduced toxicity.
PURPOSE: This multicenter, open-label, dose-escalating, phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and preliminary tumor response of a nanoparticulate formulation of paclitaxel (Nanotax®) administered intraperitoneally for multiple treatment cycles in patients with solid tumors predominantly confined to the peritoneal cavity for whom no other curative systemic therapy treatment options were available. METHODS: Twenty-one patients with peritoneal malignancies received Nanotax® in a modified dose-escalation approach utilizing an accelerated titration method. All patients enrolled had previously received chemotherapeutics and undergone surgical procedures, including 33 % with optimal debulking. Six doses (50-275 mg/m(2)) of Cremophor-free Nanotax® were administered intraperitoneally for one to six cycles (every 28 days). RESULTS: Intraperitoneal (IP) administration of Nanotax® did not lead to increases in toxicity over that typically associated with intravenous (IV) paclitaxel. No patient reported ≥Grade 2 neutropenia and/or ≥Grade 3 neurologic toxicities. Grade 3 thrombocytopenia unlikely related to study medication occurred in one patient. The peritoneal concentration-time profile of paclitaxel rose during the 2 days after dosing to peritoneal fluid concentrations 450-2900 times greater than peak plasma drug concentrations and remained elevated through the entire dose cycle. Best response assessments were made in 16/21 patients: Four patients were assessed as stable or had no response and twelve patients had increasing disease. Five of 21 patients with advanced cancers survived longer than 400 days after initiation of Nanotax® IP treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to IV paclitaxel administration, Cremophor-free IP administration of Nanotax® provides higher and prolonged peritoneal paclitaxel levels with minimal systemic exposure and reduced toxicity.
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: Francisco C Muñoz-Casares; Sebastián Rufián; Álvaro Arjona-Sánchez; María J Rubio; Rafael Díaz; Ángela Casado; Álvaro Naranjo; Carlos J Díaz-Iglesias; Rosa Ortega; María C Muñoz-Villanueva; Jordi Muntané; Enrique Aranda Journal: Cancer Chemother Pharmacol Date: 2011-04-17 Impact factor: 3.333
Authors: Joyce N Barlin; Fanny Dao; Nadim Bou Zgheib; Sarah E Ferguson; Paul J Sabbatini; Martee L Hensley; Katherine M Bell-McGuinn; Jason Konner; William P Tew; Carol Aghajanian; Dennis S Chi Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2012-03-21 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: Kjell A Mortier; Vincent Renard; Alain G Verstraete; Annie Van Gussem; Simon Van Belle; Willy E Lambert Journal: Anal Chem Date: 2005-07-15 Impact factor: 6.986
Authors: D S Alberts; P Y Liu; E V Hannigan; R O'Toole; S D Williams; J A Young; E W Franklin; D L Clarke-Pearson; V K Malviya; B DuBeshter Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 1996-12-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: James Verco; William Johnston; Michael Baltezor; Philip J Kuehl; Andrew Gigliotti; Steven A Belinsky; Anita Lopez; Ronald Wolff; Lauren Hylle; Gere diZerega Journal: J Aerosol Med Pulm Drug Deliv Date: 2018-10-25 Impact factor: 2.849
Authors: Giovanni Di Lorenzo; Giuseppe Ricci; Giovanni Maria Severini; Federico Romano; Stefania Biffi Journal: Theranostics Date: 2018-07-30 Impact factor: 11.556
Authors: Maciej Nowacki; Margarita Peterson; Tomasz Kloskowski; Eleanor McCabe; Delia Cortes Guiral; Karol Polom; Katarzyna Pietkun; Barbara Zegarska; Marta Pokrywczynska; Tomasz Drewa; Franco Roviello; Edward A Medina; Samy L Habib; Wojciech Zegarski Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2017-08-31