Literature DB >> 2720696

Phase I trial using adaptive control dosing of hexamethylene bisacetamide (NSC 95580).

B A Conley1, A Forrest, M J Egorin, E G Zuhowski, V Sinibaldi, D A Van Echo.   

Abstract

Hexamethylene bisacetamide (HMBA), a potent differentiating agent, was administered to patients with refractory malignant tumors. Thirteen patients received 30 evaluable courses. HMBA was given by continuous i.v. infusion for 5 days. Therapy was repeated every 28 days, if patients had recovered from toxicity. The starting dose was 24 g/m2/day. Because our previous trial had shown wide interpatient variability in HMBA pharmacokinetics and excess toxicity at HMBA plasma concentrations greater than 2 mM (HMBA doses between 24 and 33.6 g/m2/day), we attempted to individualize each patient's dose based on a dosing scheme using an adaptive (feedback) control algorithm, which assumed linear clearance for HMBA. In all courses, a plasma sample was assayed daily and infusion rates were adjusted to achieve an HMBA plasma concentration of 1.5-2.0 mM (300-400 mg/liter). The patients included 12 men and 1 woman with a median age of 56 years (range, 34-76) and median Karnofsky performance status of 90% (range, 60-100). All patients had received prior chemotherapy and 9 patients had also received radiation therapy. The linear adaptive control algorithm was reasonably precise, with a mean absolute error of 0.28 (SE 0.04) mM. However, adjustments in infusion rate systematically overshot the desired change in steady state concentration, probably due to nonlinear clearance of HMBA. For levels within 24 h of a change in infusion rate, this resulted in significant bias, with a mean error of 0.24 (SE 0.09) mM. The mean absolute error was 0.40 (SE 0.06) mM. A second adaptive control algorithm, using a pharmacokinetic model with parallel first-order (renal) clearance and Michaelis-Menten (nonrenal) clearance and using Bayesian parameter estimation with a priori estimates based on our previous phase I trial, proved to be much more precise than the linear method and was unbiased when applied retrospectively to the same observations, with a mean error (within 24 h of a change in infusion rate) of 0.02 (SE 0.06) mM and a mean absolute error of 0.22 (SE 0.03) mM. Toxicity was reversible in all cases. Neurotoxicity, consisting of hallucinations, agitation, somnolence, or confusion, was seen in 2 patients. Four patients complained of insomnia or anxiety. Mild asymptomatic acidosis was seen in 3 patients. Other toxicity included grade 1-2 nausea and vomiting (10 patients), grade 2 diarrhea (2 patients), grade 3 thrombocytopenia (3 patients), grade 1-3 leukopenia (3 patients), and oral herpes simplex infection (4 patients). Mild reversible renal insufficiency (measured by creatinine clearance) was seen in 8 patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1989        PMID: 2720696

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Res        ISSN: 0008-5472            Impact factor:   12.701


  19 in total

Review 1.  Pharmacokinetically guided administration of chemotherapeutic agents.

Authors:  H J van den Bongard; R A Mathôt; J H Beijnen; J H Schellens
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2000-11       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 2.  Individualised cancer chemotherapy: strategies and performance of prospective studies on therapeutic drug monitoring with dose adaptation: a review.

Authors:  Milly E de Jonge; Alwin D R Huitema; Jan H M Schellens; Sjoerd Rodenhuis; Jos H Beijnen
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2005       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 3.  Bayesian parameter estimation and population pharmacokinetics.

Authors:  A H Thomson; B Whiting
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  1992-06       Impact factor: 6.447

4.  Hexamethylene bisacetamide as a treatment for T-cell leukemia (T-ALL).

Authors:  Silvia Buonamici; Iannis Aifantis
Journal:  Leuk Res       Date:  2007-12-31       Impact factor: 3.156

5.  A limited sampling method for estimation of the etoposide area under the curve.

Authors:  A S Strömgren; B T Sørensen; P Jakobsen; A Jakobsen
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.333

Review 6.  Adaptive control methods for the dose individualisation of anticancer agents.

Authors:  A Rousseau; P Marquet; J Debord; C Sabot; G Lachâtre
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2000-04       Impact factor: 6.447

7.  A limited sampling method for estimation of the carboplatin area under the curve.

Authors:  B T Sørensen; A Strömgren; P Jakobsen; A Jakobsen
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.333

Review 8.  Limited-sampling models for anticancer agents.

Authors:  L J van Warmerdam; W W ten Bokkel Huinink; R A Maes; J H Beijnen
Journal:  J Cancer Res Clin Oncol       Date:  1994       Impact factor: 4.553

9.  Induction of HEXIM1 activities by HMBA derivative 4a1: Functional consequences and mechanism.

Authors:  Wannarasmi Ketchart; I-Ju Yeh; Haoyan Zhou; Praveena S Thiagarajan; Justin Lathia; Ofer Reizes; Agata Exner; Bin Su; Monica M Montano
Journal:  Cancer Lett       Date:  2016-05-26       Impact factor: 8.679

10.  Approaches to optimal dosing of hexamethylene bisacetamide.

Authors:  B A Conley; M J Egorin; V Sinibaldi; G Sewack; C Kloc; L Roberts; E G Zuhowski; A Forrest; D A Van Echo
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1992       Impact factor: 3.333

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.