Literature DB >> 32800400

Safety, pharmacokinetics and tissue penetration of PIPAC paclitaxel in a swine model.

Hon Lyn Tan1, Guowei Kim2, Christopher John Charles3, Renee R Li3, Clarisse Jm Jang4, Asim Shabbir2, Koy Min Chue5, Chia Hui Tai5, Raghav Sundar1, Boon Cher Goh6, Glenn Kunnath Bonney7, Wen Donq Looi8, Esther Sh Cheow9, Jimmy By So10, Lingzhi Wang11, Wei Peng Yong12.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: Peritoneal carcinomatosis is difficult to treat. Pressurized Intra-Peritoneal Aerosolised Chemotherapy (PIPAC) is a novel method of delivering chemotherapy to the peritoneal cavity, aiming for homogenous and deeper drug distribution. To date, limited chemotherapeutics have been used with promising results. Here, we evaluate the pharmacokinetics, peritoneal tissue drug concentration, penetration, and short-term safety of PIPAC using solvent-based paclitaxel in swine to guide clinical trials.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: PIPAC solvent-based paclitaxel was administered at 60, 30, and 15mg/m2 for 3 cohorts. Each PIPAC procedure was followed by intravenous (IV) administration of the same dose of solvent-based paclitaxel on Day 7, serving as control for pharmacokinetic comparison in the same pig. Safety and toxicity were evaluated by clinical assessment, blood counts and biochemistry. Blood samples were taken for pharmacokinetic analysis. Peritoneal biopsies were taken to measure tissue paclitaxel concentrations and distribution.
RESULTS: 12 Yorkshire x Landrace pigs underwent trial procedures. With PIPAC, there was linear pharmacokinetics and lower systemic exposure to paclitaxel compared to IV administration. MALDI-MSI demonstrated concentration of paclitaxel at the peritoneal surface, with estimated 2 mm penetration. PIPAC paclitaxel had favorable toxicity profile. The most significant adverse event was neutropenia which was dose dependent, with absolute neutrophil count <1.0 × 103/μL seen at the highest dose. One pig developed grade 2 hypersensitivity reaction during IV infusion and one death occurred during the PIPAC procedure, likely from anaphylaxis; these are known potential adverse events mandating standard precautions and monitoring.
CONCLUSION: PIPAC paclitaxel at 15mg/m2 may be considered for a Phase I study.
Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Ltd, BASO ~ The Association for Cancer Surgery, and the European Society of Surgical Oncology. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Drug delivery systems; Paclitaxel; Peritoneal carcinomatosis; Pharmacokinetics; Swine

Year:  2020        PMID: 32800400     DOI: 10.1016/j.ejso.2020.06.031

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur J Surg Oncol        ISSN: 0748-7983            Impact factor:   4.424


  5 in total

Review 1.  The emergence of pressurized intraperitoneal aerosol chemotherapy as a palliative treatment option for patients with diffuse peritoneal metastases: a narrative review.

Authors:  Robin J Lurvink; Kurt Van der Speeten; Koen P Rovers; Ignace H J T de Hingh
Journal:  J Gastrointest Oncol       Date:  2021-04

Review 2.  Is PIPAC a Treatment Option in Upper and Lower Gastrointestinal Cancer with Peritoneal Metastasis?

Authors:  Safak Guel-Klein; Miguel Enrique Alberto Vilchez; Wim Ceelen; Beate Rau; Andreas Brandl
Journal:  Visc Med       Date:  2022-03-21

Review 3.  Swine models for translational oncological research: an evolving landscape and regulatory considerations.

Authors:  Adeline N Boettcher; Kyle M Schachtschneider; Lawrence B Schook; Christopher K Tuggle
Journal:  Mamm Genome       Date:  2021-09-02       Impact factor: 3.224

Review 4.  Integration of Genomic Biology Into Therapeutic Strategies of Gastric Cancer Peritoneal Metastasis.

Authors:  Yong Xiang Gwee; Daryl Kai Ann Chia; Jimmy So; Wim Ceelen; Wei Peng Yong; Patrick Tan; Chin-Ann Johnny Ong; Raghav Sundar
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2022-06-01       Impact factor: 50.717

5.  Rotational intraperitoneal pressurized aerosol chemotherapy with paclitaxel and cisplatin: pharmacokinetics, tissue concentrations, and toxicities in a pig model.

Authors:  Soo Jin Park; Eun Ji Lee; Aeran Seol; Sunwoo Park; Jiyeon Ham; Ga Won Yim; Seung-Hyuk Shim; Whasun Lim; Suk-Joon Chang; Gwonhwa Song; Ji Won Park; Hee Seung Kim
Journal:  J Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2022-05-24       Impact factor: 4.756

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.