Literature DB >> 9184183

Randomized comparison of etoposide pharmacokinetics after oral etoposide phosphate and oral etoposide.

R S de Jong1, N H Mulder, D R Uges, S Kaul, B Winograd, H J Groen, P H Willemse, W T van der Graaf, E G de Vries.   

Abstract

Etoposide phosphate is a water-soluble prodrug of etoposide. The plasma pharmacokinetics of etoposide following oral administration of etoposide phosphate or oral etoposide were compared. Seventeen patients with solid tumours were enrolled to receive oral etoposide phosphate 125 mg m(-2) on days 1-5 every 3 weeks, with escalation to 175 mg m(-2) from course 3 when possible. Patients were randomized to receive oral etoposide phosphate or oral etoposide on day 1 of course 1 and the alternative compound on day 1 of course 2. Fifteen patients received two or more courses and were evaluable for pharmacokinetic comparisons. The median AUC(inf) (area under the concentration vs time curve from zero to infinity) of etoposide was 77.7 mg l(-1) h after etoposide phosphate (95% CI 61.3-100.5) and 62.0 mg l(-1) h after oral etoposide (95% CI 52.2-76.9). The difference in favour of etoposide phosphate was borderline significant: median 9.9 mg l(-1) h (95% CI 0.1-32.8 mg l(-1) h; P = 0.05). However, the inter-patient variability of etoposide AUC(inf) was not improved (coefficients of variation 42.3% and 48.4%). Etoposide phosphate was undetectable in plasma after oral administration. Toxicities of oral etoposide phosphate were not different from those known for etoposide. In conclusion, oral etoposide phosphate does not offer a clinically relevant benefit over oral etoposide.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9184183      PMCID: PMC2223531          DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1997.282

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Br J Cancer        ISSN: 0007-0920            Impact factor:   7.640


  23 in total

1.  Probability distribution of multiple scattered light measured in total transmission.

Authors: 
Journal:  Phys Rev Lett       Date:  1994-11-07       Impact factor: 9.161

2.  Prospective evaluation of a model for predicting etoposide plasma protein binding in cancer patients.

Authors:  C F Stewart; R A Fleming; S G Arbuck; W E Evans
Journal:  Cancer Res       Date:  1990-11-01       Impact factor: 12.701

3.  Variable bioavailability following repeated oral doses of etoposide.

Authors:  V J Harvey; M L Slevin; S P Joel; M M Smythe; A Johnston; P F Wrigley
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol       Date:  1985-11

4.  A randomized trial to evaluate the effect of schedule on the activity of etoposide in small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  M L Slevin; P I Clark; S P Joel; S Malik; R J Osborne; W M Gregory; D G Lowe; R H Reznek; P F Wrigley
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1989-09       Impact factor: 44.544

5.  Phase II randomized study of cisplatin plus etoposide phosphate or etoposide in the treatment of small-cell lung cancer.

Authors:  J D Hainsworth; N Levitan; G L Wampler; C P Belani; M S Seyedsadr; J Randolph; L P Schacter; F A Greco
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1995-06       Impact factor: 44.544

6.  Oral etoposide is active against platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer.

Authors:  P J Hoskins; K D Swenerton
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1994-01       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Pharmacokinetics of oral and intravenous melphalan during routine treatment of multiple myeloma.

Authors:  A G Bosanquet; E D Gilby
Journal:  Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol       Date:  1982-04

8.  Pharmacokinetics of etoposide: correlation of pharmacokinetic parameters with clinical conditions.

Authors:  K H Pflüger; M Hahn; J B Holz; L Schmidt; P Köhl; H W Fritsch; H Jungclas; K Havemann
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1993       Impact factor: 3.333

9.  The effect of dose on the bioavailability of oral etoposide: confirmation of a clinically relevant observation.

Authors:  M L Slevin; S P Joel; R Whomsley; K Devenport; V J Harvey; R J Osborne; P F Wrigley
Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol       Date:  1989       Impact factor: 3.333

10.  Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of oral etoposide phosphate.

Authors:  C Sessa; M Zucchetti; T Cerny; O Pagani; F Cavalli; M De Fusco; J De Jong; D Gentili; C McDaniel; C Prins
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  1995-01       Impact factor: 44.544

View more
  6 in total

Review 1.  Oral anticancer drugs: mechanisms of low bioavailability and strategies for improvement.

Authors:  Frederik E Stuurman; Bastiaan Nuijen; Jos H Beijnen; Jan H M Schellens
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 2.  Extended-schedule oral etoposide in selected neoplasms and overview of administration and scheduling issues.

Authors:  J D Hainsworth
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1999       Impact factor: 9.546

Review 3.  Pharmacokinetic optimisation of treatment with oral etoposide.

Authors:  Giuseppe Toffoli; Giuseppe Corona; Barbara Basso; Mauro Boiocchi
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2004       Impact factor: 6.447

4.  Absorption rate limit considerations for oral phosphate prodrugs.

Authors:  Tycho Heimbach; Doo-Man Oh; Lilian Y Li; Markus Forsberg; Jouko Savolainen; Jukka Leppänen; Yasushi Matsunaga; Gordon Flynn; David Fleisher
Journal:  Pharm Res       Date:  2003-06       Impact factor: 4.200

5.  Conversion of the prodrug etoposide phosphate to etoposide in gastric juice and bile.

Authors:  R S de Jong; E A Slijfer; D R Uges; N H Mulder; E G de Vries
Journal:  Br J Cancer       Date:  1997       Impact factor: 7.640

6.  Oral treatment with etoposide in small cell lung cancer - dilemmas and solutions.

Authors:  Renata Rezonja; Lea Knez; Tanja Cufer; Ales Mrhar
Journal:  Radiol Oncol       Date:  2013-02-01       Impact factor: 2.991

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.