Literature DB >> 9443625

Population pharmacokinetics of total and unbound etoposide.

L Nguyen1, E Chatelut, C Chevreau, B Tranchand, I Lochon, J M Bachaud, A Pujol, G Houin, R Bugat, P Canal.   

Abstract

A population pharmacokinetics study using the NONMEM program was undertaken to determine the effects of different covariates on the pharmacokinetic parameters of etoposide. A total of 1,044 plasma etoposide concentrations were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) in 100 patients (pts; 75 men and 25 women aged 25-85 years) treated for various tumor types with i.v. (57 pts) or oral (43 pts) etoposide. For 67 pts, etoposide plasma protein binding was determined by equilibrium dialysis; the unbound fraction ranged from 4% to 24%. A linear two-compartment model with first-order absorption (for oral dosing) accurately described the concentration versus time data. The central and peripheral volumes of distribution were significantly correlated with the body surface area [Vc (L) = 5.5 x BSA (m2) and Vp = 4.1 x BSA], but even after BSA had been taken into account, the interindividual variability of the two volumes remained high (34% and 57%, respectively). The clearance (CL) was not correlated with the following covariates: age, BSA, sex, height, and levels of serum bilirubin and liver enzymes. The final regression model for CL was CL (ml/min) = 49.8 x (1 - 0.009 x PRO) x WT/Scr + 33.8 x (1 - 0.29 x META) x (1 - 0.012 x ALB), where ALB, PRO, WT, and Scr, respectively, were albuminemia, proteinemia (g/l), weight (kg), and serum creatinine (microM) and META = 1 if the patient had liver metastases (otherwise, META = 0). The interindividual variability in CL (mean value 30 ml/min) decreased only from 32% to 26% when these covariates were taken into account. The mean oral bioavailability was 66%, showing an interindividual variability of 37%. The plasma clearance of the unbound fraction was strongly and negatively correlated with Scr but was not dependent on either PRO or ALB. These data show that modifications in PRO levels do not directly affect plasma exposure to unbound etoposide. This analysis makes possible the rational consideration of modifications of covariates such as Scr in etoposide dosing. This population data base will constitute the prerequisite for adaptative control with feedback dosing for continuous oral administration of etoposide.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1998        PMID: 9443625     DOI: 10.1007/s002800050718

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cancer Chemother Pharmacol        ISSN: 0344-5704            Impact factor:   3.333


  16 in total

Review 1.  Body surface area as a determinant of pharmacokinetics and drug dosing.

Authors:  M Sawyer; M J Ratain
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2001-05       Impact factor: 3.850

Review 2.  The oral route for the administration of cytotoxic drugs: strategies to increase the efficiency and consistency of drug delivery.

Authors:  H A Bardelmeijer; O van Tellingen; J H Schellens; J H Beijnen
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.850

Review 3.  Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic guided trial design in oncology.

Authors:  Ch van Kesteren; R A A Mathôt; J H Beijnen; J H M Schellens
Journal:  Invest New Drugs       Date:  2003-05       Impact factor: 3.850

4.  Population pharmacokinetics of the BEACOPP polychemotherapy regimen in Hodgkin's lymphoma and its effect on myelotoxicity.

Authors:  Stefan Wilde; Alexander Jetter; Stephan Rietbrock; Dirk Kasel; Andreas Engert; Andreas Josting; Beate Klimm; Georg Hempel; Stefanie Reif; Ulrich Jaehde; Ute Merkel; Dagmar Busse; Matthias Schwab; Volker Diehl; Uwe Fuhr
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 6.447

Review 5.  Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics for treatment optimization in clinical oncology.

Authors:  Anthe S Zandvliet; Jan H M Schellens; Jos H Beijnen; Alwin D R Huitema
Journal:  Clin Pharmacokinet       Date:  2008       Impact factor: 6.447

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.  Population pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of oral etoposide.

Authors:  G Toffoli; G Corona; R Sorio; I Robieux; B Basso; A M Colussi; M Boiocchi
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2001-11       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 8.  What is the best size descriptor to use for pharmacokinetic studies in the obese?

Authors:  Bruce Green; Stephen B Duffull
Journal:  Br J Clin Pharmacol       Date:  2004-08       Impact factor: 4.335

Review 9.  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

Review 10.  Practical treatment guide for dose individualisation in cancer chemotherapy.

Authors:  P Canal; E Chatelut; S Guichard
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  1998-12       Impact factor: 9.546

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.