Phase I and pharmacologic study of the tyrosine kinase inhibitor SU101 in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the clinical feasibility and pharmacologic behavior of the platelet-derived growth factor (PDGF) tyrosine kinase inhibitor SU101, administered on a prolonged, intermittent dosing schedule to patients with advanced solid malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-six patients were treated with SU101 doses ranging from 15 to 443 mg/m(2) as a 24-hour continuous intravenous (IV) infusion weekly for 4 weeks, repeated every 6 weeks. Pharmacokinetic studies were performed to characterize the disposition of SU101 and its major active metabolite, SU0020. Immunohistochemical staining of PDGF-alpha and -beta receptors was performed on malignant tumor specimens obtained at diagnosis. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were treated with 52 courses (187 infusions) of SU101. The most common toxicities were mild to moderate nausea, vomiting, and fever. Two patients experienced one episode each of grade 3 neutropenia at the 333 and 443 mg/m(2) dose levels. Dose escalation of SU101 above 443 mg/m(2)/wk was precluded by the total volume of infusate required, 2.5 to 3.0 L. Individual plasma SU101 and SU0020 concentrations were described by a one-compartment model that incorporates both first-order formation and elimination of SU0020. SU101 was rapidly converted to SU0020, which exhibited a long elimination half-life averaging 19 +/- 12 days. At the 443 mg/m(2)/wk dose level, trough plasma SU0020 concentrations during weeks 2 and 4 ranged from 54 to 522 micromol/L. Immunohistochemical studies revealed PDGF-alpha and -beta receptor staining in the majority (15 of 19) of malignant neoplasms. CONCLUSION: SU101 was well tolerated as a 24-hour continuous IV infusion at doses of up to 443 mg/m(2)/wk for 4 consecutive weeks every 6 weeks. Although further dose escalation was precluded by infusate volume constraints, this SU101 dose schedule resulted in the achievement and maintenance of substantial plasma concentrations of the major metabolite, SU0020, for the entire treatment period.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic trial of oral irinotecan administered daily for 5 days every 3 weeks in patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: We conducted a phase I dose-escalation trial of orally administered irinotecan (CPT-11) to characterize the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), pharmacokinetic profile, and antitumor effects in patients with refractory malignancies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: CPT-11 solution for intravenous (IV) use was mixed with CranGrape juice (Ocean Spray, Lakeville-Middleboro, MA) and administered orally once per day for 5 days every 3 weeks to 28 patients. Starting dosages ranged from 20 to 100 mg/m2/d. RESULTS: Grade 4 delayed diarrhea was the DLT at the 80 mg/m2/d dosage in patients younger than 65 years of age and at the 66 mg/m2/d dosage in patients 65 or older. The other most clinically significant toxicity of oral CPT-11 was neutropenia. A linear relationship was found between dose, peak plasma concentration, and area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) for both CPT-11 and SN-38 lactone, implying no saturation in the conversion of irinotecan to SN-38. The mean metabolic ratio ([AUC(SN-38 total) + AUC(SN-38G total)]/AUC(CPT-11 total)) was 0.7 to 0.8, which suggests that oral dosing results in presystemic conversion of CPT-11 to SN-38. An average of 72% of SN-38 was maintained in the lactone form during the first 24 hours after drug administration. One patient with previously treated colorectal cancer and liver metastases who received oral CPT-11 at the 80 mg/m2/d dosage achieved a confirmed partial response. CONCLUSION: The MTD and recommended phase II dosage for oral CPT-11 is 66 mg/m2/d in patients younger than 65 years of age and 50 mg/m2/d in patients 65 or older, administered daily for 5 days every 3 weeks. The DLT of diarrhea is similar to that observed with IV administration of CPT-11. The biologic activity and favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics make oral administration of CPT-11 an attractive option for further clinical development.

Phase I trial of paclitaxel and gemcitabine administered every two weeks in patients with refractory solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Paclitaxel and gemcitabine possess broad spectra of clinical activity, distinct mechanisms of cytotoxicity, and are differentially affected by mutations in cell-cycle regulatory proteins, such as bcl-2. This phase I trial was designed to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose limiting toxicities (DLT) of paclitaxel and gemcitabine when both drugs were given together on a once-every-two-week schedule in patients with solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 37 patients were treated at nine different dose levels ranging from paclitaxel 75-175 mg/m2 administered over three hours followed by gemcitabinc 1500-3500 mg/m2 administered over 30-60 minutes. Both drugs were administered on day 1 of a 14-day cycle. Dose escalation was performed in a stepwise manner in which the dose of one drug was escalated while the dose of the other drug was kept constant. RESULTS: Dose limiting toxicity (DLT) was observed at dose level 9: paclitaxel 175 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 3500 mg/m2 in the form of grade 4 neutropenia lasting for > or = 5 days (one patient) and grade 3 elevation of alanine aminotransferase (AST/SGPT) (one patient). An analysis of delivered dose intensity (DI) over the first three cycles revealed that higher dosages of both drugs were delivered at dose level 7, paclitaxel 150 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 3000 mg/m2 dose level, than at the MTD, dose level 8, paclitaxel 150 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 3500 mg/m2. Partial responses were confirmed in two patients with transitional cell carcinoma (one of the bladder, one of the renal pelvis) and in one patient with adenocarcinoma of unknown primary. CONCLUSIONS: Paclitaxel and gemcitabine is a promising drug combination that can be administered safely and repetitively on an every-other-week schedule. Using this drug administration schedule, the recommended phase II dose is paclitaxel 150 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 3000 mg/m2.

A statistical and clinical evaluation of fingerstick and routine laboratory prothrombin time measurements.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare prothrombin time measurements by fingerstick and routine laboratory methods. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: University-affiliated anticoagulation clinic. PATIENTS: Thirty-three patients receiving warfarin with stable anticoagulation for 3 months preceding the two studies. INTERVENTIONS: Groups 1 (17 patients) and 2 (16 patients) provided 150 and 125 paired samples, respectively, for fingerstick and routine laboratory analysis. The fact that no patient required a dosage change allowed for a clinical assessment. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Correlation and agreement between methods were good in group 1 but poor in group 2. Fingerstick results were less variable (smaller standard deviation and smaller coefficient of repeatability) in both groups. By analysis of discrepant pairs (25 in group 1, 63 in group 2), the routine laboratory results indicated dosage changes erroneously more often than did the fingerstick method. CONCLUSIONS: In these two trials, the fingerstick system was superior to the routine laboratory method in that it was more reliable (less variability and more repeatable) and less likely to indicate dosage changes erroneously.

Pharmaceutical aspects of docetaxel.

Clinical trials, pharmacokinetics, and pharmaceutical aspects of docetaxel are reviewed. In Phase I trials, the maximum tolerated dose of docetaxel ranged from 80 to 115 mg/m2. The main dose-limiting toxicity was brief neutropenia. These results led to a recommended dosage schedule in Phase II trials of 100 mg/m2 given by i.v. infusion over one hour every three weeks. Docetaxel exhibits linear pharmacokinetics and has an elimination half-life of about 12 hours. Patients with hepatic dysfunction have higher drug concentrations and more severe adverse effects. The overall response rate in Phase II trials in women with anthracycline-resistant breast cancer was 47%. Docetaxel is indicated for use in the treatment of locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer that has progressed during anthracycline-based therapy or relapsed during anthracycline-based adjuvant therapy. Docetaxel is commercially available as 20- and 80-mg formulations, but both yield the same drug concentration (10 mg/mL) when mixed with diluent. The actual drug concentration in each vial and the volume of diluent differ from those indicated on the vial labels to allow a final concentration of 10 mg/mL in the premixed solution, despite drug loss during preparation. To avoid dosage errors when the premixed solution is added to the infusion solution, calculations should be based on the amount of docetaxel per milliliter of premixed solution rather than on the total volume of premixed solution. Docetaxel is fairly easy to prepare and administer and is suitable for use on an outpatient basis.

Adapting a commercially available software program to improve ADR reporting.

To facilitate the long-term storage, retrieval, and analysis of adverse drug reaction (ADR) data, the drug information service at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio selected a computer software program with the capability to compile sets of relational databases. Five subsets were created to form the ADR database--patient demographics, medications, American Hospital Formulary Service classifications, adverse reactions, and case reports. This computerized system allows for quick information retrieval as well as the generation of monthly ADR reports. With such information, trends in ADRs can be identified and targeted for intervention programs to improve patient care and to comply with JCAHO requirements.

Sexually transmitted diseases: an update.

Although the 1993 CDC treatment guidelines for STDs contained relatively few changes from the 1989 guidelines, some recently marketed medications now appear in the list of recommended and alternative treatment regimens. Pharmacists must consider differences in dosage formulations (intramuscular versus oral), cost, and length of treatment when choosing the antibiotic or antiviral to be listed in a hospital or managed care formulary. Additionally, pharmacists should recognize that some STD therapies are now given once daily instead of in a 7-day course. When an antibiotic or antiviral prescription order is presented, pharmacists should determine why the patient is receiving this therapy. Verifying the disease process will help the pharmacist counsel the patient on the therapy. In some instances, therapy may be appropriately administered in the emergency room or the pharmacy, to ensure that the patient complies with the medication regimen. Verifying compliance will be especially important for patients who are expected to ingest only one dose, rather than a seven-day course of therapy. By initiating such programs, pharmacists can help prevent drug-resistance problems and ensure compliance.