Phase I study of temozolomide and irinotecan for recurrent malignant gliomas in patients receiving enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs: a north american brain tumor consortium study.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum tolerated dose of irinotecan when administrated with temozolomide every 28 days, in patients with recurrent malignant glioma who were also receiving CYP450 enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAED), and to characterize the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and its metabolites. The study was also intended to assess whether temozolomide affects the conversion of irinotecan to SN-38. DESIGN: Patients with recurrent malignant glioma received a fixed dose of temozolomide (150 mg/m(2)) daily for 5 days from days 1 to 5 every 28 days, and an i.v. infusion of irinotecan on days 1 and 15 of each cycle. The starting dose of irinotecan was 350 mg/m(2), which was escalated to 550 mg/m(2) in 50-mg/m(2) increments. The plasma pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and its active metabolite, SN-38, were determined during the infusion of irinotecan on cycle 1, day 1. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were enrolled into the study and treated. Thirty-one patients were evaluable for both tumor response and toxicity and two patients were evaluable for toxicity only. Common toxicities included neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Dose-limiting toxicities were grade 3 diarrhea and nausea/vomiting. The maximum tolerated dose for irinotecan was determined to be 500 mg/m(2). CONCLUSIONS: The recommended phase II dose of irinotecan in combination with temozolomide for patients receiving EIAEDs is 500 mg/m(2), administrated every 15 days on a 28-day schedule. This study also confirmed that concomitant administration of EIAEDs increases irinotecan clearance and influences SN-38 disposition. No pharmacokinetic interaction was observed between temozolomide and irinotecan.

Clinical implementation of target tracking by breathing synchronized delivery.

Target-tracking techniques can be categorized based on the mechanism of the feedback loop. In real time tracking, breathing-delivery phase correlation is provided to the treatment delivery hardware. Clinical implementation of target tracking in real time requires major hardware modifications. In breathing synchronized delivery (BSD), the patient is guided to breathe in accordance with target motion derived from four-dimensional computed tomography (4D-CT). Violations of mechanical limitations of hardware are to be avoided at the treatment planning stage. Hardware modifications are not required. In this article, using sliding window IMRT delivery as an example, we have described step-by-step the implementation of target tracking by the BSD technique: (1) A breathing guide is developed from patient's normal breathing pattern. The patient tries to reproduce this guiding cycle by following the display in the goggles; (2) 4D-CT scans are acquired at all the phases of the breathing cycle; (3) The average tumor trajectory is obtained by deformable image registration of 4D-CT datasets and is smoothed by Fourier filtering; (4) Conventional IMRT planning is performed using the images at reference phase (full exhalation phase) and a leaf sequence based on optimized fluence map is generated; (5) Assuming the patient breathes with a reproducible breathing pattern and the machine maintains a constant dose rate, the treatment process is correlated with the breathing phase; (6) The instantaneous average tumor displacement is overlaid on the dMLC position at corresponding phase; and (7) DMLC leaf speed and acceleration are evaluated to ensure treatment delivery. A custom-built mobile phantom driven by a computer-controlled stepper motor was used in the dosimetry verification. A stepper motor was programmed such that the phantom moved according to the linear component of tumor motion used in BSD treatment planning. A conventional plan was delivered on the phantom with and without motion. The BSD plan was also delivered on the phantom that moved with the prescheduled pattern and synchronized with the delivery of each beam. Film dosimetry showed underdose and overdose in the superior and inferior regions of the target, respectively, if the tumor motion is not compensated during the delivery. BSD delivery resulted in a dose distribution very similar to the planned treatments.