Clinical evaluation of the efficacy of methylnaltrexone in resolving constipation induced by different opioid subtypes combined with laboratory analysis of immunomodulatory and antiangiogenic effects of methylnaltrexone.

BACKGROUND: Opioid-induced constipation (OIC) is one of the major symptoms in palliative care with a prevalence of 30-50%. Methylnaltrexone for the treatment of OIC is significantly more effective than placebo, but only in about fifty percent of the patients regardless of dose increase. Dose increases cause increased toxicity without additional efficacy, and are therefore not recommended. While methylnaltrexone is a µ-receptor antagonist, only a few opioids are solely µ-receptor agonists. Therefore, the response to methylnaltrexone may be determined by the receptor-profile of a specific opioid. In addition, methylnaltrexone may also affect the immune system and angiogenesis as was found in pre-clinical studies. Primary aim of this study is to determine differences in the efficacy of methylnaltrexone prescribed to resolve opioid induced constipation between three commonly used opioid subtypes: morphine sulphate, oxycodone and fentanyl. Secondary aim is to explore potential immunomodulatory and antiangiogenic effects of methylnaltrexone. METHODS: In this multi-center, prospective, parallel group trial we will evaluate the efficacy of methylnaltrexone in resolving OIC occurring as a side effect of the most common opioid subtypes: morphine, oxycodone and fentanyl. In total 195 patients with OIC despite prophylactic laxatives will receive methylnaltrexone every other day up to fourteen days. Patients will report its effect in a laxation diary. Group allocation is based on the opioid type the patient is using. At the start and end of the study period patients complete the Bowel Function Index questionnaire. A subgroup of the patients will donate blood for analysis of immunomodulatory- and anti-angiogenic effects of methylnaltrexone. DISCUSSION: In this study we aim to determine the efficacy of methylnaltrexone per opioid subtype to reduce constipation. We expect that the outcome of this study will improve the clinical use of methylnaltraxone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered at clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01955213 and in the Dutch trial register: NTR4272.

Tonsillar metastasis of oesophageal adenocarcinoma.

In the literature less than 100 cases of metastatic carcinoma of the palatine tonsil have been reported. Tonsillar metastasis of adenocarcinoma of the oesophagus has not been reported previously. We report a case of a 57-year-old male with a primary adenocarcinoma of the distal esophagus with a metastasis in the right palatine tonsil. Metastatic tumour involving the palatine tonsil is rare. The route of dissemination remains unclear. Hypothetically the dissemination of tumour cells could be lymphogenic or secondary by transportation due to vomiting or at the time of endoscopy, but most likely represents haematogenous spread.

The effect of food on the pharmacokinetics of S-1 after single oral administration to patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: The purpose is to determine the effect of food on the bioavailability of S-1, an oral formulation of the 5-fluorouracil (5FU) prodrug Ftorafur (FT), 5-chloro-2,4-dihydroxypyridine (CDHP), a dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibitor, and oxonic acid (an inhibitor of 5FU phosphoribosylation in normal gut mucosa) in a molar ratio of 1:0.4:1. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Eighteen patients received a single dose of S-1 of 35 mg/m(2) with (535-885 kcal) or without food in a crossover study design: in arm A without breakfast on day -7 and with breakfast on day 0 and in arm B the reversed sequence. Blood samples were taken before and after S-1 administration. This food effect was evaluated according to the Food and Drug Administration guidelines using log-transformed data. RESULTS: Pharmacokinetic parameters for 5FU without breakfast were as follows: Tmax, 107 min; Cmax, 1.60 microm; area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) 441 microm x min; and T(1/2), 104 min. Fasting decreased Tmax of FT, 5FU, CDHP, and oxonic acid significantly (P < 0.006) and increased the Cmax (P < 0.013). The food/fast ratio for the AUC of FT was not different, which for 5FU was 0.84 (P = 0.041), for CDHP was 0.89 (P = 0.191), for oxonic acid was 0.48 (P < 0.0005), and for cyanuric acid, the breakdown product of oxonic acid, was 5.1 (P = 0.019). Accumulation of uracil, indicative for dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase inhibition, was not affected, as well as the T(1/2) of FT, 5FU, CDHP, and oxonic acid. Evaluation of the log-transformed data demonstrated that the 90% confidence interval for the food/fast ratio for the Cmax and AUC of FT, 5FU, CDHP, and uracil were within 70-143% and 80-125%, respectively, indicating no food effect. Only for oxonic acid and cyanuric acid were these values outside this interval. CONCLUSIONS: Food intake affected only the pharmacokinetics of the S-1 constituent oxonic acid but not of FT, CDHP, and 5FU. Because oxonic acid is included to protect against gastrointestinal toxicity, this observation might affect the gastrointestinal toxicity and thus the efficacy of S-1.

Positron emission tomography using 2-deoxy-2-[18F]-fluoro-D-glucose for response monitoring in locally advanced gastroesophageal cancer; a comparison of different analytical methods.

PURPOSE: To determine the ability of 2-deoxy-2-[18F]-fluoro-D-glucose (FDG) positron emission tomography (PET) to monitor response in locally advanced gastroesophageal cancer (LAGEC). Additionally, optimal FDG-PET methods for response monitoring were selected. PROCEDURES: Sequential dynamic FDG-PET scans were performed in 13 patients with LAGEC (T2-3N0-1M0-1a) treated with neoadjuvant cisplatin and gemcitabine plus granulocyte macrophage colony stimulating growth factor at a three weekly schedule. The standard FDG-PET method, nonlinear regression (NLR), was compared with computed tomography (CT), endoscopic-ultrasound (EUS), and histopathology as well as with 21 simplified analytical FDG-PET methods. RESULTS: Five out of 12 operated tumors responded histopathologically with less than 10% residual tumorcells (42%). These had a higher decrease in FDG uptake compared with nonresponders (P=0.008). Early (after two cycles) and late (after completed induction therapy) response evaluation showed a specificity of 86% and 100%, respectively, and a sensitivity of 100%. Both FDG-PET and EUS were superior to CT. From 21 methods analyzing FDG uptake, the quantitative Patlak analysis, the simplified kinetic method (SKM), and the semiquantitative standardized uptake value corrected for bodyweight (SUV-BW) seemed to correlate best with NLR. CONCLUSIONS: FDG-PET reliably predicted response in LAGEC. FDG-PET measurements using Patlak analysis or the more clinical applicable SKM and SUV-BW were acceptable alternatives to NLR.

Pretreatment deoxycytidine kinase levels predict in vivo gemcitabine sensitivity.

Deoxycytidine kinase (dCK) is essential for the phosphorylation of gemcitabine (2',2'-difluorodeoxycytidine), a deoxycytidine analogue active against various solid tumors. Cytidine deaminase (CDA) catalyzes the degradation of gemcitabine. We determined whether dCK and/or CDA levels would predict response to gemcitabine. Activities of dCK and CDA were measured in a panel of eight gemcitabine-sensitive and -resistant tumors of a different origin (pancreas, lung, colon, ovary, and head and neck) grown as s.c. tumors in mice. Sensitivity to gemcitabine was expressed as treated versus control (tumor volume treated mice/control mice). Gemcitabine was given on days 0, 3, 6, and 9 (q3dx4) at its maximum tolerated dose. In addition, we measured the mRNA expression and protein levels of dCK in seven human tumor xenografts. dCK activity (mean +/- SE) ranged from 3.3+/-0.3 to 18.4+/-1.2 nmol/h/mg protein. Sensitivity to gemcitabine, expressed as treated versus control, ranged from 0.98 to 0.02, and the activity of CDA varied from 2+/-2 to 411+/-4 nmol/h/mg protein. In contrast to CDA, dCK activity was clearly related to gemcitabine sensitivity (p = -0.93; P < 0.001). This indicates that dCK might be an important prognostic marker for gemcitabine sensitivity. Protein levels were significantly related to both dCK activity (r = 0.96; P < 0.001) and gemcitabine sensitivity (rho = -0.96; P < 0.001). dCK expression as determined by competitive template reverse transcriptase PCR was significantly related with the dCK activity (r = 0.88; P = 0.025) and protein levels (p = 0.80; P = 0.052) but not with gemcitabine sensitivity, suggesting a post-translational regulation of dCK. In conclusion, the clear correlation between dCK levels and gemcitabine sensitivity in various murine tumors and human tumor xenografts may be a prognostic parameter when considering gemcitabine therapy.