TY - JOUR
T1 - Phase I study of the combination of topotecan and irinotecan in children with refractory solid tumors.
AU - Rodriguez-Galindo, Carlos
AU - Crews, Kristine R.
AU - Stewart, Clinton F.
AU - Furman, Wayne
AU - Panetta, J. Carl
AU - Daw, Najat C.
AU - Cain, Alvida
AU - Tan, Ming
AU - Houghton, Peter H.
AU - Santana, Victor M.
N1 - Funding Information:
Contract grant sponsor: National Institutes of Health; Contract grant numbers P30 CA 21765 and CA 23099; Contract grant sponsor: American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (AL-SAC).
PY - 2006/1
Y1 - 2006/1
N2 - PURPOSE: We have shown in xenograft studies that the antitumor activities of topotecan and irinotecan are highly schedule- and dose-dependent, with a high frequency of response at low, protracted dose schedules. Preclinical and clinical data suggest that topotecan and irinotecan have different antitumor activities and mechanisms of resistance, and non-overlapping toxicities, providing a rationale for their combination. Combining both agents may increase the amount of camptothecin delivered to the tumor, without additive toxicity. METHODS: We conducted a phase I study in children with refractory solid tumors to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of irinotecan when administered with a targeted systemic exposure (TSE) of topotecan and to define the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of this combination. Irinotecan was administered IV over 60 min followed by topotecan over 30 min daily for 5 days for two consecutive weeks. We initially fixed the topotecan-TSE to 80+/-10 ng*h/ml and investigated the ability to escalate irinotecan (starting dose 16 mg/m2/d). Topotecan and irinotecan pharmacokinetics were determined. RESULTS: Eleven patients (median age 10 years) were enrolled. Owing to DLT, irinotecan was de-escalated to 12 (level -1; n = 3) and 9 (level -2; n = 3) mg/m2/day, and topotecan-TSE was reduced to 60+/-10 ng*h/ml (level -3; n = 2). DLTs were neutropenia (n = 8), typhlitis (n = 5), and skin rash (n = 1). MTD could not be reached. Median (range) irinotecan and topotecan lactone systemic clearances were 50.3 (16.6-76.2) l/h/m2 and 27.6 (14.7-55.9) l/h/m2, respectively. The pharmacokinetics profile of each agent was similar to that seen in previous single agent studies. One patient with neuroblastoma and one with rhabdomyosarcoma had a partial and a complete response, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite promising antitumor activity, the combination of topotecan and irinotecan given on a protracted schedule does not warrant further development in children due to unacceptable toxicity.
AB - PURPOSE: We have shown in xenograft studies that the antitumor activities of topotecan and irinotecan are highly schedule- and dose-dependent, with a high frequency of response at low, protracted dose schedules. Preclinical and clinical data suggest that topotecan and irinotecan have different antitumor activities and mechanisms of resistance, and non-overlapping toxicities, providing a rationale for their combination. Combining both agents may increase the amount of camptothecin delivered to the tumor, without additive toxicity. METHODS: We conducted a phase I study in children with refractory solid tumors to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of irinotecan when administered with a targeted systemic exposure (TSE) of topotecan and to define the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of this combination. Irinotecan was administered IV over 60 min followed by topotecan over 30 min daily for 5 days for two consecutive weeks. We initially fixed the topotecan-TSE to 80+/-10 ng*h/ml and investigated the ability to escalate irinotecan (starting dose 16 mg/m2/d). Topotecan and irinotecan pharmacokinetics were determined. RESULTS: Eleven patients (median age 10 years) were enrolled. Owing to DLT, irinotecan was de-escalated to 12 (level -1; n = 3) and 9 (level -2; n = 3) mg/m2/day, and topotecan-TSE was reduced to 60+/-10 ng*h/ml (level -3; n = 2). DLTs were neutropenia (n = 8), typhlitis (n = 5), and skin rash (n = 1). MTD could not be reached. Median (range) irinotecan and topotecan lactone systemic clearances were 50.3 (16.6-76.2) l/h/m2 and 27.6 (14.7-55.9) l/h/m2, respectively. The pharmacokinetics profile of each agent was similar to that seen in previous single agent studies. One patient with neuroblastoma and one with rhabdomyosarcoma had a partial and a complete response, respectively. CONCLUSION: Despite promising antitumor activity, the combination of topotecan and irinotecan given on a protracted schedule does not warrant further development in children due to unacceptable toxicity.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=33644696212&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=33644696212&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1007/s00280-005-0030-7
DO - 10.1007/s00280-005-0030-7
M3 - Article
C2 - 16001174
AN - SCOPUS:33644696212
SN - 0344-5704
VL - 57
SP - 15
EP - 24
JO - Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology
JF - Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology
IS - 1
ER -