Enrico Mini

Randomized phase III trial comparing biweekly infusional fluorouracil/leucovorin alone or with irinotecan in the adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer: PETACC-3.

PURPOSE The primary objective of this randomized, multicenter, phase III trial was to investigate whether the addition of irinotecan to the de Gramont infusional fluorouracil (FU)/leucovorin (LV) adjuvant regimen (LV5FU2) would improve disease-free survival (DFS) in patients with stage III colon cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS After curatively intentioned surgery, patients with stage II and III colon cancer were randomly allocated surgery to receive LV5FU2 (LV 200 mg/m(2) as a 2-hour infusion, followed by FU; as a 400 mg/m(2) bolus and then a 600 mg/m(2) continuous infusion over 22 hours, days 1 and 2, every 2 weeks for 12 cycles: de Gramont regimen) with or without irinotecan (180 mg/m(2) as a 30- to 90-minute infusion, day 1, every 2 weeks). In total, 260 (7.9%) of 3,278 patients received an alternative high-dose infusional FU/LV regimen (Arbeitsgemeinschaft Internische Onkologie regimen) with or without irinotecan. Results The principal efficacy analysis was based on 2,094 treated patients with stage III disease, randomly allocated in the LV5FU2 strata. After a median follow-up of 66.3 months, the 5-year DFS rate was 56.7% with irinotecan/LV5FU2 and 54.3% with LV5FU2 alone (primary end point: log-rank P = .106). Combining irinotecan with LV5FU2 did not significantly improve overall survival in this patient group compared with LV5FU2 alone (5-year rate 73.6% v 71.3%, respectively; log-rank P = .094). The addition of irinotecan to LV5FU2 was associated with an increased incidence of grade 3 to 4 GI events and neutropenia. CONCLUSION Irinotecan added to LV5FU2 as adjuvant therapy did not confer a statistically significant improvement in DFS or overall survival in patients with stage III colon cancer compared with LV5FU2 alone.

Natural compounds for cancer treatment and prevention.

We describe here the main natural compounds used in cancer therapy and prevention, the historical aspects of their application and pharmacognosy. Two major applications of these compounds are described: as cancer therapeutics and as chemopreventive compounds. Both natural compounds, extracted from plants or animals or produced by microbes (antibiotics), and synthetic compounds, derived from natural prototype structures, are being used. We also focus on the molecular aspects of interactions with their recognized cellular targets, from DNA to microtubules. Some critical aspects of current cancer chemotherapy are also discussed, focusing on genetics and genomics, and the recent revolutionary theory of cancer: aneuploidy as the primum movens of cancer.

Pharmacokinetic Drug Interactions of Macrolides

SummaryThe macrolide antibiotics include natural members, prodrugs and semisynthetic derivatives. These drugs are indicated in a variety of infections and are often combined with other drug therapies, thus creating the potential for pharmacokinetic interactions.Macrolides can both inhibit drug metabolism in the liver by complex formation and inactivation of microsomal drug oxidising enzymes and also interfere with microorganisms of the enteric flora through their antibiotic effects. Over the past 20 years, a number of reports have incriminated macrolides as a potential source of clinically severe drug interactions. However, differences have been found between the various macrolides in this regard and not all macrolides are responsible for drug interactions. With the recent advent of many semisynthetic macrolide antibiotics it is now evident that they may be classified into 3 different groups in causing drug interactions. The first group (e.g. troleandomycin, erythromycins) are those prone to forming nitrosoalkanes and the consequent formation of inactive cytochrome P450-metabolite complexes. The second group (e.g. josamycin, flurithromycin, roxithromycin, clarithromycin, miocamycin and midecamycin) form complexes to a lesser extent and rarely produce drug interactions. The last group (e.g. spiramycin, rokitamycin, dirithromycin and azithromycin) do not inactivate cytochrome P450 and are unable to modify the pharmacokinetics of other compounds.It appears that 2 structural factors are important for a macrolide antibiotic to lead to the induction of cytochrome P450 and the formation in vivo or in vitro of an inhibitory cytochrome P450-iron-nitrosoalkane metabolite complex: the presence in the macrolide molecules of a non-hindered readily accessible N-dimethylamino group and the hydrophobic character of the drug.Troleandomycin ranks first as a potent inhibitor of microsomal liver enzymes, causing a significant decrease of the metabolism of methylprednisolone, theophylline, carbamazepine, phenazone (antipyrine) and triazolam. Troleandomycin can cause ergotism in patients receiving ergot alkaloids and cholestatic jaundice in those taking oral contraceptives.Erythromycin and its different prodrugs appear to be less potent inhibitors of drug metabolism. Case reports and controlled studies have, however, shown that erythromycins may interact with theophylline, carbamazepine, methylprednisolone, warfarin, cyclosporin, triazolam, midazolam, alfentanil, disopyramide and bromocriptine, decreasing drug clearance. The bioavailability of digoxin appears also to be increased by erythromycin in patients excreting high amounts of reduced digoxin metabolites, probably due to destruction of enteric flora responsible for the formation of these compounds. These incriminated macrolide antibiotics should not be administered concomitantly with other drugs known to be affected metabolically by them, or at the very least, combined administration should be carried out only with careful patient monitoring.Josamycin, midecamycin and probably also the related compounds miocamycin, clarithromycin and flurithromycin, may have a clinically significant interaction with carbamazepine and cyclosporin, requiring close monitoring. Roxithromycin interaction with drugs such as theophylline or cyclosporin does not seem to justify a dosage reduction. No pharmacokinetic interactions have yet been described for spiramycin, rokitamycin, dirithromycin and azithromycin.

Gold compounds as anticancer agents: chemistry, cellular pharmacology, and preclinical studies

Gold compounds are a class of metallodrugs with great potential for cancer treatment. During the last two decades, a large variety of gold(I) and gold(III) compounds are reported to possess relevant antiproliferative properties in vitro against selected human tumor cell lines, qualifying themselves as excellent candidates for further pharmacological evaluation. The unique chemical properties of the gold center confer very interesting and innovative pharmacological profiles to gold‐based metallodrugs. The primary goal of this review is to define the state of the art of preclinical studies on anticancer gold compounds, carried out either in vitro or in vivo. The available investigations of anticancer gold compounds are analyzed in detail, and particular attention is devoted to underlying molecular mechanisms. Notably, a few biophysical studies reveal that the interactions of cytotoxic gold compounds with DNA are generally far weaker than those of platinum drugs, implying the occurrence of a substantially different mode of action. A variety of alternative mechanisms were thus proposed, of which those involving either direct mitochondrial damage or proteasome inhibition or modulation of specific kinases are now highly credited. The overall perspectives on the development of gold compounds as effective anticancer drugs with an innovative mechanism of action are critically discussed on the basis of the available experimental evidence.  © 2009 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Med Res Rev, 30, No. 3, 550–580, 2010

Pharmacological Strategies for Overcoming Multidrug Resistance

Multidrug resistance (MDR) is a major obstacle to the effective treatment of cancer. One of the underlying mechanisms of MDR is cellular overproduction of P-glycoprotein (P-gp) which acts as an efflux pump for various anticancer drugs. P-gp is encoded by the MDR1 gene and its overexpression in cancer cells has become a therapeutic target for circumventing multidrug resistance. A potential strategy is to co-administer efflux pump inhibitors, although such reversal agents might actually increase the side effects of chemotherapy by blocking physiological anticancer drug efflux from normal cells. Although many efforts to overcome MDR have been made using first and second generation reversal agents comprising drugs already in current clinical use for other indications (e.g. verapamil, cyclosporine A, quinidine) or analogues of the first-generation drugs (e.g. dexverapamil, valspodar, cinchonine), few significant advances have been made. Clinical trials with third generation modulators (e.g. biricodar, zosuquidar, and laniquidar) specifically developed for MDR reversal are ongoing. The results however are not encouraging and it may be that the perfect reverser does not exist. Other approaches to multidrug resistance reversal have also been considered: encapsulation of anthracyclines in liposomes or other carriers which deliver these drugs selectively to tumor tissues, the use of P-gp targeted antibodies such as UIC2 or the use of antisense strategies targeting the MDR1 messenger RNA. More recently, the development of transcriptional regulators appears promising. Also anticancer drugs that belong structurally to classes of drugs extruded from cells by P-gp but that are not substrates of this drug transporter may act as potent inhibitors of MDR tumors (e.g. epothilones, second generation taxanes). Taking advantage of MDR has also been studied. Bone marrow suppression, one of the major side effects of cancer chemotherapy, can compromise the potential of curative and palliative chemotherapy. It is conceivable that drug resistance gene transfer into bone marrow stem cells may be able to reduce or abolish chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression and facilitate the use of high dose chemotherapy. Clinical trials of retroviral vectors containing drug resistance genes have established that the approach is safe and are now being designed to address the therapeutically relevant issues.

A novel inward‐rectifying K+ current with a cell‐cycle dependence governs the resting potential of mammalian neuroblastoma cells.

1. Human and murine neuroblastoma cell lines were used to investigate, by the whole‐cell patch‐clamp technique, the properties of a novel inward‐rectifying K+ current (IIR) in the adjustment of cell resting potential (Vrest), which was in the range ‐40 to ‐20 mV. 2. When elicited from a holding potential of 0 mV, IIR was completely inactivated with time constants ranging from 13 ms at ‐140 mV to 4.5 s at ‐50 mV. The steady‐state inactivation curve (h(V)) was found to be independent of [Na+]o and [K+]o (2‐80 mM) and could be fitted to a Boltzmann curve with a steep slope factor of 5‐6, and a V1/2 around Vrest. Divalent ion‐free extracellular solutions shifted h(V) to the left by about 28 mV. 3. Peak chord conductance, whose maximal value was approximately proportional to the square root of [K+]o, could be fitted to a Boltzmann curve independently of [K+]o, with a V1/2 value around ‐48 mV and a slope factor of 18. Extracellular Cs+ and Ba2+ blocked the IIR in a concentration‐ and voltage‐dependent manner, but Ba2+ was less effective than it is on classical inward‐rectifier channels. 4. Under control culture conditions the values of Vrest and V1/2 of h(V) varied widely among cells. The knowledge of V1/2 proved crucial or the theoretical prediction of Vrest. After cell synchronization in the G0‐G1 phase of the cell cycle, or at the G1‐S boundaries, the cells reduced their variability of h(V). The same occurred after cell synchronization in G1 by treatment with retinoic acid. 5. The experimental data could be fitted to a classical model of an inward rectifier, after removing the dependence of conductance activation on (V‐EK), and incorporating an inactivation with an intrinsic voltage dependence. Moreover, the model predicts, for this novel inward rectifier and in contrast with the classical inward rectifier, the incapacity of maintaining, in physiological media, a Vrest more negative than ‐35 to ‐40 mV, which is an important feature of cancer cells.

High-resolution melting analysis for rapid detection of KRAS, BRAF, and PIK3CA gene mutations in colorectal cancer.

High-resolution melting analysis (HRMA) provides a valid approach to efficiently detect DNA genetic and somatic mutations. In this study, HRMA was used for the screening of 116 colorectal cancers (CRCs) to detect hot-spot mutations in the KRAS and BRAF oncogenes. Mutational hot spots on the PIK3CA gene, exons 9 and 20, were also screened. Direct sequencing was used to confirm and characterize HRMA results. HRMA revealed abnormal melting profiles in 65 CRCs (56.0%), 16 of them harboring mutations in 2 different genes simultaneously. The frequency of mutations was 17.2% for PIK3CA (11.2% in exon 9 and 6.0% in exon 20), 43.1% for KRAS exon 2, and 9.5% in exon 15 of the BRAF gene. We found a significant association between PIK3CA and KRAS mutations (P = .008), whereas KRAS and BRAF mutations were mutually exclusive (P = .001). This report describes a novel approach for the detection of PIK3CA somatic mutations by HRMA.

Effect of methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase 677C-->T polymorphism on toxicity and homocysteine plasma level after chronic methotrexate treatment of ovarian cancer patients.

MTHFR is a critical enzyme that regulates the metabolism of folate and methionine, both of which are important factors in DNA methylation and synthesis. Subjects with the 677C→T variant have impaired remethylation of Hcy to methionine that could determine hyperhomocysteinemia. Remethylation of Hcy into methionine and DNA methylation are also affected by MTX treatment. Thus, a combined effect between MTX and reduced activity of the MTHFR 677C→T polymorphism could occur, leading to toxicity. In a clinical trial, 43 ovarian cancer patients were treated with low doses of MTX. During MTX therapy, 12 patients (27.9%) developed G3/4 WHO toxicity. In these 12 patients, we observed 6 G3/4 thrombocytopenias, 1 G3 neutropenia, 1 G3 anemia, 9 G3 mucositis cases and 1 G4 mucositis case. A significant association was observed between toxicity and TT MTHFR 677 genotype (p < 0.0001). G3/4 toxicity occurred in 10 of 13 (77%), 1 of 17 (6%) and 1 of 13 (8%) patients with the TT, CT and CC MTHFR genotypes, respectively. According to the logistic regression model, patients with the TT genotype had a relative risk of 42.0 (95% CI 4.2–418.6) of developing G3/4 toxicity compared to patients with the CC and CT genotypes. Patients with the TT genotype had Hcy plasma levels after MTX therapy significantly (p = 0.0001) higher than basal levels (mean ± SD = 16.71 ± 4.72 vs. 12.48 ± 3.57 μmol/l); moreover, they also had higher Hcy plasma levels after MTX than patients with other MTHFR 677 genotypes (CC mean ± SD = 9.87 ± 3.61 μmol/l and CT mean ± SD = 11.48 ± 3.13 μmol/l). Finally, significant associations were observed between G3/4 WHO toxicity and higher Hcy plasma levels after MTX treatment (p = 0.0004). In conclusion, our data suggest that the TT MTHFR 677 genotype is associated with marked MTX‐induced hyperhomocysteinemia and could represent a pharmacogenetic marker for toxicity after chronic treatment with low doses of MTX.

Adverse effects of macrolide antibacterials.

SummaryThe renewed interest in macrolide antibacterials with expanded indications for clinical use, as well as their markedly increased usage, justifies the continuous search for new compounds designed to offer the patient not only enhanced bioavailability but also a reduced incidence of adverse effects.Macrolides are an old and well established class of antimicrobial agents that account for 10 to 15% of the worldwide oral antibiotic market. Macrolides are considered to be one of the safest anti-infective groups in clinical use, with severe adverse reactions being rare. Newer products with improved features have recently been discovered and developed, maintaining or significantly expanding the role of macrolides in the management of infection. This review deals with the tolerability of the clinically available macrolide antibacterials. With the exception of drug interactions, adverse effects have been analysed during the last 40 years in many thousands of adult and paediatric patients. Recently developed derivatives have been compared with the older compounds, and the expected and well assessed adverse effects have been set apart from those which are unusual, very rare or questionable.Gastrointestinal reactions represent the most frequent disturbance, occurring in 15 to 20% of patients on erythromycins and in 5% or fewer patients treated with some recently developed macrolide derivatives that seldom or never induce endogenous release of motilin, such as roxithromycin, clarithromycin, dirithromycin, azithromycin and rikamycin (rokitamycin).Except for troleandomycin and some erythromycins administered at high dose and for long periods of time, the hepatotoxic potential of macrolides, which rarely or never form nitrosoalkanes, is low for josamycin, midecamycin, miocamycin, flurithromycin, clarithromycin and roxithromycin; it is negligible or absent for spiramycin, rikamycin, dirithromycin and azithromycin. Transient deafness and allergic reactions to macrolide antibacterials are highly unusual and have definitely been shown to be more common following treatment with the erythromycins than with the recently developed 14-, 15- and 16-membered macrolides.There have been case reports in the literature of 51 patients during the last 30 years who experienced uncommon or dubious adverse effects after treatment with older compounds and in which there appears to be strong evidence of a causal relationship with the drug. Only 3 cases had an unfavourable outcome, and these were patients administered erythromycin lactobionate intravenously too rapidly or at high dose. Targets of these occasional reactions are generally the heart, liver and central nervous system. Other unusual organ pathologies are related to immunomediated disorders more than to primary parenchymal toxicity, or to the rarely serious consequences of macrolide-induced alterations in intestinal microflora.Physicians should be alerted to the possibility of unusual toxicity that could also emerge in the future from the new and recently developed macrolide antibacterials, coinciding with their expanded clinical use worldwide.

Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Depot Leuprorelin

Leuprorelin acetate is a synthetic agonist analogue of gonadotropin-releasing hormone. Continued leuprorelin administration results in suppression of gonadal steroid synthesis, resulting in pharmacological castration.Since leuprorelin is a peptide, it is orally inactive and generally given subcutaneously or intramuscularly. Sustained release parenteral depot formulations, in which the hydrophilic leuprorelin is entrapped in biodegradable highly lipophilic synthetic polymer microspheres, have been developed to avoid daily injections. The peptide drug is released from these depot formulations at a functionally constant daily rate for 1, 3 or 4 months, depending on the polymer type [polylactic/glycolic acid (PLGA) for a 1-month depot and polylactic acid (PLA) for depot of >2 months], with doses ranging between 3.75 and 30mg.Mean peak plasma leuprorelin concentrations (Cmax) of 13.1, 20.8 to 21.8, 47.4, 54.5 and 53 µg/L occur within 1 to 3 hours of depot subcutaneous administration of 3.75, 7.5, 11.25, 15 and 30 mg, respectively, compared with 32 to 35 µg/L at 36 to 60 min after a subcutaneous injection of 1mg of a non-depot formulation. Sustained drug release from the PLGA microspheres maintains plasma concentrations between 0.4 and 1.4 µg/L over 28 days after single 3.75, 7.5 or 15mg depot injections.Mean areas under the concentration-time curve (AUCs) are similar for subcutaneous or intravenous injection of short-acting leuprorelin 1mg; a significant dose-related increase in the AUC from 0 to 35 days is noted after depot injection of leuprorelin 3.75, 7.5 and 15mg. Mean volume of distribution of leuprorelin is 37L after a single subcutaneous injection of 1mg, and 36, 33 and 27L after depot administration of 3.75, 7.5 and 15mg, respectively. Total body clearance is 9.1 L/h and elimination half-life 3.6 hours after a subcutaneous 1mg injection; corresponding values after intravenous injection are 8.3 L/h and 2.9 hours.A 3-month depot PLA formulation of leuprorelin acetate 11.25mg ensures a Cmax of around 20 µg/L at 3 hours after subcutaneous injection, and continuous drug concentrations of 0.43 to 0.19 µg/L from day 7 until before the next injection.Recently, an implant that delivers leuprorelin for 1 year has been evaluated. Serum leuprorelin concentrations remained at a steady mean of 0.93 µg/L until week 52, suggesting zero-order drug release from the implant.In general, regular or depot leuprorelin treatment is well tolerated. Local reactions are more common after application of the 3- or 4-month depot in comparison with the 1-month depot.