Muriel Poublanc

Cystatin C as a New Covariate to Predict Renal Elimination of Drugs Application to Carboplatin

Background and objectiveThe individual dosing of drugs that are mainly eliminated unchanged in the urine is made possible by assessing renal function. Most of the methods used are based on serum creatinine (SCr) levels. Cystatin C(CysC) has been proposed as an alternative endogenous marker of the glomerular filtration rate (GFR). Carboplatin is one of the drugs for which elimination is most dependent on the GFR. A prospective clinical trial including 45 patients was conducted to assess the value of serum CysC as a predictor of carboplatin clearance (CL).MethodsThe patients were receiving carboplatin as part of established protocols. Carboplatin was administered as a daily 60-minute infusion at doses ranging from 290 to 1700mg. A population pharmacokinetic analysis was performed using the nonlinear mixed effect modelling NONMEM program according to a two-compartment pharmacokinetic model.ResultsData from 30 patients were used to test the relationships between carboplatin CL and morphological, biological and demographic covariates previously proposed for prediction of the GFR. The interindividual variability of carboplatin CL decreased from 31% (no covariate) to 14% by taking into account five covariates (SCr, CysC, bodyweight [BW], age and sex). Prospective evaluation of these relationships using the data from the other 15 patients confirmed that the best equation to predict carboplatin CL was based on these five covariates, with a mean absolute percentage error of 13% as an assessment of precision. NONMEM analysis of the whole dataset (n = 45 patients) was performed. The best covariate equation corresponding to the overall analysis was: CL (mL/min) = 110 · (SCr/75)−0.512 · (CysC/1.0)−0.327 · (BW/65)0.474 · (age/ 56)−0.387 · 0.854sex, with SCr in μmol/L, CysC in mg/L, BW in kilograms, age in years and sex = 0 if male and 1 if female. To put the value of CysC as an endogenous marker of the GFR into perspective, covariate equations without SCr were also evaluated; a better prediction was obtained by considering CysC together with age and BW (interindividual variability of 16.6% vs 23.3% for CysC alone).ConclusionCysC is a marker of drug elimination that is at least as good as SCr for predicting carboplatin CL. The model based on five covariates was superior to those based on only four covariates (with BW, age and sex combined with either SCr or CysC), indicating that CysC and SCr are not completely redundant to each other. Further pharmacokinetic evaluation is needed to determine whether SCr or CysC is the better marker of renal elimination of other drugs.

αvβ3 Integrin and Fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1): Prognostic factors in a phase I–II clinical trial associating continuous administration of Tipifarnib with radiotherapy for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma

BACKGROUND Based on our previous results showing the involvement of the farnesylated form of RhoB in glioblastoma radioresistance, we designed a phase II trial associating the farnesyltransferase inhibitor Tipifarnib with radiotherapy in patients with glioblastoma and studied the prognostic values of the proteins which we have previously shown control this pathway. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients were treated with 200mg Tipifarnib (recommended dose (RD)) given continuously during radiotherapy. Twenty-seven patients were included in the phase II whose primary end-point was time to progression (TTP). Overall survival (OS) and biomarker analysis were secondary end-points. Expressions of αvβ3, αvβ5 integrins, FAK, ILK, fibroblast growth factor 2 (FGF2) and fibroblast growth factor receptor 1 (FGFR1) were studied by immuno-histochemistry in the tumour of the nine patients treated at the RD during the previously performed phase I and on those of the phase II patients. We evaluated the correlation of the expressions of these proteins with the clinical outcome. RESULTS For the phase II patients median TTP was 23.1 weeks (95%CI = [15.4; 28.2]) while the median OS was 80.3 weeks (95%CI = [57.8; 102.7]). In the pooled phase I and II population, median OS was 60.4 w (95%CI = [47.3; 97.6]) while median TTP was 18.1 w (95%CI = [16.9; 25.6]). FGFR1 over-expression (HR = 4.65; 95%CI = [1.02; 21.21], p = 0.047) was correlated with shorter TTP while FGFR1 (HR = 4.1 (95% CI = [1.09-15.4]; p = 0.036)) and αvβ3 (HR = 10.38 (95%CI = [2.70; 39.87], p = 0.001)) over-expressions were associated with reduced OS. CONCLUSION Association of 200mg Tipifarnib with radiotherapy shows promising OS but no increase in TTP compared to historical data. FGFR1 and αvβ3 integrin are independent bad prognostic factors of OS and TTP.

A Phase I Dose-Escalating and Pharmacokinetic Study of Docetaxel and Vinorelbine as First-Line Chemotherapy for Metastatic Breast Cancer

Docetaxel and vinorelbine are both active drugs as single agents in the treatment of metastatic breast cancer. We performed a phase I dose-escalating and pharmacokinetic study to assess the safety profile of a new combination regimen and the pharmacokinetic interaction of vinorelbine and docetaxel. Patients with metastatic breast cancer received first-line treatment with both drugs on days 1–5. Treatment was restarted on day 21 of each cycle. We had to stop the escalation at the first step of the study (vinorelbine 20 mg/m2 followed by docetaxel 30 mg/m2 on days 1 and 5) because of hematological toxicity. In 4 additional patients who received G-CSF supplementation, no major leukopenia occurred, suggesting that the toxicity profile of this combination is very homogenous and focused on neutrophils. We found no pharmacokinetic interaction between the two drugs. These results suggest that a pharmacodynamic interaction was the cause of the hematological toxicity and that sequential regimens should be preferably further explored.

Unexpected High Levels of Vorinostat when Combined with Vinorelbine in Patients with Advanced Cancer

BACKGROUND This study was a multi-centre, dose-escalation trial in patients with advanced cancers. Primary objective was to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of vorinostat, a competitive inhibitor of histone deacetylase (HDAC), in combination with vinorelbine. Secondary aims were to determine (1) corresponding pharmacokinetics, (2) safety of this regimen, and (3) impact of UGT1A1 and 2B17 polymorphisms on vorinostat pharmacokinetics. METHODS Starting dose of once daily oral vorinostat was 200 mg for 7 days every 21 days in combination with a 20-min intraveinous weekly infusion of vinorelbine 25 mg/m2, starting 4 hours after the first vorinostat dose. During cycle 1, blood samples were collected at day 1 for vorinostat and at days 1 and 8 for vinorelbine for pharmacokinetic evaluation. RESULTS Seven patients were included. Most of adverse events observed were mild (grades 0-2) and reversible after treatment discontinuation (hemotological toxicity, asthenia, diarrhea, dyspnea, fever, hyperglycemia and nausea). Two patients had a dose limiting toxicity at the first dose level that consisted of grade 3 hyperglycemia and vinorelbine administration was delayed. The first dose-level was considered as the MDT and therefore dose escalation was stopped. Mean vorinostat plasma AUC was higher than reported previously at a similar dose when used as single agent or in combination with other cytotoxics. There was no obvious vinorelbine-vorinostat interaction nor any correlation with UGT1A1 or 2B17 polymorphisms. CONCLUSION MDT of the combination was 200 mg oral vorinostat for 7 days in combination with 25 mg/m2 weekly vinorelbine. Severity of hyperglycemia was most likely related to unexpected high vorinostat exposures.