Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) guidelines for human leukocyte antigen B (HLA-B) genotype and allopurinol dosing: 2015 update.

The Clinical Pharmacogenetics Implementation Consortium (CPIC) Guidelines for HLA-B*58:01 Genotype and Allopurinol Dosing was originally published in February 2013. We reviewed the recent literature and concluded that none of the evidence would change the therapeutic recommendations in the original guideline; therefore, the original publication remains clinically current. However, we have updated the Supplemental Material and included additional resources for applying CPIC guidelines into the electronic health record. Up-to-date information can be found at PharmGKB (http://www.pharmgkb.org).

A Phase I study of infusional vinblastine in combination with the P-glycoprotein antagonist PSC 833 (valspodar).

BACKGROUND: PSC 833 is a second-generation P-glycoprotein (Pgp) antagonist developed to reverse multidrug resistance (MDR). The authors conducted a Phase I study of orally administered PSC 833 in combination with vinblastine administered as a 5-day continuous infusion. METHODS: Seventy-nine patients with advanced malignant disease were enrolled in the trial and treated with escalating doses of PSC 833. Pharmacokinetic interactions between PSC 833 and vinblastine were anticipated. Accordingly, when dose limiting toxicities were observed, the dose of vinblastine was reduced as PSC 833 was escalated. Three schedules and two formulations of PSC 833 were used in the study. RESULTS: The maximum tolerated doses of PSC 833 were 12.5 mg/kg orally every 12 hours for 8 days for the liquid formulation in combination with 0.9 mg/m(2) per day vinblastine as a continuous intravenous infusion (CIV) for 5 days; and 4 mg/kg orally every 6 hours for 8 days for the microemulsion formulation in combination with 0.6 mg/m(2) per day vinblastine CIV for 5 days. The principal toxicities for PSC 833 were ataxia and paresthesias and for the combination, constipation, fever. and neutropenia. Increased oral bioavailability and increased peak and trough concentrations were observed with the microemulsion formulation. Significant interpatient variability in pharmacokinetic parameters was observed. Ten patients studied at the MTD for PSC 833 (4 mg/kg orally every 6 hours for 8 days) had inhibition of rhodamine efflux from CD56 positive peripheral lymphocytes as a surrogate for Pgp antagonism. Among 43 evaluable patients with clear cell carcinoma of the kidney, 3 patients had complete responses, and 1 patient had a partial response. CONCLUSIONS: PSC 833 in combination with vinblastine can be administered safely to patients provided the vinblastine dose is adjusted for pharmacokinetic interactions. The high interpatient variability is a significant confounding factor. Surrogate studies with CD56 positive cells suggest that Pgp inhibition in the clinical setting is achievable. Improved methods for predicting pharmacokinetic interactions should improve future studies.

A phase I trial of carboxyamido-triazole and paclitaxel for relapsed solid tumors: potential efficacy of the combination and demonstration of pharmacokinetic interaction.

PURPOSE: Preclinical and clinical investigation of the combination of the antiangiogenesis/anti-invasion agent carboxyamido-triazole (CAI) administered with the cytotoxic agent paclitaxel (PAX). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Colony-forming assays were used to test the activity of CAI plus PAX on A2780 human ovarian cancer. The sequence of CAI followed by PAX (CAI>Pax) was modeled in nude mice to test for potential additive toxicity. The Phase I clinical dose escalation schema tested p.o. administered CAI in PEG-400 (50-100 mg/m(2)) or micronized CAI (250 mg/m(2)) for 8 days followed by a 3-h infusion of PAX (110-250 mg/m(2)) every 21 days. Patients were assessed for toxicity, pharmacokinetics of CAI and PAX, and disease outcome. RESULTS: In preclinical studies, CAI>Pax was additive in A2780 human ovarian cancer cell lines when CAI (1 or 5 microM) preceded subtherapeutic doses of PAX. CAI did not reverse PAX resistance and collateral resistance to CAI was documented in PAX-resistant cells. CAI>PAX administration had no overt additive toxicity in nude mice. Thirty-nine patients were treated on a dose-escalation Phase I trial using daily oral CAI for 8 days followed by the PAX infusion. Pharmacokinetic analysis revealed that PAX caused an acute increase in circulating CAI concentrations in a dose-dependent fashion. No additive or cumulative toxicity was observed, and grade 3 nonhematological toxicity was rare. Three partial responses and two minor responses were observed. CONCLUSIONS: The sequential combination of CAI and PAX is well tolerated, and the activity observed suggests that further study of the combination is warranted.

Phase I study of infusional paclitaxel in combination with the P-glycoprotein antagonist PSC 833.

PURPOSE: PSC 833 (valspodar) is a second-generation P-glycoprotein (Pgp) antagonist developed to reverse multidrug resistance. We conducted a phase I study of a 7-day oral administration of PSC 833 in combination with paclitaxel, administered as a 96-hour continuous infusion. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with advanced cancer were enrolled onto the trial. PSC 833 was administered orally for 7 days, beginning 72 hours before the start of the paclitaxel infusion. Paclitaxel dose reductions were planned because of the pharmacokinetic interactions known to occur with PSC 833. RESULTS: In combination with PSC 833, maximum-tolerated doses were defined as paclitaxel 13.1 mg/m(2)/d continuous intravenous infusion (CIVI) for 4 days without filgrastim, and paclitaxel 17.5 mg/m(2)/d CIVI for 4 days with filgrastim support. Dose-limiting toxicity for the combination was neutropenia. Statistical analysis of cohorts revealed similar mean steady-state concentrations (C(pss)) and areas under the concentration-versus-time curve (AUCs) when patients received paclitaxel doses of 13.1 or 17.5 mg/m(2)/d for 4 days with PSC 833, as when they received a paclitaxel dose of 35 mg/m(2)/d for 4 days without PSC 833. However, the effect of PSC 833 on paclitaxel pharmacokinetics varied greatly among individual patients, although a surrogate assay using CD56+ cells suggested inhibition of Pgp was complete or nearly complete at low concentrations of PSC 833. Responses occurred in three of four patients with non-small-cell lung cancer, and clinical benefit occurred in five of 10 patients with ovarian carcinoma. CONCLUSION: PSC 833 in combination with paclitaxel can be administered safely to patients provided the paclitaxel dose is reduced to compensate for the pharmacokinetic interaction. Surrogate studies with CD56+ cells indicate that the maximum-tolerated dose for PSC 833 gives serum levels much higher than those required to block Pgp. The variability in paclitaxel pharmacokinetics, despite complete inhibition of Pgp in the surrogate assay, suggests that other mechanisms, most likely related to P450, contribute to the pharmacokinetic interaction. Future development of combinations such as this should include strategies to predict pharmacokinetics of the chemotherapeutic agent. This in turn will facilitate dosing to achieve comparable CPss and AUCs.

Pilot trial of the safety, tolerability, and retinoid levels of N-(4-hydroxyphenyl) retinamide in combination with tamoxifen in patients at high risk for developing invasive breast cancer.

PURPOSE: N-(4-hydroxyphenyl) retinamide (¿4-HPR, Fenretinide; R.W. Johnson Pharmaceutical Research Institute, Springhouse, PA) and tamoxifen (TAM) have synergistic antitumor and chemopreventive activity against mammary cancer in preclinical studies. We performed a pilot study of this combination in women at high risk for developing breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-two women were treated with four cycles of 4-HPR, 200 mg orally (PO) for 25 days of each 28-day cycle, and TAM, 20 mg PO once daily for 23 months beginning after 1 month of 4-HPR alone. Tolerability, dark adaptometry, tissue biopsies, and retinoid plasma concentrations (Cp) were evaluated. RESULTS: Symptomatic reversible nyctalopia developed in two patients (6%) on 4-HPR, but 16 (73%) of 22 patients had reversible changes in dark adaptation, which correlated with relative decrease in Cp retinol (P

A continuous-improvement approach for reducing the number of chemotherapy-related medication errors.

A comprehensive, interdisciplinary approach for reducing the number of chemotherapy-related medication errors at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center, where approximately 8500 doses of chemotherapy agents are dispensed annually, is described. Heightened awareness of the seriousness of chemotherapy-related medication errors prompted formation of an interdisciplinary task force in June 1995 to analyze and improve the hospital's system for ordering, checking, processing, and administering cancer chemotherapy agents. Problems were analyzed and rectified in accordance with the hospital's plan-do-check-act performance-improvement model. Performance monitors for the improvements included a system to record and categorize all chemotherapy-related prescribing errors and a hospital-wide occurrence-reporting system. The task force identified seven major categories in which improvements were needed: protocol development, computer-system enhancements, dose verification, information access, education for health care practitioners, error follow-up, and infusion pumps. Despite the Clinical Center's good safety-net system, 23 modifications were made to the existing system through December 1999. These changes resulted in an overall 23% decrease in prescribing errors and a 53% decrease in serious prescribing errors. The task force membership was recently broadened to include representatives of additional departments where chemotherapy agents are used, and this group recommended more than 20 additional system changes. The changes are being implemented, and their effect on reducing the number of chemotherapy-related errors will be measured. The continuous-improvement process used prospectively by the task force helps ensure that safe chemotherapy practices are instituted uniformly throughout the hospital.

A Phase I study of raltitrexed, an antifolate thymidylate synthase inhibitor, in adult patients with advanced solid tumors.

The purpose of this study was to perform a Phase I trial of raltitrexed, a selective inhibitor of thymidylate synthase, and to determine the pharmacokinetic and toxicity profiles as a function of raltitrexed dose. Fifty patients with advanced solid tumors and good performance status were treated with raltitrexed as a 15-min i.v. infusion every 3 weeks, at doses escalating from 0.6 to 4.5 mg/m2. Asthenia, neutropenia, and hepatic toxicity were the most common dose-limiting toxicities in this largely pretreated patient population, but they occurred during the initial cycle in only one of nine patients treated with 4.0 mg/m2 and in two of nine patients treated with 4.5 mg/m2. Only 2 of 13 patients treated with 3.5 mg/m2 ultimately experienced unacceptable toxicity after three and seven cycles, compared with 42 and 56% of patients receiving 4.0 and 4.5 mg/m2 after medians of three and two cycles, respectively. The maximum raltitrexed plasma concentration and the area under the plasma concentration-time curve increased in proportion to dose. Raltitrexed clearance was independent of dose and was associated with the estimated creatinine clearance. Asthenia, neutropenia, and hepatic transaminitis were dose-related and tended to occur more frequently when patients received three or more cycles of therapy. A 3-week treatment interval was feasible in the majority of patients at all doses. Although 4.0 mg/m2 appeared to be a safe starting dose in this pretreated patient population, about half who received two or more courses ultimately experienced dose-limiting toxicity. A dose of 3.5 mg/m2 was well tolerated in most patients.

Paclitaxel chemotherapy after autologous stem-cell transplantation and engraftment of hematopoietic cells transduced with a retrovirus containing the multidrug resistance complementary DNA (MDR1) in metastatic breast cancer patients.

The MDR1 multidrug resistance gene confers resistance to natural-product anticancer drugs including paclitaxel. We conducted a clinical gene therapy study to determine whether retroviral-mediated transfer of MDR1 in human hematopoietic cells would result in stable engraftment, and possibly expansion, of cells containing this gene after treatment with myelosuppressive doses of paclitaxel. Patients with metastatic breast cancer who achieved a complete or partial remission after standard chemotherapy were eligible for the study. Hematopoietic stem cells (HSCs) were collected by both peripheral blood apheresis and bone marrow harvest after mobilization with a single dose of cyclophosphamide (4 g/m2) and daily filgrastim therapy (10 microg/kg/day). After enrichment for CD34+ cells, one-third of each collection was incubated ex vivo for 72 h with a replication-incompetent retrovirus containing the MDR1 gene (G1MD) in the presence of stem-cell factor, interleukin 3, and interleukin 6. The remaining CD34+ cells were stored without further manipulation. All of the CD34+ cells were reinfused for hematopoietic rescue after conditioning chemotherapy with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide regimen. After hematopoietic recovery, patients received six cycles of paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 every 3 weeks). Bone marrow and serial peripheral blood samples were obtained and tested for the presence of the MDR1 transgene using a PCR assay. Six patients were enrolled in the study and four patients received infusion of genetically altered cells. The ex vivo transduction efficiency, estimated by the PCR assay, ranged from 0.1 to 0.5%. Three of the four patients demonstrated engraftment of cells containing the MDR1 transgene. The estimated percentage of granulocytes containing the MDR1 transgene ranged from a maximum of 9% of circulating nucleated cells down to the limit of detection of 0.01%. One patient remained positive for the MDR1 transgene throughout all six cycles of paclitaxel therapy, whereas the other 2 patients showed a decrease in the number of cells containing the transgene to undetectable levels. Despite the low level of engraftment of MDR1-marked cells, a correlation was observed between the relative number of granulocytes containing the MDR1 transgene and the granulocyte nadir after paclitaxel therapy. No adverse reactions to the genetic manipulation procedures were detected. Therefore, engraftment of human HSCs transduced with the MDR1 gene can be achieved. However, the overall transduction efficiency and stable engraftment of gene-modified HSCs must be improved before MDR1 gene therapy and in vivo selection with anticancer drugs can be reliably used to protect cancer patients from drug-related myelosuppression.

Engraftment of MDR1 and NeoR gene-transduced hematopoietic cells after breast cancer chemotherapy.

To determine whether the multidrug resistance gene MDR1 could act as a selectable marker in human subjects, we studied engraftment of peripheral blood progenitor cells (PBPCs) transduced with either MDR1 or the bacterial NeoR gene in six breast cancer patients. This study differed from previous MDR1 gene therapy studies in that patients received only PBPCs incubated in retroviral supernatants (no nonmanipulated PBPCs were infused), transduction of PBPCs was supported with autologous bone marrow stroma without additional cytokines, and a control gene (NeoR) was used for comparison with MDR1. Transduced PBPCs were infused after high-dose alkylating agent therapy and before chemotherapy with MDR-substrate drugs. We found that hematopoietic reconstitution can occur using only PBPCs incubated ex vivo, that the MDR1 gene product may play a role in engraftment, and that chemotherapy may selectively expand MDR1 gene-transduced hematopoietic cells relative to NeoR transduced cells in some patients.

Standardizing the expression and nomenclature of cancer treatment regimens. American Society of Health-System Pharmacist (ASHP), American Medical Association (AMA), American Nurses Association (ANA).

Guidelines for describing cancer chemotherapy regimens in all aspects of drug development, including treatment protocols, order forms, and product labels, are proposed. To complement the approaches to reducing medication errors that have been recommended by ASHP and others, pharmacists at the National Institutes of Health and the National Cancer Institute, with the input of oncology pharmacists from diverse areas of practice, developed guidelines for expressing chemotherapy dosage schedules and treatment regimens. The guidelines present standards that are broadly applicable and can be adopted by other institutions. Clear and unambiguous expression of all medication orders and consistency of treatment descriptions are suggested. Written treatment plans and orders should contain enough information to allow health care providers from diverse disciplines to compare them with published treatment descriptions and investigational protocols and must therefore include planned dosages and schedules expressed in patient-specific units. In general, drug dosages should be expressed as the amount of drug administered from a single container. When ordering drugs that are part of complex or combination-drug regimens, prescribers should write as many of the orders at one time as is possible, so that continuity might be preserved. Standard rules are proposed for describing chemotherapy regimens.

Phase I study of paclitaxel as a radiation sensitizer in the treatment of mesothelioma and non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities of paclitaxel with concurrent thoracic irradiation in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma and locally advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) using a 120-hour continuous infusion regimen. A secondary objective was to assess the effect of paclitaxel on the cell cycle through serial tumor biopsies. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Paclitaxel was administered as a 120-hour (5-day) continuous infusion repeated every 3 weeks during the course of radiation therapy. The starting dose of paclitaxel was 90 mg/m2. Doses were escalated at 15-mg/m2 increments in successive cohorts of three patients. In NSCLC patients, radiation was delivered to the primary tumor and regional lymph nodes for a total tumor dose of 6,120 cGy. In mesothelioma patients, hemithoracic irradiation was delivered as the initial treatment field with a conedown to the tumor volume for a total dose of 5,760 to 6,300 cGy. Tumor biopsies were obtained, if possible, before and during paclitaxel treatment. RESULTS: Thirty patients were entered onto this study through three dose levels (from 90 mg/m2 to 120 mg/m2). The MTD was determined to be 105 mg/m2. The dose-limiting toxicity was grade 4 neutropenia (two patients). Grade 2 gastrointestinal (GI) toxicity (nausea and vomiting) was also observed at 120 mg/m2. Three of 30 patients developed a hypersensitivity reaction. Six patients had grade 2 lung injury manifested by a persistent cough that required antitussives. Five patients underwent tumor biopsies. None of the patients showed a significant block of cells in mitosis (G2/M) after paclitaxel infusion. CONCLUSION: The MTD of paclitaxel, when administered as a 120-hour continuous infusion with concurrent radiotherapy, was determined to be 105 mg/m2. The dose-limiting toxicity was neutropenia. Continuous infusion paclitaxel administered with large field irradiation of the lung is well tolerated and deserves continued evaluation.

A review of paclitaxel (Taxol) administration, stability, and compatibility issues.

The purpose of this article is to review information relative to the administration, stability, and compatibility of paclitaxel (Taxol, Mead Johnson Oncology Products, Princeton, NJ). The unique formulation used to solubilize paclitaxel has led to an increased awareness of plasticizer-leaching issues, paclitaxel stability in solution, and paclitaxel compatibility with other medications. Particularly with longer paclitaxel infusion schedules (greater than 48 hours), both drug stability in solution and pump apparatus congruence require careful consideration to minimize plasticizer-leaching problems and to ensure optimum drug delivery. Despite knowledge of the physical compatibility of paclitaxel with numerous drugs, a paucity of research has documented the specifics of paclitaxel's chemical compatibility with other medications.

Clinical overview of the taxanes.

Paclitaxel and docetaxel are taxane antineoplastic agents with broad antitumor activity. Since being introduced, they have become increasingly important in the treatment of a number of major solid tumors. Paclitaxel plus a platinum analog is now considered first-line therapy for advanced ovarian cancer, and both paclitaxel and docetaxel have significant activity as single agents in recurrent ovarian cancer. Docetaxel may be useful in some of these women with ovarian cancer who fail or progress after paclitaxel-containing treatments. Both drugs have significant response rates in the treatment of breast cancer and are options for patients with advanced disease, including anthracycline-refractory disease. Administration of taxanes in new combination regimens and as adjuvant therapy for breast cancer is under investigation; for example, the combination of paclitaxel and doxorubicin is highly active, and comparative studies of taxanes and anthracyclines should help clarify optimal treatment regimens in breast cancer. Both drugs have significant activity alone in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and head and neck cancers. For the former, paclitaxel-cisplatin is now standard treatment in cooperative group combination therapy trials. As a result of its radiosensitizing properties, paclitaxel is undergoing extensive evaluation as combined modality treatment for advanced NSCLC and head and neck cancer. Both taxanes will probably be useful in combination regimens in head and neck cancer. Research is continuing to define further their roles and relative usefulness in other malignancies.

A phase I study of topotecan followed sequentially by doxorubicin in patients with advanced malignancies.

Inhibitors of topoisomerase I and topoisomerase II have demonstrated synergy when administered sequentially in several tumor models while having a diminished antitumor effect when given concurrently. To explore the potential for clinical sequence-dependent synergy, we instituted a Phase I study of topotecan (a topoisomerase I inhibitor) followed by doxorubicin (a topoisomerase II inhibitor) in patients with advanced malignancies. Thirty-three patients with advanced malignancies or malignancies for whom no standard therapy exists were entered into the study. Topotecan was administered in escalating doses by 72-h continuous infusion on days 1, 2, and 3, followed by a bolus of doxorubicin given on day 5. To explore the hematological toxicity associated with this sequence, bone marrow aspirates were obtained both prior to the topotecan infusion and immediately prior to the doxorubicin in 10 patients to determine by fluorescence-activated cell sorting analysis whether CD34+ cell synchronization was occurring using this sequential schedule. Dose-limiting hematological toxicity occurred at the first dose-level in three of six patients. Therefore, we defined the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) below our starting dose-level. Further dose-escalation and a new MTD were defined with the addition of granulocyte-colony stimulating factor (G-CSF). The MTD was, therefore, topotecan 0.35 mg/m2/day continuous i.v. infusion on days 1, 2, and 3, followed by doxorubicin 45 mg/m2 on day 5 without G-CSF, whereas the MTD with G-CSF was topotecan 0.75 mg/m2/day by 72-h continuous i.v. infusion, followed by doxorubicin 45 mg/m2 i.v. bolus on day 5. Ten patients with paired bone marrow aspirates obtained before topotecan and before doxorubicin administrations were available for evaluation. In 7 of 10 patients, there was an increase (16.6 +/- 2.9% to 25.0 +/- 3.5%; P < 0.02) in the proportion of CD34+ cells in S-phase 24 h after the topotecan infusion and prior to doxorubicin compared to the pretreatment values, whereas 1 patient had a decrease in the proportion of CD34+ cells in S phase and 2 patients had no change. Topotecan and doxorubicin with this sequence and schedule can be given safely; the dose-limiting toxicity is hematological toxicity. Alterations in the fraction of hematopoietic progenitor CD34+ cells in S-phase may account for the increased granulocytopenia and thrombocytopenia observed at relatively low dose levels of the combination with and without G-CSF.

A phase I study of paclitaxel and cyclophosphamide in recurrent adenocarcinoma of the ovary.

We have conducted a disease specific phase I study of paclitaxel and cyclophosphamide in recurrent adenocarcinoma of the ovary. This was done to take advantage of the cellular and molecular synergism between paclitaxel and DNA-damaging agents, with the hope of avoiding paclitaxel-cisplatin toxicities. Paclitaxel was given as a 24-hr CIVI, after which cyclophosphamide was given as a 60-min infusion. Cycles of therapy were repeated every 3 weeks; and granulocyte colony-simulating factor (G-CSF) was given in a "flexible" dosing fashion. Starting doses were 170 mg/m2 paclitaxel and 750 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was seen at the doses of 250 mg/m2 paclitaxel and 1250 mg/m2 cyclophosphamide. DLT was cumulative thrombocytopenia. There were six nonhematologic grade 3 or 4 toxicities experienced in the study. Eleven of 20 evaluable patients (55%) have achieved an objective response (4 CCR;7 PR). Three of four CCRs were confirmed by negative findings at peritoneoscopy. The median number of prior therapies was 2 (range 1-4) and 17 individuals had platinum-refractory disease. We conclude that paclitaxel followed by cyclophosphamide is an active combination in recurrent ovarian cancer and that further study is needed to determine if this combination is truly better than paclitaxel alone.

Phase I crossover study of paclitaxel with r-verapamil in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We conducted a phase I crossover study of escalating doses of both paclitaxel (Taxol; Bristol-Myers, Squibb, Princeton, NJ) and r-verapamil, the less cardiotoxic stereoisomer, in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-nine patients refractory to paclitaxel by 3-hour infusion were treated orally with r-verapamil every 4 hours starting 24 hours before the same-dose 3-hour paclitaxel infusion and continuing for a total of 12 doses. Once the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination was determined, seven additional patients who had not been treated with either drug were evaluated to determine whether the addition of r-verapamil altered the pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel. Consenting patients had tumor biopsies for P-glycoprotein (Pgp) expression before receiving paclitaxel and after becoming refractory to paclitaxel therapy. RESULTS: The MTD of the combination was 225 mg/m2 of r-verapamil every 4 hours with paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 by 3-hour infusion. Dose-limiting hypotension and bradycardia were observed in three of five patients treated at 250 mg/m2 r-verapamil. Fourteen patients received 32 cycles of r-verapamil at the MTD as outpatient therapy without developing cardiac toxicity. The median peak and trough serum verapamil concentrations at the MTD were 5.1 micromol/L (range, 1.9 to 6.3), respectively, which are within the range necessary for in vitro modulation of Pgp-mediated multidrug resistance (MDR). Increased serum verapamil concentrations and cardiac toxicity were observed more frequently in patients with elevated hepatic transaminases and bilirubin levels. Hematologic toxicity from combined paclitaxel and r-verapamil was significantly worse compared with the previous cycle of paclitxel without r-verapamil. In the pharmacokinetic analysis, r-verapamil delayed mean paclitaxel clearance and increased mean peak paclitaxel concentrations. CONCLUSION: r-Verapamil at 225 mg/m2 orally every 4 hours can be given safely with paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 by 3-hour infusion as outpatient therapy and is associated with serum levels considered active for Pgp inhibition. The addition of r-verapamil significantly alters the toxicity and pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel.

Phase I/II study of 72-hour infusional paclitaxel and doxorubicin with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor in patients with metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: We conducted a phase I/II trial of concurrently administered 72-hour infusional paclitaxel and doxorubicin in combination with granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) in patients with previously untreated metastatic breast cancer and bidimensionally measurable disease. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We defined the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of concurrent paclitaxel and doxorubicin administration and then studied potential pharmacokinetic interactions between the two drugs. Forty-two patients who had not received prior chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer received 296 total cycles of paclitaxel and doxorubicin with G-CSF. RESULTS: The MTD was determined to be paclitaxel 180 mg/m2 and doxorubicin 60 mg/m2 each by 72-hour infusion with G-CSF. Diarrhea was the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of this combination, with three of three patients developing abdominal computed tomographic (CT) scan evidence of typhlitis (cecal thickening) at the dose level above the MTD. All patients developed grade 4 neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] < 500 microL), generally less than 5 days in duration. This combination was generally safely administered at dose levels at or below the MTD. The overall response rate was 72% (28 of 39 patients; 95% confidence interval [CI], 55% to 85%), with 8% complete responses (CRs) (three of 39; 95% CI, 2% to 21%) and a median response duration of 9 months. The median overall survival time for all patients is 23 months, with a median follow-up duration of 28 months. Pharmacokinetic studies showed that administration of paclitaxel and doxorubicin together by 72-hour infusion did not affect the steady-state concentrations of either drug. CONCLUSION: Concurrent 72-hour infusional paclitaxel and doxorubicin can be administered safely, but is associated with significant toxicity. The overall response rate of this combination in untreated metastatic breast cancer patients is similar to that achieved with other doxorubicin-based combination regimens. The modest complete response rate achieved suggests that this schedule of paclitaxel and doxorubicin administration does not produce significant additive or synergistic cytotoxicity against breast cancer.