Serum cytokeratin 18 M30 antigen level and its correlation with nutritional parameters in middle-aged Japanese males with nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD).

Cytokeratin (CK) 18 M30 antigen has been proposed as a diagnostic marker of nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD). We studied serum CK18 M30 antigen level and examined the correlations among CK18 and biological data, dietary intake, and plasma fatty acid composition in middle-aged Japanese males with (NAFLD; n=42) and without NAFLD (control; n=35). NAFLD was diagnosed if subjects showed fatty liver on abdominal ultrasonography and their alcohol consumption was <20 g/d. They were also confirmed to have negative serological results for tests of autoimmune liver disease and hepatitis B and C. In the NAFLD group, body mass index, waist circumference, serum M30 antigen, alanine transaminase (ALT), cholinesterase, triacylglycerol, LDL-cholesterol, and HbA1c were significantly higher than in the control group. In the fatty acid analysis of plasma phospholipids, significantly higher dihomo-γ-linolenic acid (DGLA), total saturated fatty acids (SFA), and palmitic/linoleic acid ratio as well as lower arachidonic acid/DGLA ratio were observed in the NAFLD group compared with the control group. In the NAFLD group, M30 antigen was correlated positively with serum ALT, plasma DGLA, dietary SFA, and serum TNF-α as determined by partial correlation analysis controlled for BMI. On the basis of multivariate regression analysis using a stepwise method, M30 antigen was significantly associated with ALT and plasma DGLA. Regarding the determinants of NAFLD as revealed by logistic regression analysis, a high odds ratio was observed for plasma DGLA. In conclusion, members of the NAFLD group showed higher levels of serum CK18 M30 antigen and M30 antigen was strongly associated with serum ALT and plasma DGLA. Abnormal fatty acid metabolism may be a factor that causes aggravation of NAFLD.

Pre-administration of docetaxel protects against adriamycin-induced cardiotoxicity.

BACKGROUND: We have revealed in a pre-clinical study that the combination of adriamycin (ADR) and docetaxel (DOC) in which ADR was administered 12 h after DOC injection not only significantly reduced leukopenia and toxic death but also significantly increased the antitumor effect compared with the dosing schedule without an interval between each injection used commonly in clinical practice. The purpose of this study was to clarify in mice whether the toxic death caused by ADR was reduced by administering ADR after DOC injection when the doses and dosing-interval of ADR and DOC were changed. METHODS: ADR alone or a combination of ADR and DOC (ADR/DOC group in which both drugs were administered simultaneously or DOC-ADR group in which ADR was administered after DOC injection) was administered every 7 days in mice. RESULTS: When dosing intervals (0-24 h) were changed, there were no differences in survival rate among the 6, 12, and 24-h interval groups, although these groups showed significantly higher survival rate compared with the ADR/DOC group. When the dose of ADR (2.5-15 mg/kg) was changed, the survival rate was higher in all the DOC-ADR groups than the ADR alone groups. When the dose of DOC (3.125-12.5 mg/kg) was changed, DOC caused a dose-dependent reduction in toxic death. Although there was no striking difference in adverse effects between the ADR alone and DOC-ADR groups, the DOC-ADR group showed markedly attenuated increases in CPK-MB activity compared with the ADR alone group. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that pre-administration of DOC may protect against ADR-induced toxic death and cardiotoxicity.

Therapeutic index by combination of adriamycin and docetaxel depends on dosing time in mice.

Although the combination of adriamycin and docetaxel showed a better cure rate against metastatic breast cancer, severe myelosuppression and cardiotoxicity were dose-limiting factors. The purpose of this study was to establish a suitable dosing schedule, based on a chronopharmacologic approach, to relieve severe adverse effects. In experiment 1, adriamycin or docetaxel was injected i.p. at 2, 6, 10, 14, 18, or 22 hours after light onset (HALO) to estimate toxicities. In experiment 2, the dosing time dependency of toxicity and pharmacokinetics were assessed in the combination of adriamycin and docetaxel. In addition, G2-M phase in myelocyte cells was determined in nontreated mice. Adverse effects caused by adriamycin were shown to be the worst at 2 HALO and the best at 14 HALO. On the other hand, docetaxel-induced adverse effects were more severe at 14 HALO than at 2 HALO. In the combination study, the D(2)-A(1)4 group, in which docetaxel was administered at 2 HALO followed by adriamycin at 14 HALO, showed the most toxicity relief of all the treated groups. In the pharmacokinetic study, the dosing time dependency of toxicities was not related to the daily variation of pharmacokinetics of adriamycin and docetaxel. A significant 24-hour rhythm of G2-M phase distribution was found in myelocyte cells of nontreated mice. The daily variation of leukopenia caused by docetaxel corresponded to the 24-hour rhythm of G2-M phase distribution. These findings reveal that the therapeutic index of the combined chemotherapy can be improved by administering adriamycin and docetaxel at the time when the most adverse effects are relieved in each drug.

Influence of dosing schedule on toxicity and antitumor effects of a combination of adriamycin and docetaxel in mice.

PURPOSE: Although the combination of Adriamycin (ADR) and docetaxel (DOC) showed a better cure rate against metastatic breast cancer in a clinical study, severe myelosuppression and cardiotoxicity were dose-limiting factors. The purpose of this study was to establish the most suitable dosing schedule to relieve severe adverse effects and improve the antitumor effects. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Both ADR and DOC were administered simultaneously in the simultaneous-dosing group (ADR/DOC), whereas in the intermittent-dosing groups (ADR-DOC and DOC-ADR), the second drug was administered 12 h after the first drug. Leukocyte counts and survival were measured to estimate adverse effects. After administration, ADR and DOC concentrations in blood, myelocyte cells, and heart were determined. To clarify the antitumor effect, tumor growth was measured in Ehrlich-cell-bearing mice after the initiation of drug injections. RESULTS: The simultaneous-dosing group showed severe leukopenia compared with the saline-treated group. However, the toxicity was reduced in the intermittent-dosing groups. The DOC-ADR group showed the best survival rate in the dosing groups. In the pharmacokinetic study, ADR and DOC concentrations in plasma, myelocyte cells, and the heart were markedly higher in the simultaneous-dosing group than the intermittent-dosing groups. These results indicate that pharmacokinetic interactions may contribute to the change in leukopenia induced by concurrent administration of ADR and DOC. The antitumor effect in the DOC-ADR group was the highest in the dosing groups. CONCLUSIONS: In the present study, the findings suggest that ADR administered 12 h after DOC injection (DOC-ADR group) not only inhibits tumor growth more strongly but also significantly reduces leukopenia compared with results for the simultaneous-dosing (ADR/DOC) group and significantly reduced the number of toxic deaths compared with the other groups.