Adequate nephroprotection reduces renal complications after hyperthermic intrathoracic chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Hyperthermic intrathoracic chemotherapy (HITOC) is used for the treatment of malignant pleural tumors. Although HITOC proved to be safe, postoperative renal failure due to nephrotoxicity of intrapleural cisplatin remains a concern. METHODS: This single-center study was performed retrospectively in patients who underwent pleural tumor resection and HITOC between September 2008 and December 2018. RESULTS: A total of 84 patients (female n = 33; 39.3%) with malignant pleural tumors underwent surgical cytoreduction with subsequent HITOC (60 minutes; 42°C). During the study period, we gradually increased the dosage of cisplatin (100-150 mg/m2 BSA n = 36; 175 mg/m2 BSA n = 2) and finally added doxorubicin (cisplatin 175 mg/m2 BSA/doxorubicin 65 mg; n = 46). All patients had perioperative fluid balancing. The last 54 (64.3%) patients also received perioperative cytoprotection. Overall 29 patients (34.5%) experienced renal insufficiency. Despite higher cisplatin concentrations, patients with cytoprotection showed significantly lower postoperative serum creatinine levels after 1 week (P = .006) and at discharge (P = .020). Also, they showed less intermediate and severe renal insufficiencies (5.6% vs 13.3%). CONCLUSIONS: Adequate perioperative fluid management and cytoprotection seem to be effective in protecting renal function. This allows the administration of higher intracavitary cisplatin doses without raising the rate of renal insufficiencies.

Metformin exhibits radiation countermeasures efficacy when used alone or in combination with sulfhydryl containing drugs.

Metformin, a biguanide drug used in the treatment of type II diabetes, was evaluated alone and in combination with amifostine, captopril, MESNA or N-acetyl-cysteine (NAC) for its ability to protect when administered 24 h after irradiation. Mouse embryo fibroblasts (MEF), human microvascular endothelial cells (HMEC) and SA-NH mouse sarcoma cells were exposed to 4 Gy in vitro. C3H mice were exposed to 7 Gy and evaluated utilizing an endogenous spleen colony assay system. Amifostine and WR1065, administered 30 min prior to irradiation, were used as positive controls. Treatment of MEF, HMEC and SA-NH cells with metformin elevated survival levels by 1.4-, 1.5- and 1.3-fold compared to 1.9-, 1.8- and 1.6-fold for these same cells treated with WR1065, respectively. Metformin (250 mg/kg) was effective in protecting splenic cells from a 7 Gy dose in vivo (protection factor = 1.8). Amifostine (400 mg/kg), administered 30 min prior to irradiation resulted in a 2.6-fold survival elevation, while metformin administered 24 h after irradiation in combination with NAC (400 mg/kg), MESNA (300 mg/kg) or captopril (200 mg/kg) enhanced survival by 2.6-, 2.8- and 2.4-fold, respectively. Each of these agents has been approved by the FDA for human use and each has a well characterized human safety profile. Metformin alone or in combination with selected sulfhydryl agents possesses radioprotective properties when administered 24 h after radiation exposure comparable to that observed for amifostine administered 30 min prior to irradiation making it a potentially useful agent for radiation countermeasures use.

A new orally active, aminothiol radioprotector-free of nausea and hypotension side effects at its highest radioprotective doses.

PURPOSE: A new aminothiol, PrC-210, was tested for orally conferred radioprotection (rats, mice; 9.0 Gy whole-body, which was otherwise lethal to 100% of the animals) and presence of the debilitating side effects (nausea/vomiting, hypotension/fainting) that restrict use of the current aminothiol, amifostine (Ethyol, WR-2721). METHODS AND MATERIALS: PrC-210 in water was administered to rats and mice at times before irradiation, and percent-survival was recorded for 60 days. Subcutaneous (SC) amifostine (positive control) or SC PrC-210 was administered to ferrets (Mustela putorius furo) and retching/emesis responses were recorded. Intraperitoneal amifostine (positive control) or PrC-210 was administered to arterial cannulated rats to score drug-induced hypotension. RESULTS: Oral PrC-210 conferred 100% survival in rat and mouse models against an otherwise 100% lethal whole-body radiation dose (9.0 Gy). Oral PrC-210, administered by gavage 30-90 min before irradiation, conferred a broad window of radioprotection. The comparison of PrC-210 and amifostine side effects was striking because there was no retching or emesis in 10 ferrets treated with PrC-210 and no induced hypotension in arterial cannulated rats treated with PrC-210. The tested PrC-210 doses were the ferret and rat equivalent doses of the 0.5 maximum tolerated dose (MTD) PrC-210 dose in mice. The human equivalent of this mouse 0.5 MTD PrC-210 dose would likely be the highest PrC-210 dose used in humans. By comparison, the mouse 0.5 MTD amifostine dose, 400 µg/g body weight (equivalent to the human amifostine dose of 910 mg/m(2)), when tested at equivalent ferret and rat doses in the above models produced 100% retching/vomiting in ferrets and 100% incidence of significant, progressive hypotension in rats. CONCLUSIONS: The PrC-210 aminothiol, with no detectable nausea/vomiting or hypotension side effects in these preclinical models, is a logical candidate for human drug development to use in healthy humans in a wide variety of radioprotection settings, including medical radiation, space travel, and nuclear accidents.

Ameliorative effect of DRDE 07 and its analogues on the systemic toxicity of sulphur mustard and nitrogen mustard in rabbit.

Despite extensive research efforts, there is no unanimous approval of any animal model to evaluate the toxicity of sulphur mustard [SM; bis (2-chloroethyl) sulphide] or nitrogen mustard [HN-3; tris-(2-chloroethyl) amine] and screening of various prophylactic and therapeutic agents against them. In this study, differential toxicity of mustard agents in higher animal model that is male rabbit was determined. Protective efficacy of DRDE 07 [S-2(2-aminoethylamino) ethyl phenyl sulphide] and its analogues were also evaluated against SM and HN-3 toxicity. Differential toxicity study of SM and HN-3 reveals that both the compounds were more toxic by percutaneous route as compared to subcutaneous route. Till date, there is no recommended drug to counteract SM induced toxicity or mortality in vivo. However, DRDE 07 (an amifostine analogue) and its analogues are found to be very effective protective agents against percutaneously exposed SM in rabbits. The present experiments also showed that SM does not cause skin injury alone but also can cause systemic toxicity as well. DRDE 07 and many of its analogues may prove as prototype compounds for the development of better prophylactic and therapeutic drugs to counter the toxicity of SM or HN-3. In conclusion, rodents and rabbits can be used for the screening of drugs against the blistering agents.

A phase I study of extrapleural pneumonectomy and intracavitary intraoperative hyperthermic cisplatin with amifostine cytoprotection for malignant pleural mesothelioma.

OBJECTIVE: This study was undertaken to determine maximum tolerated dose and toxicity of intraoperative intracavitary hyperthermic cisplatin perfusion with amifostine after extrapleural pneumonectomy for malignant pleural mesothelioma. METHODS: Patients with mesothelioma were prospectively enrolled. Those with resectable disease received amifostine and 1-hour hyperthermic cisplatin perfusion of ipsilateral hemithorax and abdomen. Morbidity, recurrence, and survival were recorded. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were enrolled; 29 underwent resection (operative mortality 7%, 2/29). Median age was 57 years. Eighteen were in pathologic stage I or II; 11 were in stage III. Median hospitalization was 15 days. Common complications were atrial fibrillation (66%, 19 patients), deep venous thrombosis (31%, 9 patients), and grade 3+ renal toxicity (31%, 9 patients). Feasibility was determined. Renal toxicity was unrelated to cisplatin dose, with no maximum tolerated dose determined. Overall median survival was 17 months (resected 20 months, unresected 10 months). Median survivals were 26 months for patients receiving higher cisplatin doses and 16 months for those receiving lower doses (P = .35). Survival was significantly longer with negative extrapleural nodes (31 vs 14 months, P = .0115) and early stage (all resected 35 months for stage I-II vs 14 months for stage III, P = .0022, epithelial 39 months for stage I-II vs 15 months for stage III, P = .0072). CONCLUSION: Early stage and negative extrapleural lymph nodes were associated with prolonged survival. Single-dose amifostine did not protect adequately against cisplatin-induced renal toxicity. Additional cytoprotective strategies are needed to allow determination of cisplatin maximum tolerated dose.

Results of combination therapy with amifostine, pentoxifylline, ciprofloxacin and dexamethasone in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukemia.

Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) is a clonal disease of the bone marrow characterized by abnormal hematopoiesis and cytopenias. It has been shown that abnormal cytokine production together with apoptosis are major contributors to the cytopenias associated with the disorder. As the interaction of cytokines plays a role in the pathogenesis, suppression of the cytokine production by the administration of the combination of pentoxifylline, ciprofloxacin, and dexamethasone (PCD combination) has resulted in the correction of at least some aspects of the cytopenias in the majority of patients and in complete hematologic remission in a small percentage. The aminothiol prodrug amifostine, a compound to protect tissues from cytotoxic drugs and radiotherapy has been found to stimulate proliferation of normal hematopoiesis and suppress apoptosis in patients with MDS. In this study we report the results of combination therapy of amifostine and PCD in 12 patients with MDS and acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Amifostine was given in a dose of 200 mg/m(2), as an i.v. infusion administered in 10 min, three times a week; pentoxifylline 2400 mg/day, (3 x 800 mg) p.o.; ciprofloxacin, 1 g/day p.o.; dexamethasone 4.5 mg/day p.o. We achieved 66% response rate in our patients. In some cases responses were achieved in only thrombocytopenia or anemia whereas in others responses were achieved in multiple series. As a result it was found that amifostine + PCD combination may be beneficial in reversing cytopenias in the treatment of MDS and AML and is worth further study.

A pilot study of addition of amifostine to melphalan, carboplatin, etoposide, and cyclophosphamide with autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplantation in pediatric solid tumors-A pediatric blood and marrow transplant consortium study.

Limited information is available regarding the use of amifostine in pediatric hematopoietic stem cell transplant (HSCT) patients. Melphalan, carboplatin, etoposide +/- cyclophosphamide is a commonly used preparatory regimen in pediatric solid tumor HSCT. Therefore, we decided to determine the feasibility of the addition of amifostine (750 mg/m b.i.d. x 4 d) to melphalan (200 mg/m), carboplatin (1200 mg/m), and etoposide (800 mg/m) (level 1) and escalating doses of cyclophosphamide (3000 mg/m and 3800 mg/m, levels 2 and 3, respectively) followed by autologous HSCT. Thirty-two patients with a variety of pediatric solid tumors were studied. Seventeen patients were accrued at level 1, 9 at level 2, and 6 at level 3. Major toxicities during the administration of the preparatory regimen were hypocalcemia, emesis, and hypotension. Hypocalcemia required aggressive calcium supplementation during the conditioning phase. No dose limiting toxicities were encountered at level 3. Amifostine at 750 mg/m b.i.d. for 4 days can be administered with a double alkylator regimen consisting of melphalan (200 mg/m), cyclophosphamide (up to 3800 mg/m), carboplatin (1200 mg/m), and etoposide (800 mg/m) with manageable toxicities.

Limited cytoprotective effects of amifostine in high-dose radioactive iodine 131-treated well-differentiated thyroid cancer patients: analysis of quantitative salivary scan.

PURPOSE: The aim of present study was to investigate the cytoprotective effect of amifostine on salivary glands in 131I-treated differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC) patients using serial quantitative analysis of salivary gland scans. METHODS: Serial quantitative salivary scintigraphies were performed in 80 newly diagnosed DTC patients (9 men, 71 women; mean age, 43.2 years old; range, 21-58 years old). Forty-two patients were assigned randomly to the amifostine treatment group, which received 300 mg/m2 amifostine intravenously before 131I administration. RESULTS: In both amifostine-treated and nontreated groups statistically significant declines of functional parameters after 131I treatment were revealed by quantitative salivary scintigraphy in DTC patients. Amifostine pretreatment did not prevent the parenchymal damage to major salivary gland function after 131I treatment (F = 1.37, p = 0.2461). However, the dose of 131I had significant effects on salivary gland function after 131I treatment (F = 9.72, p = 0.0002). CONCLUSION: The present study did not show cytoprotective effects of amifostine for DTC patients treated with 131I.

Phase II multicenter randomized study of amifostine for prevention of acute radiation rectal toxicity: topical intrarectal versus subcutaneous application.

PURPOSE: To investigate the cytoprotective effect of subcutaneous vs. intrarectal administration of amifostine against acute radiation toxicity. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Patients were randomized to receive amifostine either intrarectally (Group A, n = 27) or a 500-mg flat dose subcutaneously (Group B, n = 26) before irradiation. Therapy was delivered using a four-field technique with three-dimensional conformal planning. In Group A, 1,500 mg of amifostine was administered intrarectally as an aqueous solution in 40 mL of enema. Two different toxicity scales were used: the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer/Radiation Therapy Oncology Group (RTOG) rectal and urologic toxicity criteria and the Subjective-RectoSigmoid scale based on the endoscopic terminology of the World Organization for Digestive Endoscopy. Objective measurements with rectosigmoidoscopy were performed at baseline and 1-2 days after radiotherapy completion. The area under the curve for the time course of mucositis (RTOG criteria) during irradiation represented the mucositis index. RESULTS: Intrarectal amifostine was feasible and well tolerated without any systemic or local side effects. According to the RTOG toxicity scale, Group A had superior results with a significantly lower incidence of Grades I-II rectal radiation morbidity (11% vs. 42%, p = 0.04) but inferior results concerning urinary toxicity (48% vs. 15%, p = 0.03). The mean rectal mucositis index and Subjective-RectoSigmoid score were significantly lower in Group A (0.44 vs. 2.45 [p = 0.015] and 3.9 vs. 6.0 [p = 0.01], respectively), and the mean urinary mucositis index was lower in Group B (2.39 vs. 0.34, p < 0.028). CONCLUSIONS: Intrarectal administration of amifostine (1,500 mg) seemed to have a cytoprotective efficacy in acute radiation rectal mucositis but was inferior to subcutaneous administration in terms of urinary toxicity. Additional randomized studies are needed for definitive decisions concerning the cytoprotection of pelvic irradiated areas.

A phase II randomized study of topical intrarectal administration of amifostine for the prevention of acute radiation-induced rectal toxicity.

PURPOSE: To investigate the cytoprotective effect of intrarectal amifostine administration on acute radiation-induced rectal toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: 67 patients with T1b-2 N0 M0 prostate cancer were randomized to receive amifostine intrarectally (group A, n = 33) or not (group B, n = 34) before irradiation. Therapy was delivered using a four-field technique with three-dimensional conformal planning. In group A, 1,500 mg amifostine was administered intrarectally as an aqueous solution in a 40-ml enema. Two different toxicity scales were used: EORTC/RTOG rectal and urologic toxicity criteria along with a Subjective-RectoSigmoid (S-RS) scale based on the endoscopic terminology of the World Organization for Digestive Endoscopy. Objective measurements with rectosigmoidoscopy were performed at baseline and 1-2 days after the completion of radiotherapy. The area under curve for the time course of mucositis (RTOG criteria) during irradiation represented the mucositis index (MI). RESULTS: Intrarectal amifostine was feasible and well tolerated without any systemic or local side effects. According to the RTOG toxicity scale, five out of 33 patients showed grade 1 mucositis in group A versus 15 out of 34 patients with grade 1/2 in group B (p = 0.026). Mean rectal MI was 0.3 +/- 0.1 in group A versus 2.2 +/- 0.4 in group B (p < 0.001), while S-RS score was 3.9 +/- 0.5 in group A versus 6.3 +/- 0.7 in group B (p < 0.001). The incidence of urinary toxicity was the same in both groups. CONCLUSION: Intrarectal administration of amifostine seems to have a cytoprotective efficacy in acute radiation-induced rectal mucositis. Further randomized studies are needed for definitive therapeutic decisions.

Combinations of radioprotectants spare radiation-induced damage to the physis.

Radiotherapy used in the treatment of bone and soft tissue sarcomas in pediatric patients often results in undesirable growth plate damage. Radioprotectants may hold promise in the selective protection of growth plate tissue in this setting. In an animal model, the hypothesis tested was that pentoxifylline, selenium, or misoprostol, used in combination with amifostine, would significantly reduce longitudinal growth loss during one radiation dose exposure to a greater extent than the protection provided by only amifostine without increased morbidity or mortality or adverse effects on bone mineral density. Amifostine alone and in combination with each of the other radioprotectants resulted in limb discrepancy reduction to levels significantly less than radiated controls. The tibial length discrepancy in the selenium and amifostine group was 12.1 +/- 0.8%, less than the 15.5 +/- 2.6% tibial length discrepancy in the animals treated with amifostine alone, and less than the mean 18.8% tibial length discrepancy in the radiated limbs without radioprotection. There were no adverse effects on bone density in any group, but the selenium and amifostine group showed some increased mortality. Combinations of amifostine with these radioprotectants show efficacy in growth plate radioprotection and therefore warrant additional study in a clinically relevant fractionated model.

Residual chromosomal damage after radiochemotherapy with and without amifostine detected by 24-color FISH.

BACKGROUND: Amifostine is a radioprotective drug applied to reduce acute radiation toxicity during a course of conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. In the present study, amifostine was used in patients undergoing adjuvant radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer. It was described previously that additional application of amifostine led to less acute skin and bowel toxicity. The present study was aimed to determine whether amifostine has an influence on the amount of residual chromosomal damage. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Peripheral lymphocytes of twelve rectal cancer patients who had undergone postoperative radiochemotherapy 2-3 years ago were investigated for residual chromosomal damage using 24-color fluorescence in situ hybridization (24-color FISH). All twelve patients had received a total dose of 55.8 Gy in conventional fractionation of 1.8 Gy and a 120-h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) chemotherapy (1,000 mg/m(2) per day) in the 1st and 5th week of irradiation. Seven out of twelve patients had been given additional amifostine on chemotherapy days (500 mg total dose as short i.v. infusion immediately prior to the daily radiation fraction). Cultivation of lymphocytes and 24-color FISH were performed according to standard protocols. 100 metaphases per patient were analyzed for chromosomal aberrations in a blind study. RESULTS: Analysis of the average number of breaks per mitosis (B/M) revealed an increased amount of residual chromosomal damage in the group treated with amifostine (0.65 B/M [0.32-0.97]) as well as in those treated without amifostine (0.76 B/M [0.31-1.25]). Also the average number of cells containing aberrations per 100 analyzed metaphases was similar (with amifostine: 22.1 [13-32] vs. 24.4 [13-35] without amifostine). The aberration types, occurring as simple translocations, reciprocal translocations, breaks, dicentrics, inversions, rings and complex chromosomal rearrangements, did not show any specific accumulation in one or the other group either. CONCLUSION: While there was a significant amifostine-mediated clinical amelioration of normal tissue toxicity, the comparison of residual chromosomal damage 2-3 years after completion of radiochemotherapy was characterized by a high interindividual variation, and no equivalent difference could be detected between the two groups.

Phase I clinical and pharmacologic study of weekly cisplatin and irinotecan combined with amifostine for refractory solid tumors.

PURPOSE: This Phase I study was designed primarily to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of irinotecan and cisplatin with and without amifostine in children with refractory solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cisplatin, at a fixed dose of 30 mg/m(2), and escalating doses of irinotecan (starting dose, 40 mg/m(2)) were administered weekly for four consecutive weeks, every 6 weeks. After the MTD of irinotecan plus cisplatin was determined, additional cohorts of patients were enrolled with amifostine (825 mg/m(2)) support. Leukocyte DNA-platinum adducts and pharmacokinetics of cisplatin and WR-1065 (amifostine-active metabolite) were also determined. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients received 43 courses of therapy. The MTD for irinotecan administered in combination with cisplatin (30 mg/m(2)) was 50 mg/m(2). The DLTs of this combination were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. With the addition of amifostine, at an irinotecan dose of 65 mg/m(2) and cisplatin dose of 30 mg/m(2), the DLT was hypocalcemia. Although no objective responses were observed, six patients received at least three courses of therapy. The amounts of platinum adducts (mean +/- SD) were 10 +/- 20 molecules/10(6) nucleotides. The maximum plasma concentrations (C(max)) for free cisplatin and WR-1065 were 4.5 +/- 1.6 micro M and approximately 89 +/- 10 micro M, respectively. The half-life (t(1/2)) for free plasma cisplatin was 25.4 +/- 5.4 min. The initial t(1/2) for plasma WR-1065 was approximately 7 min and terminal t(1/2) approximately 24 min. CONCLUSION: The combination of cisplatin and irinotecan administered weekly for 4 weeks in children with refractory cancer is well tolerated. Amifostine offers some myeloprotection, likely permitting >/=30% dose escalation for irinotecan, when administered in a combination regimen with cisplatin. However, effective antiemetics and calcium supplementation are necessary with the use of amifostine. Further escalation of irinotecan dosing, using these precautions for amifostine administration, may be possible.

Preclinical studies on the radioprotective efficacy and pharmacokinetics of subcutaneously administered amifostine.

The radioprotective effects and pharmacokinetics of subcutaneously (SC) administered amifostine have been investigated in animal studies. Studies in rats using a single dose of amifostine showed that SC administration gave protection from radiation-induced mucositis that is at least equivalent to that achieved by intravenous administration of the drug. These studies also indicate that tissue levels of the active metabolite WR-1065 correlated better with the radioprotective effects of amifostine than do plasma WR-1065 levels. Multiple-dose studies in rats show radioprotective effects equal to or greater than those obtained with intravenous dosing in the setting of fractionated irradiation. In addition, there is no evidence of drug accumulation in either normal or tumor tissue, with tumor WR-1065 levels peaking just above the limits of quantitation during treatment. Preliminary data from studies of SC amifostine in monkeys indicate a plasma pharmacokinetic profile similar to that reported earlier in humans. Tissue WR-1065 levels were higher at 30 minutes after SC dosing than they were after intravenous dosing and were comparable for the two routes at 60 minutes.

Phase I trial of a twice-daily regimen of amifostine with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide chemotherapy in children with refractory carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Amifostine protects normal tissues against chemotherapy and radiation-induced toxicity without loss of antitumor effects. Evidence suggests that multiple daily doses of amifostine may improve its cytoprotective effects. The purpose of this study was to assess the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of twice-daily doses of amifostine with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide (ICE) chemotherapy for children with refractory malignancies and to determine the pharmacokinetic properties of amifostine, WR-1065, and the disulfide metabolites of amifostine. METHODS: Patients with refractory malignancies were treated with amifostine 15 minutes before and 2 hours after chemotherapy with ifosfamide (3 g/m(2) per dose on Days 1 and 2) and carboplatin (635 mg/m(2) on Day 3). Etoposide was administered on Days 1 and 2 (150 mg/m(2)). The starting dose of amifostine was 740 mg/m(2). Pharmacokinetic studies were performed after the first dose of amifostine. RESULTS: Twelve patients received 23 courses of ICE and amifostine. Dose-limiting toxicities for amifostine at 740 mg/m(2) were somnolence and anxiety. The other Grade 3 and 4 toxicities included asymptomatic, reversible hypocalcemia, vomiting, and reversible hypotension. At a dose of 600 mg/m(2), amifostine was well tolerated. Hypocalcemia, due to rapid, transient suppression of parathyroid hormone production, required close monitoring and aggressive intravenous calcium supplementation. Pharmacokinetic studies revealed high interpatient variability with rapid plasma clearance of amifostine and WR-1065. The median elimination half-life of amifostine (9.3 minutes) and WR-1065 (15 minutes) was much shorter than the disulfide metabolites (74.4 minutes). CONCLUSIONS: The recommended pediatric dose of amifostine for a twice-daily regimen is 600 mg/m(2) per dose (1200 mg/m(2)/day) with DLTs of anxiety and somnolence, lower than the previously recommended single dose of 1650 mg/m(2).

[Renal protection with amifostine during intraoperative peritoneal chemohyperthermia (IPCH) with cisplatin (CDDP) for peritoneal carcinosis. Phase 1 study]. / Protezione renale con amifostine durante chemioipertermia intraperatoria peritoneale (CIIP) con cisplatino (CDDP) per carcinosi peritoneale. Studio fase I.

BACKGROUND: An innovative approach to peritoneal neoplasm therapy is based on the surgical exeresis of visceral neoplasms, peritonectomy and lastly perfusion of the abdominal cavity with cytostatic drugs in hypothermia (1PCH). Cisplatin (CDDP) is one of the most frequently used drugs for peritoneal perfusion owing to its excellent synergy with hypothermia, reduced ability to penetrate the peritoneal- plasma barrier and its demonstrated efficacy against the majority of neoplasms causing peritoneal carcinosis. A major restriction is that CDDP causes renal toxicity. In order to minimise the risk of renal damage, the authors studied the use of amifostin to protect the renal system. A phase-1 study was performed to find the dose of amifostin that guarantees effective renal protection without causing hypotension. METHODS: A total of 67 cytoreductions were performed at our centre associated with abdominal cavity perfusion using cytostatic compounds in hyperthermia (1PCH) with CDDP for peritoneal carcinosis. Among the first 9 patients undergoing IPCH without nephroprotection, Grade 2 (WHO) renal toxicity was observed in 4 cases (44%) and Grade IV-WHO toxicity in one patient (11%) leading to hemodialysis and death. Arnifastin was then administered to 18 patients. The administration protocol was as follows: cytoreduction, im. administration of amifostin 910 mg/m2 in 15 minutes, execution of IPCH. All patients treated using this dose presented hypotension with systolic arterial pressure <70 mmHg and amifostin administration was consequently suspended. Amifostin was then administered to a further 18 patients divided into groups of three. The dose used for the first triplet was 400 mg/m2; we then increased the dose by 50 mg/m2 in each subsequent triplet. The maximum dose tolerated was 50 mg/m2 less than the initial dose that caused systolic pressure to fall below 70 mmHg. RESULTS: Patients treated with doses = or <500 mg/m2 did not present hypotension and it was therefore possible to administer the entire dose. Patients treated with 600 mg/m2 of amifostin all presented hypotension <70 mg Hg, leading to the suspension of the drug. A new triplet of patients was treated at a dose of 550 mg/m2 and none showed hypotension. Taking 550 mg/m2 as the maximum tolerable dose, a further 22 patients then received amifostin infusion with 550 mg/m2 prior to IPCH. Creatinemia was assayed daily for two weeks and creatinine clearance was measured twice a week to evaluate the efficacy of nephroprotection. None of the patients treated with amifostin during the study died from causes correlated to renal failure: 1 patient died from TEP and 1 from septic shock. No patient treated with a dose of 550 mg/m2 developed arterial hypotension. None of the 18 patients in the dose-finding study presented postoperative creatinemia >1.6 (WHO grade 1 toxicity). In the group of 22 patients treated later, 2 cases (9%) presented creatinemia >1.6 (1.8 and 2.1) for a few days; both had undergone severe debulking and one of the patients subsequently underwent resection and anastomosis of the left renal artery invaded by the neoplasm. CONCLUSIONS: Some patients undergoing cytoreduction+IPCH without the use of amifostin developed severe renal toxicity; acute renal failure occurred in 1 patient requiring hemodialysis and was the main cause of death. None of the 28 patients treated with amifostin 550 mg/m2 developed hypotension or renal insufficiency; only 2 cases showed a slight transient increase in renal function markers. Amifostin appears to be an effective drug for protecting renal emunctory from the toxic effects of CDDP used in cytoreduction+IPCH in patients with peritoneal carcinosis. The dose of 550 mg/m2 used in this study does not cause hypotension and is recommended for this type of clinical use.

Intermittent use of amifostine during postoperative radiochemotherapy and acute toxicity in rectal cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Amifostine has been shown to be able to reduce acute radiation toxicity if administered daily prior to radiation during a course of a conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. A disadvantage is the necessity of daily intravenous injection. We have used amifostin in patients undergoing adjuvant radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer. Amifostine was administered only in the first and fifth week of radiotherapy together with 5-FU chemotherapy. The objective was to determine whether the intermittent use of amifostine may be effective in reducing acute radiation toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From September 1997 through October 1998, 30 patients with stage II/III rectal cancer underwent postoperative radiochemotherapy at our department. All patients had undergone curative (R0) resection and received 50.4 Gy to the pelvis with a 3-field technique using a belly board followed by a boost of 5.4 Gy to the presacral space in conventional fractionation with 1.8 Gy per fraction. 5-FU chemotherapy was administered as 120-hours continuous infusion in the first and fifth radiation week via a central venous catheter in a daily dosage of 1,000 mg/m2. All patients were offered to participate in a phase-II study using additional amifostine. Fifteen patients participated and received 500 mg amifostine daily on chemotherapy days (days 1 to 5 and 29 to 33) immediately prior to the daily radiation fraction. Fifteen patients did not participate and served as non-randomized control. The study was approved by the ethical committee of the Martin-Luther-University and informed consent was obtained from all patients. RESULTS: The distribution of patients' characteristics and prognostic parameters was comparable in both groups. Side effects of amifostine were mild and included hypotension (53% grade I, 7% grade II) and nausea (47% grade I, 13% grade II). Antiemetics were not routinely used. All patients completed radiochemotherapy plus amifostine without unplanned breaks or dose reductions. One patient developed a cerebral infarction which was considered to be not related to the use of amifostine. As compared to the non-randomized control group, patients with additional amifostine had less acute skin and bowel toxicity (maximum erythema score 1.47 +/- 0.64 without vs 0.87 +/- 0.52 with amifostine, p = 0.009 and maximum diarrhea score 1.07 +/- 1.03 vs 0.40 +/- 0.63, p = 0.044). Oral 5-FU-related mucositis and hematological toxicity were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase-II study, amifostine significantly reduced acute skin and bowel toxicity of adjuvant chemoradiation in patients with rectal cancer even if the drug was administered only intermittently and not during the whole course of radiotherapy. This finding might be important with regard to intense combined regimes and should be further investigated.

Influence of the administration of amifostine on the pharmacokinetics of 5-fluorouracil in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma.

A high dose antineoplastic therapy with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) is associated with severe side effects. It is thought that the cytoprotective drug amifostine can reduce these side effects when it is given prior to a chemotherapeutic course. In this study, the pharmacokinetic parameters of 5-FU are monitored in six patients, who received two chemotherapeutic courses of 2,600 mg/m2 BSA 5FU over 24 h, one course with 700 mg/m2 BSA amifostine prior to the 5-FU infusion and the other without. 20 serum samples were drawn during each infusion time and the 5-FU concentrations were determined by a sensitive and selective GC-MS assay. The statistical analysis of the serum concentrations revealed no significant differences in the pharmacokinetic parameters of 5-FU, whether amifostine is administered or not. The conclusion can be drawn that a reduction of side effects is due to the cytoprotective effect of amifostine and not to a change in the serum concentrations of 5-FU.

Patients with myelodysplastic syndromes benefit from palliative therapy with amifostine, pentoxifylline, and ciprofloxacin with or without dexamethasone.

Thirty-five patients with myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) were registered on protocol MDS 96-02 and were receiving continuous therapy with pentoxifylline 800 mg 3 times a day and ciprofloxacin 500 mg twice a day by mouth; dexamethasone was added to the regimen for the partial responders and the nonresponders after 12 weeks at a dose of 4 mg by mouth every morning for 4 weeks. Amifostine was administered intravenously 3 times a week at 3 dose levels (200 mg/M(2), 300 mg/M(2), and 400 mg/M(2)) to cohorts of 10 patients each. Therapy has been continued for 1 year in responders. Twenty-nine have completed at least 12 weeks of therapy and are available for response evaluation. Of the 21 men and 8 women (median age, 67 years), 20 had refractory anemia (RA), 3 had RA with ringed sideroblasts (RARS), 5 had RA with excess blasts (RAEB), and 1 had chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMMoL). Five had secondary MDS. No differences were noted in response rates among the 3 dose levels. Seven patients did not respond at all, and 22 showed an improvement in cytopenias (76%). Three had a triple lineage response, 10 had a double lineage response, and 9 had a single lineage response (8 of 9 in absolute neutrophil count [ANC] and 1 had more than a 50% reduction in packed red blood cell transfusions). Fifteen patients responded only after the addition of dexamethasone, whereas 7 responded before. When examined by lineage, 19 of 22 showed improved ANC, 11 of 22 demonstrated more than 50% reduction in blood transfusions, improved Hb levels, or both, and 7 of 22 showed improvement in platelet counts. Interestingly, the responses were frequently slow to appear, and continued improvement in counts was seen up to 12 months of therapy and beyond. This study supports the feasibility of treating patients with MDS with the unique approach of cytoprotection and anticytokine therapies as well as the principle that prolonged commitment to treatment is desirable when noncytotoxic agents are administered. (Blood. 2000;95:1580-1587)

[Amifostine as protective agent in cisplatin-based chemotherapy of advanced bladder cancer]. / Renale Protektion unter MVEC-Polychemotherapie beim fortgeschrittenen Urothelkarzinom der Harnblase durch Amifostin.

Amifostine is an organic thiophsophate which protects normal cells from the effects of chemotherapy with reduced nadir and duration of cyclophosphamide induced neutropenia, reduced cisplatin derived renal and neurological complications being described. However, no data are available for urological malignancies treated with cisplatin-based chemotherapy. Aim of the study was to assess the efficacy of pretreatment with amifostine in terms of prevention of renal, hematopoietic and neurologic toxicity. 17 patients (mean age: 62.6 [45-74]) with advanced transitional cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder received inductive or adjuvant cisplatin based chemotherapy (1-6 cycles) with a cisplatin dose of 70 mg/m(2). Amifostine (740-910 mg/m(2)) was administered intravenously 30 minutes prior to chemotherapy. For all patients creatinine clearance, serum creatinine and electrolytes including magnesium, and blood cell count were determined prior to and after each cycle. A group of 12 patients (mean age: 61.9 [51-67]) did undergo MVEC chemotherapy (1-4 cycles) without receiving amifostine and served as control group. Amifostine was well tolerated and only 1 patient suffered from gastrointestinal discomfort, blood pressure remained unchanged in all patients. Amifostine prevented a significant reduction of creatinine clearance even in the 2 patients with known renal insufficiency: mean creatinine clearance was 125 +/- 20 ml/min prior to and 115 +/- 25 ml/min after chemotherapy. In the control group, however, creatinine clearance dropped from 121 +/- 30 ml/min to 85 +/- 20 ml/min after completion of MVEC chemotherapy. Serum creatinine levels did not increase significantly (1.1 mg/dl prior to and 1.2 mg/dl after chemotherapy), magnesium levels did not decrease significantly and normalized at the end of chemotherapy. Significant neutropenia and thrombocytopenia developed in 29 % and 12 % of the patients in the amifostine group and in 67 % and 33 % of the patients in the control group. Amifostine was shown to have a protective effect against cisplatin induced nephrotoxicity in the elderly patient undergoing systemic chemotherapy. Based on our data amifostine should be applied in the supportive management to prevent chemotherapy induced complications.