CancerNetwork Members: Login | Register
Become a fan on  Facebook  Add us on  Google Plus Follow us on  Twitter Join us on LinkedIn Sign up for our Newsletters Subscribe to our RSS Feed

 

CancerNetwork SearchMedica Medline Drugs

Powered by SearchMedica

 
PUBLICATIONS
NEWS
PODCASTS
TOPICS
BLOGS
NURSES
PATIENTS
JOBS
CONFERENCES
CME
SUPPLEMENTS
 

Home »

ONCOLOGY. Vol. 13 No. 7 3
 

Gemcitabine and UFT Plus Oral Calcium Folinate: Phase I Study

By

Philip Agop Philip, MD, PhD, Dina Ibrahim, MD, Mark Zalupski, MD, Patricia Arlauskas, and Anthony Shields, MD, PhD
Division of Hematology and Oncology, Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan

| July 1, 1999

Gemcitabine (Gemzar) is a nucleoside analog increasingly used in the treatment of a variety of solid tumors. DNA synthesis is inhibited by gemcitabine by masked chain termination and via inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase. Synergy may exist between gemcitabine and other antimetabolites, including 5-fluorouracil. The varying patterns of dose-limiting toxicities to gemcitabine and UFT (uracil and tegafur in a 4:1 molar ratio) plus oral calcium folinate (Orzel) permit their use in combination. The primary aim of this phase I study is to determine the maximum tolerated doses of gemcitabine and UFT plus oral calcium folinate in patients with a variety of solid tumors. Only eight patients have been recruited to date, with myelosuppression being the main toxicity observed. [ONCOLOGY 7(Suppl 3):116-119, 1999]



Introduction

Gemcitabine (Gemzar) (2-deoxy-2,2-difluorocytidine) is a new antimetabolite being increasingly used in the treatment of solid tumors. It is an analog of deoxycytidine and cytosine arabinoside (Ara-C) (Figure 1) that has shown significant activity as a single agent in lung, breast, pancreas, and ovarian cancers. Gemcitabine(Drug information on gemcitabine) (dFdC) is activated by deoxycytidine kinase to dFdC-5¢-monophosphate (dFdCMP). The latter is further metabolized to dFdC-5¢-diphosphate (dFdCDP) and dFdC-5¢-triphosphate (dFdCTP), which, when incorporated into deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA), results in masked chain termination (Figure 2). In comparison to Ara-C triphosphate (Ara-CTP) incorporation into DNA, dFdCTP is less readily excised from DNA by DNA exonuclease. Thus, dFdCTP accumulates intracellularly to a greater degree than Ara-CTP, which may account, at least in part, for its different spectrum of preclinical and clinical activity. In addition, dFdCDP blocks DNA synthesis by another mechanism, which is the inhibition of ribonucleotide reductase.[1]

It is now well recognized that the activity of gemcitabine is very schedule-dependent.[2] Preclinical testing demonstrated an excellent broad spectrum of antitumor activity in animals carrying human tumor xenografts.[3]

Although the initial phase I trials determined the maximum tolerated dose of gemcitabine to be 800 to 1,000 mg/m²when patients were dosed once a week for 3 of every 4 weeks, subsequent phase II trials found this dose to exhibit minimal toxicity.[4] The safety profile of gemcitabine was unusually mild for such an active agent in solid tumors. Hematologic toxicity was mild and short-lived with modest World Health Organization (WHO) grades 3 and 4 for hemoglobin (6.4% and 0.9% of patients, respectively), leukocytes (8.1% and 0.5%), neutrophils (18.7% and 5.7%), and platelets (6.4% and 0.9%). The incidence of grades 3 and 4 infection associated with this level of myelosuppression was low (0.9% and 0.2%). Transaminase elevations occurred frequently, but they were usually mild and rarely dose-limiting. Nausea and vomiting were mild, rarely dose-limiting, and generally well controlled with standard antiemetics. Flulike symptoms were experienced in a small proportion of patients but were of short duration. In cases where edema/peripheral edema were experienced, there was no evidence of any association with cardiac, hepatic, or renal failure. Hair loss was rare, with WHO grade 3 alopecia reported in 0.5% of patients. Furthermore, gemcitabine displayed minimal toxicity in elderly patients, and the side-effect profile does not seem to be affected by patient age.

Abbruzzese[5] reviewed the extensive data generated in phase I studies with gemcitabine. These studies demonstrated important schedule-dependent differdifferences in toxicity profile and activity of gemcitabine. Frequent drug administration produced a high incidence of toxicities: in the daily schedule, flulike symptoms (fever, malaise, and headache) were experienced, and in some patients, idiosyncratic episodes of severe hypotension; in the twice-a-week schedule, the dose-limiting toxicity was thrombocytopenia. Less-frequent drug administration was better tolerated (myelosuppression was the dose-limiting toxicity), but little efficacy was observed.

The first objective of this phase I study was to determine the toxicity profile and the maximum tolerated dose of the combination of gemcitabine and UFT (uracil and tegafur in a 4:1 molar ratio) plus oral calcium folinate(Drug information on calcium folinate) (Orzel) in patients with advanced cancers. The second objective was to measure the rate of objective tumor response, duration of response, and overall survival in patients treated with the combination of gemcitabine and UFT plus oral calcium folinate. The rationale for combining gemcitabine with UFT plus oral calcium folinate is their nonoverlapping toxicities: the dose-limiting toxicity of gemcitabine is hematologic, whereas nonhematologic toxicity is the major dose-limiting toxicity of UFT plus oral calcium folinate.

Materials and Methods

Eligibility Criteria

The Human Investigational Committee approved the study at Wayne State University, and patients provided signed, written informed consent. Patients must have histologic or cytologic proof of advanced malignancy and disease evaluable for response. Life expectancy should be greater than 3 months, and patients must have a performance status of 0 to 2 on the Southwest Oncology Group scale. Serum creatinine concentration must be £ 1.5 mg/dL. Patients must have hemoglobin ³ 8.0 g/dL, absolute neutrophil count ³ 1,500/µL, platelet count ³ 100,000/µL, and total serum bilirubin £ 2.0 mg/dL. Serum aspartate aminotransferase concentration must be less than 3.0 times the upper range of normal, provided patients have evidence of hepatic metastases.

Study Design

Dose escalations of gemcitabine and UFT plus oral calcium folinate will be according to the schema outlined in Table 1. At least three patients will be entered at each dose level until reaching the maximum tolerated dose. The 90-mg/day calcium folinate dose will be kept constant throughout the study. Dose escalations are not allowed within the same patient. A minimum of six patients will be entered at a given dose level if one or more of the initial three patients at that dose level develop 1) grades 3/4 nonhematologic toxicity (excluding alopecia), 2) grade 4 thrombocytopenia, 3) grade 4 neutropenia complicated with either fever or treatment delays of > 1 week, or 4) dose withholding during a treatment cycle (except for diarrhea).

Drugs and Treatment

Gemcitabine will be administered intravenously over 30 minutes on days 1, 8, and 15 of a cycle; cycles will be repeated every 28 days. UFT plus oral calcium folinate will be administered orally in three divided doses. The dose of UFT will be escalated in successive cohorts of patients, whereas the dose of calcium folinate will remain constant at 90 mg/day. The dose of UFT per day is calculated on the basis of the body surface area and rounded off to the nearest 100 mg. Immediately before a dose of UFT, 30 mg of calcium folinate will be administered orally. UFT plus oral calcium folinate will be administered on days 1 to 21 of each cycle. Treatment will be continued until disease progression or undue toxicity.

Results

Eight patients have been accrued to this study, five of whom were evaluable for toxicity at the time of preparing this article (Table 2). Table 3 summarizes the toxicity data. The maximum tolerated dose has not been reached, based on the follow-up of the five patients reported so far. The major toxicity is hematologic; nonhematologic toxicity has been absent at these two dose levels. One patient at dose level 1 has grade 4 thrombocytopenia but has not required any platelet transfusions. This patient was previously heavily treated with several lines of chemotherapy including alkylating agents.

Discussion

The combination of gemcitabine and UFT plus oral calcium folinate represents an attempt to modulate 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) pharmacodynamics in humans. Gemcitabine and UFT are both antimetabolites that inhibit DNA synthesis by at least two different mechanisms: DNA chain termination with gemcitabine and inhibition of thymidylate synthase by 5-fluoro-2¢-deoxyuridylate (FdUMP). In addition, the metabolite dFdCDP inhibits ribonucleotide reductase, which is the key enzyme in the generation of deoxyribonucleotide. Gemcitabine may therefore enhance DNA synthesis inhibition by its additive effect to UFT, and also by augmenting the inhibition of thymidylate synthesis and reducing the concentration of deoxyuridine monophosphate (dUMP), which competes with FdUMP for thymidylate synthase.

Several studies have been initiated to determine the tolerability and the maximum tolerated dose of gemcitabine when combined with 5-FU. The combination of gemcitabine and continuous-infusion 5-FU was investigated and shown to produce neutropenia as its dose-limiting toxicity.[6] The maximum tolerated dose of the combination was gemcitabine 900 mg/m²/week (3 of 4 weeks) and 5-FU 200 mg/m²/day. In another study, the dose-limiting toxicity was nonhematologic when 5-FU 300 mg/m²/day was combined with low-dose gemcitabine (300 mg/m²/week, 3 of 4 weeks).[7] These two early reports on the combination of gemcitabine and continuous-infusion 5-FU indicated that the dose-limiting toxicities resulting from the combination, whether hematologic or nonhematologic, depended on the ratio of gemcitabine to 5-FU dose.

The combination of gemcitabine and UFT plus oral calcium folinate may be further developed in the treatment of cancers that are responsive to either drug, but particularly in disease where both drugs have shown notable antitumor activities (eg, breast cancer). The optimum schedule of administration of gemcitabine and UFT plus oral calcium folinate will also need further investigation.

 

Join the Conversation

Want to join the conversation? If you're a healthcare professional, we'd like to hear your comments. Just sign in or register today to become part of our growing, online community.





1. Plunkett W, Huang P, Xu YZ, et al: Gemcitabine: Metabolism, mechanisms of action, and self-potentiation (review). Semin Oncol 22:3-10, 1995.

2. Braakhuis BJ, Ruiz van Haperen VW, Boven E, et al: Schedule-dependent antitumor effect of gemcitabine in in vivo model system. Semin Oncol 22:42-46, 1995.

3. Lund B, Kristjansen PE, Hansen HH: Clinical and preclinical activity of 2¢,2¢-difluorode-oxycytidine (gemcitabine) (review). Cancer Treat Rev 19:45-55, 1993.

4. Pollera CF, Ceribelli A, Crecco M, et al: Weekly gemcitabine in advanced or metastatic solid tumors. A clinical phase I study. Invest New Drugs 12:111-119, 1994.

5. Abbruzzese JL: Phase I studies with the novel nucleoside analogue gemcitabine (review). Semin Oncol 23:25-31, 1996.

6. Cortes-Funes H, Castellano D, Paz-Area L, et al: A phase I-II study of gemcitabine (GEM) plus continuous infusion (CI) 5-fluorouracil (5FU) in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer (APC). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 17:A1018, 1998.

7. Gordon G, Mani S, Vogelzang NJ, et al: A phase I study of weekly gemcitabine (G) and prolonged continuous infusion (CI) 5-fluoro-uracil (5-FU) with activity in renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 17:A1280, 1998.


 
TOPIC INDEX

Cancer Types

 
  • Breast
  • Breast (HER2+)
  • Breast (Triple-Negative)
  • CML
  • Colorectal
  • Gastrointestinal
  • GIST
  • Genitourinary
  • Gynecologic
  • Head & Neck
  • Hematology
  • Kidney (Renal Cell)
  • Leukemia
  • Lung
  • Lymphoma
  • Melanoma
  • Multiple Myeloma
  • Ovarian
  • Prostate
  • Sarcoma

Supportive Care

More Topics

  • Bone Metastases
  • End-of-Life Care
  • Palliative Care
  • Ethics in Oncology
  • Practice Management
  • Practice & Policy


All Topics 


 
IMAGE IQ

Lower Back Pain in an Elderly Man With a History of Localized Prostate Cancer
James B. Yu, MD1 , May 17, 2013

A 70-year-old man with a history of localized prostate cancer treated with whole-pelvis radiation therapy with a boost to the prostate, in conjunction with androgen deprivation therapy 7 years prior, presented with lower back pain. A bone scan revealed an area of activity in the sacrum. What is the most likely diagnosis?

More Image IQs 

 
FROM PHYSICIANS PRACTICE
Primary Care Can't Thrive Without Nurse Practitioners
Courtney H. Lyder, ND,  May 17, 2013
With a projected shortfall of primary-care physicians, it's time for alternate solutions to patient care. Nurse practitioners are one logical remedy.
VWhat Physicians Can Learn from the Allscripts EHR Lawsuit
Marisa Torrieri,  May 16, 2013
Lawsuit prompts question: What should physicians do to ensure they end up with a great EHR instead of buyer’s remorse?
Eight Ways ICD-9 Will Still Matter to Medical Practices
Brenda Edwards, CPC,  May 15, 2013
What should your medical practice do with your ICD-9-CM book after October 1, 2014? Keep it.
Seven Ways Technology Can Speed Up Patient Collections
Cheyenne Brinson,  May 15, 2013
Failing to adopt widely available billing and collections technology can cost medical practices big. Here's how to do it right.
Four Reasons Private Medical Practice is Becoming Extinct
Carol Stryker,  May 15, 2013
It’s becoming increasingly difficult for private medical practices to thrive. Here’s what’s driving the trend toward consolidation.
 

 

 
MOST POPULAR
  • Most Popular
  • Most Emailed
  • Most Recent
  • Colorectal Lesions
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Slide Show: Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck
  • Skin Lesions
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer: An Update on Treatment
  • Dermatologic Adverse Events Associated With Targeted Therapies
  • ONS: Understanding Spirituality and How It Can Be Used to Help Patients
  • Colorectal Lesions
  • Palliative Radiotherapy in Elderly Patients With Bone Metastases Improves Quality of Life
  • Staying Fit Could Ward Off Lung and Colorectal Cancer for Middle-Age Men
  • Obesity Impairs Efficacy of L-Asparaginase in Leukemia Treatment
  • New AUA Guidelines for Prostate Cancer Screening
  • 50 Shades of Pink—And Why It Helps to Know the Difference
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter
 
COMMENTS
  • Most Commented
  • Most Recent
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • Financial Toxicity, Part II: How Can We Help With the Burden of Treatment-Related Costs?
  • Patient Quality of Life Endpoints in Oncology Trials, Part II
  • Who's Coding Whom?
  • “How Do I Say This Nicely? Your Oncologist Wasn't Following Guidelines”
  • Preventing Exposure to Hazardous Drugs
  • Cancer Metabolism as a Therapeutic Target
  • Study: Cholesterol Drugs Reduced Risk of Prostate Cancer Death
  • “This Is My Last Day on Earth”
  • ONS: Safe Handling of Chemotherapy
Click here to subscribe to our newsletter



CancerNetwork on Facebook

CancerNetwork | ConsultantLive | Diagnostic Imaging | Musculoskeletal Network | OBGYN.net | PediatricsConsultantLive |
Physicians Practice | Psychiatric Times | SearchMedica | Medical Resources

© 1996 - 2013 UBM Medica LLC, a UBM company
Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Advertising Information - Editorial Policy Statement - UBM Medica Network Privacy Policy