For over 40 years, the primary therapy for the treatment of
colorectal cancer has been intravenous fluorouracil (5-FU), administered as an
intravenous bolus, 5-day infusion, or protracted infusion over several weeks.
Intravenous 5-FU has also been used in adjuvant regimens for newly diagnosed
colorectal cancer, typically as a bolus injection.
As with other therapeutic drug classes, there has been an effort
to develop oral dose formulations of drugs used in oncology. The appeal of oral
drugs for oncology, as for other disease areas, is for the most part obvious.
This includes ease of administrationpatients may not need to visit a
healthcare facility (eg, a physician’s office or hospital) in order to receive
treatment. For the advanced-disease patient, this may allow more meaningful time
with family and less time spent in a healthcare facility. For the newly
diagnosed patient receiving adjuvant chemotherapy, the availability of oral
therapy often permits patients at an early stage of disease to receive treatment
while continuing full-time employment. Studies by Liu et al demonstrated that
cancer patients preferred oral drugs to their intravenous counterparts as long
as they were assured that efficacy was maintained with the oral formulation.
However, several pharmacologic requirements must be met in
developing an oral formulation. These include demonstrated stability of the
medication in the gastrointestinal tract and ability to be absorbed from the
gastrointestinal tract with sufficient bioavailability to assure dosing
decisions. Other factors, eg, lack of interaction with other orally administered
drugs that the patient may be taking, also are important. Additional
considerations can limit enthusiasm for oral drugs, including concern about
patients’ mental status that may result in inappropriate dosing, or overdosing
in situations when chemotherapy should be stopped because of side effects. Other
related issues include patient compliance and the difficulty in adequately
assessing how much of, and when, the drug was taken.
In oncology, increasing clinical experience with oral
chemotherapy agents has been accumulated and includes oral mercaptopurines,
nitrosoureas, hydroxyurea, and methotrexate. Several other new oral chemotherapy
agents are currently under investigation. Thus, more orally administered agents
for the treatment of cancer are likely to be available in the future.
In particular, five oral fluoropyrimidine drugs have recently
entered clinical trials in the United States. These include capecitabine
(Xeloda), UFT (uracil and tegafur) or the combination of UFT and leucovorin
(Orzel), eniluracil (ethynyluracil), S-1, and BOF A-2. BOF A-2 was associated
with severe toxicity, hence clinical studies have been terminated. The other
four agents are still under clinical evaluation. The details are described
Capecitabine is a third-generation fluoropyrimidine drug that
was designed to be a selectively activated prodrug that would release 5-FU
preferentially within the tumor (Figure 1A). Capecitabine, when administered
orally, is absorbed from the gastrointestinal tract into the bloodstream and has
excellent bioavailability. This agent is activated by a series of three
enzymes in the liver and tumor to eventually release 5-FU within the tumor (Figure
1B). The last of these enzymesthymidine phosphorylase, localized
mainly in the tumoris responsible for selective activation of the metabolite
5´-DFUR to 5-FU.
Capecitabine was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration
(FDA) in April 1998 as third-line therapy for patients with paclitaxel (Taxol)-
or anthracycline-resistant metastatic breast cancer (or for patients for whom
anthracycline was not indicated). In approving this oral fluoropyrimidine, it
was noted that there was less severe myelotoxicity and, in particular, less
febrile-associated leukopenia than with intravenous infusion of 5-FU. The only
toxicity that appeared more prominent with capecitabine was the occurrence of
hand/foot syndrome, which was often severe (grade 3). This toxicity, while
uncomfortable, is not life threatening and can be managed by withholding therapy
for several days or by decreasing the daily dose (typically from the recommended
dose of 2,500 to 2,000 mg/m2/d).
Capecitabine has also been evaluated in colorectal cancer. Two
large phase III studies compared a capecitabine regimen with a standard Mayo
Clinic regimen of 5-FU plus leucovorin. In both trials the capecitabine regimen
produced a greater response rate, with survival and time to progression
equivalent to that achieved with the Mayo Clinic regimen, but with much less
severe toxicity and with potential quality-of-life benefits.[10,11]
At present, capecitabine is not scheduled for a further Oncology
Drug Advisory Committee (ODAC) review; approval of this agent for the treatment
of advanced colorectal cancer is expected this year. Capecitabine may also have
other roles, including acting as a radiosensitizer in rectal cancer and as noted
above as adjuvant therapy in colorectal cancer. These studies are currently
In the 1970s, tegafura prodrug of 5-FUwas synthesized in
the hope of having an oral dose form of 5-FU. This drug, however, was
associated with many undesirable side effects, and despite being approved in
Japan and many other Asian countries, it failed to obtain approval in the United
States. In the late 1970s, an attempt was made to improve tegafur by combining
it with the naturally occurring pyrimidine uracil, to modulate the metabolism,
and in turn the pharmacology, of tegafur. This two-component drug, known as UFT,
is composed of uracil and tegafur in a 4:1 ratio (Figure
UFT is currently approved for clinical use in many areas
worldwide, including Japan, Asia, South America, and Spain. It is also being
evaluated with oral leucovorin as a two-pill combination known as Orzel in an
attempt to improve further on the efficacy of the 5-FU formed from UFT.
Mechanism of Action
The mechanism of action of UFT and the combination drug UFT plus
leucovorin is summarized in Figure 3. Figure 3A demonstrates that the uracil in
the UFT combination functions as an "inhibitor" of the important
pyrimidine catabolic enzyme dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD), which is an
important regulatory step in 5-FU metabolism. Uracil is, in fact, a
competitive inhibitor of DPD, resulting in 5-FU levels being elevated and
sustained for a longer time with the theoretical opportunity for more 5-FU to be
anabolized. Because it is a competitive inhibitor, the effect is transient and
reverses rapidly once the uracil levels have sufficiently decreased. Figure 3B
demonstrates the additional biomodulation produced by leucovorin with UFT plus
leucovorin, showing that leucovorin expands the 5,10 methylene tetrahydrofolate
pool resulting theoretically in the formation of more ternary complex required
for effective inhibition of the synthesis of thymidylate needed for DNA
There is extensive experience in the clinical evaluation of UFT
worldwide, as it has been approved and used extensively in many countries.
UFT plus leucovorin has recently undergone extensive evaluation in clinical
in phase III studies demonstrating equivalence to the Mayo Clinic regimen of
5-FU plus leucovorin with less severe toxicity.[17,18] In September 1999, the
Oncology Drug Advisory Committee of the FDA reviewed the clinical data on UFT
plus leucovorin and voted unanimously to approve the drug application. However,
the FDA has continued to have concerns about approving either UFT alone or
combined with leucovorin. Thus, approvals of both UFT and the combination of UFT
with leucovorin are currently on hold.
1. Diasio RB, Harris BE: Clinical pharmacology of
5-fluorouracil. Clin Pharmacokin 16:215-237, 1989.
2. MacDonald JS: Adjuvant therapy of colon cancer. CA Cancer J
Clin 49:202-218, 1999.
3. Liu G, Franssen E, Fitch MI, et al: Patient preferences for
oral versus intravenous palliative chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 15:110-115, 1997.
4. Diasio RB: Principles of drug therapy, in Goldman L, Bennett
JC (eds): Cecil Textbook of Medicine, chap 5, 21st ed. Philadelphia, WB
5. Greco FA, Hainsworth JD (guest editors): Oral chemotherapy:
Past, present and future directions. Drugs 58(suppl 3):1-140, 1999.
6. Miwa M, Ura M, Nishida M, et al: Design of a novel oral
fluoropyrimidine carbamate, capecitabine, which generates 5-fluorouracil
selectively in tumors by enzymes concentrated in human liver and cancer tissues.
Eur J Cancer 34:1274-1281, 1998.
7. Mackean MJ, Planting AS, Twelves C, et al: A phase I and
pharmacological study of intermittent twice-daily oral therapy with capecitabine
in patients with advanced and/or metastatic cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:2977-2985,
8. Takebayashi Y, Akiyama S, Akiba S, et al: Clinicopathologic
significance of an angiogenic factor, thymidine phosphorylase, in human
colorectal cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 88:1110-1117, 1996.
9. Blum JL, Jones SE, Buzdar AU, et al: Multicenter phase II
study of capecitabine in paclitaxel-refractory metastatic breast cancer. J Clin
Oncol 17:485-493, 1999.
10. Twelves C, Harper P, Van Cutsem E, et al: A phase III trial
(SO14796) of Xeloda (capecitabine) in previously untreated advanced/metastatic
colorectal cancer (abstract 1010). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 18:263a, 1999.
11. Cox JV, Pazdur R, Thibault A, et al: A phase III trial of
Xeloda (capecitabine) in previously untreated advanced/metastatic colorectal
cancer (abstract 1016). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 18:265a, 1999.
12. Friedman MA, Ignoffo RJ: A review of the US clinical
experience of the fluoropyrimidine, Ftorafur (NSC-148958). Cancer Treat Rev
13. Taguchi T: Experience with UFT in Japan. Oncology
(Huntington) 11(9 suppl 10):35-39, 1997.
14. Hoff PM, Lassere Y, Pazdur R: Tegafur uracil + calcium
folinate in colorectal cancer; double modulation of fluorouracil. Drugs 58
(suppl 3):77-83, 1999.
15. Diasio RB: Oral administration of fluorouracil: a new
approach utilizing modulators of dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase activity.
Cancer Therapeutics 2:97-106, 1999.
16. Sulkes A, Benner SE, Canetta RM: Uracil-ftorafur: An oral
fluoropyrimidine active in colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 16:3461-3475, 1998.
17. Pazdur R, Douillard J, Skillings J, et al: Multicenter phase
III study of 5-fluorouracil or UFT in combination with leucovorin in patients
with metastatic colorectal cancer (abstract 1009). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol
18. Carmichael J, Popiela T, Radstone D, et al: Randomized
comparative study of Orzel (oral uracil/Tegafur + leucovorin) versus parenteral
5-fluorourarcil + LV in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (abstract
1015). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 18:264a, 1999.
19. Spector T, Porter DJT, Nelson DJ, et al: 5-Ethynyluracil
(776C85), a modulator of the therapeutic activity of 5-fluorouracil. Drugs of
the Future 19:566-571, 1994.
20. Lu Z, Zhang R, Diasio RB: Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase
activity in human peripheral blood mononuclear cells and liver: Population
characteristics, newly identified patients, and clinical implication in
5-fluorouracil chemotherapy. Cancer Res 53:5433-5438, 1993.
21. Heslin MJ, Yan J, Shao L, et al: Dihydropyrimidine
dehydrogenase (DPD) rapidly regenerates after inactivation by eniluracil
(776C85) in primary and metastatic colorectal cancer (abstract 682). Proc Am Soc
Clin Oncol 19:176a, 2000.
22. Shirasaka T, Shimamato Y, Ohsimo H, et al: Development of a
novel form of oral 5-fluorouracil derivative (S-1) directed to the potentiation
of the tumor selective cytotoxicity of 5-fluorouracil by two biochemical
modulators. Anticancer Drugs 7:548-557, 1996.
23. Shirasaka T, Shimamato Y, Fukushima M: Inhibition by oxonic
acid of gastrointestinal toxicity of 5-fluorouracil without loss of its
antitumor activity in rats. Cancer Res 53:4004-4009, 1993.