Clinical cancer research : an official journal of the American Association for Cancer Research · 2006
Photofrin uptake in the tumor and normal tissues of patients receiving intraperitoneal photodynamic therapy.
Клиническое исследование II фазыСравнительное исследованиеСтатьяПоддержка NIH: внешняя программаПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hahn Stephen M, Putt Mary E, Metz James, Shin Daniel B, Rickter Elizabeth, Menon Chandrakala, Smith Debbie, Glatstein Eli, Fraker Douglas L, Busch Theresa M
Аннотация
PURPOSE: A phase II trial of Photofrin-mediated i.p. photodynamic therapy shown in a previous report limited efficacy and significant acute, but not chronic, toxicity. A secondary aim of this trial and the subject of this report is to determine Photofrin uptake in tumor and normal tissues.
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients received Photofrin, 2.5 mg/kg, i.v., 48 hours before debulking surgery. Photofrin uptake was measured by spectroflurometric analysis of drug extracted from tumor and normal tissues removed at surgery. Differences in drug uptake among these tissues were statistically considered using mixed-effects models.
RESULTS: Photofrin concentration was measured in 301 samples collected from 58 of 100 patients enrolled on the trial. In normal tissues, drug uptake significantly (P<0.0001) differed as a function of seven different tissue types. In the toxicity-limiting tissue of intestine, the model-based mean (SE) Photofrin level was 2.70 ng/mg (0.32 ng/mg) and 3.42 ng/mg (0.24 ng/mg) in full-thickness large and small intestine, respectively. In tumors, drug uptake significantly (P=0.0015) differed as a function of patient cohort: model-based mean Photofrin level was 3.32 to 5.31 ng/mg among patients with ovarian, gastric, or small bowel cancer; 2.09 to 2.45 ng/mg among patients with sarcoma and appendiceal or colon cancer; and 0.93 ng/mg in patients with pseudomyxoma. Ovarian, gastric, and small bowel cancers showed significantly higher Photofrin uptake than full-thickness large and/or small intestine. However, the ratio of mean drug level in tumor versus intestine was modest (<or=2.31).
CONCLUSIONS: Some selectivity is found in Photofrin uptake between tumor and normal tissues of the peritoneal cavity, but absolute differences in drug uptake relative to toxicity-limiting normal tissues (intestine) are small. This narrow differential in drug selectivity likely contributes to a narrow window in therapeutic application, which has been previously reported.
EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients received Photofrin, 2.5 mg/kg, i.v., 48 hours before debulking surgery. Photofrin uptake was measured by spectroflurometric analysis of drug extracted from tumor and normal tissues removed at surgery. Differences in drug uptake among these tissues were statistically considered using mixed-effects models.
RESULTS: Photofrin concentration was measured in 301 samples collected from 58 of 100 patients enrolled on the trial. In normal tissues, drug uptake significantly (P<0.0001) differed as a function of seven different tissue types. In the toxicity-limiting tissue of intestine, the model-based mean (SE) Photofrin level was 2.70 ng/mg (0.32 ng/mg) and 3.42 ng/mg (0.24 ng/mg) in full-thickness large and small intestine, respectively. In tumors, drug uptake significantly (P=0.0015) differed as a function of patient cohort: model-based mean Photofrin level was 3.32 to 5.31 ng/mg among patients with ovarian, gastric, or small bowel cancer; 2.09 to 2.45 ng/mg among patients with sarcoma and appendiceal or colon cancer; and 0.93 ng/mg in patients with pseudomyxoma. Ovarian, gastric, and small bowel cancers showed significantly higher Photofrin uptake than full-thickness large and/or small intestine. However, the ratio of mean drug level in tumor versus intestine was modest (<or=2.31).
CONCLUSIONS: Some selectivity is found in Photofrin uptake between tumor and normal tissues of the peritoneal cavity, but absolute differences in drug uptake relative to toxicity-limiting normal tissues (intestine) are small. This narrow differential in drug selectivity likely contributes to a narrow window in therapeutic application, which has been previously reported.