PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Pamela Atherton

Publications and source records attributed to Pamela Atherton.

9 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Will improvement in quality of life (QOL) impact fatigue in patients receiving radiation therapy for advanced cancer?

BACKGROUND: Fatigue has a significant impact on the quality of life (QOL) of cancer patients. Recent research has suggested that physical activity can reduce fatigue in patients receiving active cancer treatment. In this project, we examined the impact that participation in a randomized controlled trial of a multidisciplinary intervention designed to impact overall QOL had on fatigue for advanced cancer patients actively receiving treatment. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed cancer were randomly assigned to an 8-session structured multidisciplinary intervention or a standard-care arm at the beginning of their course of radiotherapy (RT) designed to impact QOL. Ninety-minute sessions were led by either a psychiatrist or psychologist, collaborating with a nurse, physical therapist, chaplain, or social worker, depending on the session's theme. The fatigue assessments used in this trial included the Linear Analogue Self Assessment (LASA), the Profile of Mood States (POMS), Spielberger's State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI), and the Symptom Distress Scale (SDS). RESULTS: There were 115 participants enrolled and the 2 randomization arms were well balanced in terms of baseline characteristics and treatment received except for increased commuting distance for the patients in the intervention arm (P = 0.042). Most of scores indicated less fatigue (higher score) in the standard treatment group, but there were no statistically significant differences found at baseline and weeks 4, 8, and 27 except for SDS at week 8 (P = 0.018) with less patients reporting significant fatigue in the standard treatment arm. For the entire participant population, fatigue levels initially worsened with radiotherapy, stabilized at week 8, and returned to baseline by week 27. Disease site, chemotherapy use, and radiotherapy dose did not have a significant impact on fatigue levels. CONCLUSIONS: Radiotherapy initially caused a worsening of fatigue but with time fatigue levels returned to baseline. Clinically, this structured multidisciplinary intervention had no impact on fatigue, and there was the suggestion the multiple sessions may have contributed to worse fatigue during active cancer treatment.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

Phase I and pharmacologic study of infusional topotecan and Carboplatin in relapsed and refractory acute leukemia.

PURPOSE: To assess the maximum tolerated dose, toxicities, pharmacokinetics, and antileukemic activity of topotecan and carboplatin in adults with recurrent or refractory acute leukemias. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients received topotecan and carboplatin by 5-day continuous infusion at nine dose levels. Patients achieving a complete remission received up to two additional courses for consolidation. Plasma topotecan and ultrafilterable platinum were assayed on days 1 to 5. In addition, pretreatment levels of various polypeptides in leukemic cells were examined by immunoblotting to assess possible correlations with response. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients received a total of 69 courses of therapy. Dose-limiting toxicity consisted of grade 4/5 typhlitis and grade 3/4 mucositis after one course of therapy or grade 4 neutropenia and thrombocytopenia lasting >50 days when a second course was administered on day 21. Among 45 evaluable patients, there were 7 complete remissions, 2 partial remissions, 1 incomplete complete remission, and 1 reversion to chronic-phase chronic myelogenous leukemia. Topotecan steady-state plasma concentrations increased with dose. No accumulation of topotecan or ultrafilterable platinum occurred between days 1 and 5 of therapy. Leukemic cell levels of topoisomerase I, checkpoint kinase 1, checkpoint kinase 2, and Mcl-1 correlated with proliferating cell nuclear antigen but not with response. In contrast, low Bcl-2 expression correlated with response (P = 0.014, Mann-Whitney U test). CONCLUSIONS: The maximum tolerated dose was 1.6 mg/m(2)/d topotecan plus 150 mg/m(2)/d carboplatin. The complete remission rate in a heavily pretreated population was 16% (33% at the highest three dose levels). Responses seem to correlate with low pretreatment blast cell Bcl-2 expression.

Acute Disease↗
PubMed2005

Phase I trial of 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: We determined the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) of 17-allylamino-17-demethoxygeldanamycin (17-AAG) when infused on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle in advanced solid tumor patients. We also characterized the pharmacokinetics of 17-AAG, its effect on chaperone and client proteins, and whether cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A5 and NAD(P)H:quinone oxidoreductase 1 (NQO1) polymorphisms affected 17-AAG disposition or toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An accelerated titration design was used. Biomarkers were measured in peripheral-blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) at baseline and on days 1 and 15, and pharmacokinetic analysis was performed on day 1 of cycle 1. CYP3A5*3 and NQO1*2 genotypes were determined and correlated with pharmacokinetics and toxicity. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients received 52 courses at 11 dose levels. DLTs at 431 mg/m(2) were grade 3 bilirubin (n = 1), AST (n = 1), anemia (n = 1), nausea (n = 1), vomiting (n = 1), and myalgias (n = 1). No tumor responses were seen. 17-AAG consistently increased heat shock protein (Hsp) 70 levels in PBMCs. At the MTD, the clearance and half-life (t(1/2)) of 17-AAG were 11.6 L/h/m(2) and 4.15 hours, respectively; whereas the active metabolite 17-aminogeldanamycin had a t(1/2) of 7.63 hours. The CYP3A5*3 and NQO1*2 polymorphisms were not associated with 17-AAG toxicity. The CYP3A5*3 polymorphism was associated with higher 17-AAG clearance. CONCLUSION: The MTD of weekly 17-AAG is 308 mg/m(2). 17-AAG induced Hsp70 in PBMCs, indicating that Hsp90 has been affected. Further evaluation of 17-AAG is ongoing using a twice-weekly regimen, and this schedule of 17-AAG is being tested in combination with chemotherapy.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of two different schedules of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, Fluorouracil, and leucovorin in patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: We sought to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and evaluate the toxicities and clinical activity of two irinotecan (CPT-11), fluorouracil (FU), leucovorin (LV), and oxaliplatin schedules in patients with advanced solid tumors. Additionally, we investigated the effect of CPT-11 on oxaliplatin pharmacokinetics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirteen patients (cohort 1) received intravenous CPT-11 (infusion) and FU/LV (bolus) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 and oxaliplatin (infusion) on days 1 and 15 every 6 weeks for a total 37 courses (median, three courses) at three dose levels. Twenty-two cohort 2 patients received intravenous CPT-11/oxaliplatin (infusion, day 1) and FU/LV (90-minute bolus infusion, days 2 to 5) every 3 weeks for a total of 122 courses (median, four courses) at three dose levels. Pharmacokinetic and neurotoxicity assessments were performed at the cohort 2 MTD. RESULTS: Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) seen in both cohorts at the starting dose required dose de-escalation. Cohort 1 DLT included diarrhea and neutropenia. In cohort 2, diarrhea, vomiting, dehydration, neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, and paresthesias were DLTs. Antitumor activity was seen in both cohorts. In cohort 2, the total platinum area under the curve of patients increased 17% in cycle 2 (P =.048), but objective neurotoxicity was not seen. CONCLUSION: The toxicities resulting from the addition of oxaliplatin to CPT-11/FU/LV are significant but manageable. The MTDs for the weekly schedule are CPT-11 (75 mg/m2), oxaliplatin (50 mg/m2), FU (320 mg/m2), and LV (20 mg/m2); and, for the 3-weekly schedule, the MTDs are CPT-11 (175 mg/m2), oxaliplatin (85 mg/m2), FU (240 mg/m2), and LV (20 mg/m2). Second-cycle platinum accumulation raises the possibility for enhanced cumulative neurotoxicity with CPT-11/oxaliplatin combinations.

Adult↗
PubMed2003

A Phase I trial of the farnesyl protein transferase inhibitor R115777 in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: This Phase I study was undertaken to define the toxicity, pharmacodynamics, and maximum tolerated dose of the combination of R115777, a farnesyl transferase inhibitor, with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty patients with solid tumors received a median of 2.5 cycles (range 1-30+) through five dose levels. R115777 was administered p.o. twice daily for 14 days. Gemcitabine was infused 15 min after the ingestion of R115777 on days 1 and 8. Cisplatin was administered starting 30 min after completion of the gemcitabine infusion on day 1. Cycles were repeated every 21 days. Toxicities were graded by the National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria and recorded as maximum grade per patient for each treatment cycle. At the maximum tolerated dose, accumulation of prelamin A in buccal mucosa cells of patients was evaluated as a marker of farnesyl transferase inhibition by R115777. RESULTS: Neutropenia and thrombocytopenia were the most common toxicities. Dose-limiting toxicity in cycle 1 was myelosuppression with thrombocytopenia alone (4 patients), neutropenia alone (1 patient), or a combination of both (3 patients). Common nonhematologic toxicities were anorexia, rash, nausea, vomiting, and fatigue, none of which was dose limiting in the first cycle. At the maximum tolerated dose, defined as R115777 300 mg twice daily p.o., 1000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine, and 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin, inhibition of prelamin A farnesylation in buccal mucosa cells of patients was demonstrated, confirming that R115777 inhibits protein farnesylation in vivo. Nine objective responses (one complete response and eight partial responses) were documented in 27 evaluable patients. CONCLUSION: The combination of R115777 with gemcitabine and cisplatin was well tolerated and showed evidence of antitumor activity. The maximum tolerated dose of R115777 successfully inhibits farnesyltransferase in patients in vivo. This combination warrants further evaluation in a number of tumor types.

Adult↗
PubMed2002

Comparative pharmacokinetic study of continuous venous infusion fluorouracil and oral fluorouracil with eniluracil in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To compare the pharmacokinetics of continuous venous infusion (CVI) fluorouracil (5-FU) with that of oral eniluracil/5-FU and to describe toxicities and clinical activity of prolonged oral administration of eniluracil/5-FU. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized, open-label, cross-over study compared CVI 5-FU to an oral 5-FU/eniluracil combination. Seventeen patients (arm A) were randomly assigned to receive eniluracil/5-FU combination tablets (10:1 mg/m(2) BID for 7 days) during the first study period, followed by 5-FU (300 mg/m(2) CVI for 7 days) during period 2, with a 14-day washout between periods. Sixteen patients (arm B) received treatment in the opposite sequence. In period 3, all patients received eniluracil/5-FU tablets BID for 28 days. Plasma levels of 5-FU during CVI and oral administration were analyzed in periods 1 and 2. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) activity was determined by measuring plasma uracil, urinary alpha-fluoro-beta-alanine, and peripheral-blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) DPD activity. RESULTS: There were no grade 3 or 4 toxicities in either arm. Partial responses were observed in three patients. Another three patients had stable disease for > or = 3 months. Eniluracil and 5-FU pharmacokinetics were similar to those observed in previous studies and were unaffected by administration sequence. The mean +/- SD steady-state plasma concentration (C(P)) and area under the curve (AUC)(144-168h) for CVI 5-FU (104 +/- 45 ng/mL and 2,350 +/- 826 ng x h/mL, respectively) were three-fold greater than those for oral 5-FU (38.1 +/- 7.7 ng/mL and 722 +/- 182 ng x h/mL, respectively [P <.00001]). Individual 5-FU concentrations during CVI were highly variable, whereas those after eniluracil/5-FU were very reproducible. DPD activity in PBMCs before each study period was normal. CONCLUSION: Both CVI 5-FU and oral eniluracil/5-FU were well tolerated, with moderate activity in these heavily pretreated patients. However, 5-FU steady-state C(P) and AUCs achieved with oral eniluracil/5-FU were significantly less than with CVI 5-FU.

Administration, Oral↗
PubMed2002

A phase I and pharmacologic study of pyrazoloacridine (NSC 366140) and carboplatin in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Pyrazoloacridine (PZA) is the first of a new class of rationally synthesized acridine derivatives to undergo clinical testing as an anticancer agent. We previously demonstrated cytotoxic synergy between combinations of PZA and platinum compounds. Subsequent studies revealed that PZA inhibits removal of platinum-DNA adducts in cultured A549 cells. Based on these results, we undertook a phase I study of the combination of PZA and carboplatin (CBDCA). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Twenty-eight patients received 76 28-day courses (median 2.5, range 1-6) of CBDCA (30-minute infusion) followed by PZA (3-hour infusion), through six dose levels [PZA/CBDCA] (200/AUC 3, 400/AUC 3, 400/AUC 4, 400/AUC 5, 500/AUC 5, 600/AUC 5 mg/m2/AUC). Pharmacokinetic analyses were performed to evaluate the disposition of PZA. Retention of platinum-DNA adducts in peripheral blood mononuclear cells of patients was also evaluated. RESULTS: The most common and dose-limiting toxicity was myelosuppression, consisting of neutropenia and leukopenia. Non-hematologic toxicities of anorexia, nausea and stomatitis were mild to moderate. In six patients evaluated at the MTD, CBDCA did not appear to affect the pharmacokinetics of PZA. One patient with malignant melanoma had a partial response. Disease stabilization for greater than 4 courses of treatment occurred in 4 patients. CONCLUSION: The combination of PZA and CBDCA was well tolerated and may have utility in some tumor types.

Acridines↗
PubMed2002

A Phase I study of bizelesin (NSC 615291) in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the toxicities, characterize the pharmacokinetics, and determine the maximum-tolerated dose of bizelesin administered once every 4 weeks. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors received escalating doses of bizelesin as an i.v. push every 4 weeks. Pharmacokinetic studies were performed with the first treatment cycle. RESULTS: Nineteen eligible patients received a total of 54 courses of bizelesin at doses ranging from 0.1 to 1 microg/m(2). Dose-limiting toxicity of neutropenia was seen in 2 of 4 patients treated at the 1 microg/m(2) dose level. Nonhematological toxicity was generally mild with maximum toxicity being <or= grade 2 per National Cancer Institute Common Toxicity Criteria. No objective responses were seen in the 19 eligible patients. An L1210 bioassay was used to determine bizelesin plasma levels. The terminal elimination half-life was 140 min at the recommended Phase II dose. The area under the concentration time curve increased in proportion to administered dose, and the clearance remained constant over the dose range studied. Correlation analysis demonstrated relationships between dose and area under the concentration with cycle 1 hematological parameters, including absolute neutrophil and leukocyte nadirs. CONCLUSION: Bizelesin administered every 4 weeks as an i.v. push is well tolerated with dose-limiting toxicity of neutropenia. The maximum-tolerated dose (and recommended Phase II dose) is 0.8 microg/m(2) administered once every 4 weeks.

Adult↗