Carboplatin or iproplatin in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A cancer and leukemia group B study

We report the predictive model for the clinical response of new platinum analogs against lung cancer by a bioassay using human lung-cancer cell lines including small-cell (SCLC) and non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Exponentially growing cells of six different SCLC and six NSCLC lines were exposed to different concentrations of the three platinum compounds, cisplatin, carboplatin, and 254-S in a double-agar colony-forming cell assay. The concentrations inhibiting 50% of colony formation (IC50 value) for cisplatin, carboplatin and 254-S in SCLC cell lines were significantly lower than those in NSCLC cell lines. A total of 15 patients entered the pharmacological study. In all, 80 mg/m2 cisplatin, 450 mg/m2 carboplatin, and 100 mg/m2 254-S were each given to five patients by intravenous drip infusion. Bioassay as well as chemical assay was achieved by clonogenic techniques using NCI-H-69 (SCLC cell line) and PC-9 (NSCLC cell line) as target cells. Biological comparison of antitumor activity was performed on the basis of the antitumor activity of patients' plasma using the antitumor index (ATI), which was defined as the area under the percentage of colony suppression versus time curve obtained by bioassay and calculated by the trapezoidal rule. When NCI-H-69 and PC-9 were used as target cells for bioassay, colony-inhibitory activity was revealed by the ATIs. The ATIs obtained by bioassay showed better correlation than the AUCs obtained by chemical assay with the clinical response for cisplatin and carboplatin against SCLC and NSCLC, according to the following equation: [Reported Response (%)] = 11.5668 + 0.0014 x [ATI] (r = 0.97). The response rates for 254-S against SCLC and NSCLC were predicted by this formula to be 40%-65% and 14%-16%, respectively. 254-S is prospectively suspected of having the same, if not more, activity then carboplatin against SCLC and of having almost the same activity as cisplatin against NSCLC.

Prediction of the antitumor activity of new platinum analogs based on their ex vivo pharmacodynamics as determined by bioassay

Sasaki¹,

Shinkai²,

Eguchi³

et al. 1991

GM-CSF, carboplatin, doxorubicin: a phase I study

Poplin

Alberts

Rinehart³

et al. 1994

Dose intensification has the potential to increase the response frequency of chemosensitive tumors to chemotherapy. G-CSF and GM-CSF offer the possibility of dose-intensifying chemotherapy without prohibitive myelosuppression. A phase I study was undertaken to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of carboplatin that could be administered with a fixed dose of doxorubicin, 60 mg/m2, administered every 28 days. Further escalation of the carboplatin dose was then attempted, with the concomitant addition of GM-CSF 10 mg/kg per day on days 1-21. We had 21 patients, 13 with prior therapy, who were eligible. In all, 60 courses of therapy were delivered, all with doxorubicin and with carboplatin doses of 250 mg/m2, 325 mg/m2 and 400 mg/m2. At carboplatin 400 mg/m2 and doxorubicin 60 mg/m2, thrombocytopenia was dose limiting. The addition of GM-CSF did not allow further escalation. Of the 6 patients treated with carboplatin 400 mg/m2, doxorubicin 60 mg/m2, and GM-CSF, grade 4 granulocytopenia and thrombocytopenia were seen in 4 and 5 patients, respectively. The severity of thrombocytopenia was related to the calculated carboplatin AUC and also to baseline platelet count and prior therapy. In addition, the interaction of GM-CSF and chemotherapy, especially carboplatin-based, may be more complex than originally anticipated.

A strategy for the development of two clinically active cisplatin analogs: CBDCA and CHIP

Foster

Harding

Wolpert-DeFilippes

et al. 1990

The antitumor agent cisplatin has a broad antitumor spectrum and has been incorporated into regimens that are curative for some malignant diseases. However, one of the major limitations to its clinical usefulness is the incidence of severe toxicities involving several major organ systems. Therefore, much enthusiasm has been generated for the development of cisplatin analogs that demonstrate an improved therapeutic index in some preclinical models. The two most promising analogs are CBDCA (carboplatin) and CHIP (iproplatin). The preclinical and early clinical trial results have demonstrated that these two compounds show activity in cisplatin-responsive tumors. The preclinical background providing the rationale for the clinical development of these two analogs is described. We suggest a means of screening for each analog's clinical antitumor activity and determining the analogs' utility against specific malignant diseases compared with that of the parent compound or standard treatment.