1983
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.1983.182
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Enhancement of the action of alkylating agents by single high, or chronic low doses of misonidazole

Abstract: Summary Misonidazole (MISO) given as a large single dose enhanced the action of cyclophosphamide (Cy) and melphalan (L-PAM)

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

1984
1984
1988
1988

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 20 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…We have previously hypothesized that the 'trapping' of melphalan by MISO-induced vascular collapse was partly responsible for the resulting growth delay (Murray et al, 1987), and this hypothesis is currently being tested using vaso-active drugs such as hydralazine, which reduces blood flow in the SaFA tumour and potentiates the effects of melphalan as assessed by regrowth delay, but which by itself is not cytotoxic (Murray & Randhawa, unpublished agents. The results were equivocal; in one case the sensitizer enhancement ratio; that is the dose of cytotoxin required to achieve a given level of effect in the absence of sensitizer, divided by the dose required to give the same effect in the presence of sensitizer, was maintained compared to single dosing (Hirst et al, 1982) and in others there was a loss of enhancement (McNally et al, 1983;Twentyman & Workman, 1983;Randhawa et al, 1985). The administration of the drug combination in the form of a fractionated regime using higher doses, with intervals of the order of 1 day or more did however result in the maintenance of SER in several systems (Hill & Siemann, 1984;McNally et al, 1983;Randhawa, unpublished longer intervals between MISO doses allow recovery of the vasculature between fractions, consequently maintaining the SER.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…We have previously hypothesized that the 'trapping' of melphalan by MISO-induced vascular collapse was partly responsible for the resulting growth delay (Murray et al, 1987), and this hypothesis is currently being tested using vaso-active drugs such as hydralazine, which reduces blood flow in the SaFA tumour and potentiates the effects of melphalan as assessed by regrowth delay, but which by itself is not cytotoxic (Murray & Randhawa, unpublished agents. The results were equivocal; in one case the sensitizer enhancement ratio; that is the dose of cytotoxin required to achieve a given level of effect in the absence of sensitizer, divided by the dose required to give the same effect in the presence of sensitizer, was maintained compared to single dosing (Hirst et al, 1982) and in others there was a loss of enhancement (McNally et al, 1983;Twentyman & Workman, 1983;Randhawa et al, 1985). The administration of the drug combination in the form of a fractionated regime using higher doses, with intervals of the order of 1 day or more did however result in the maintenance of SER in several systems (Hill & Siemann, 1984;McNally et al, 1983;Randhawa, unpublished longer intervals between MISO doses allow recovery of the vasculature between fractions, consequently maintaining the SER.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…The results were equivocal; in one case the sensitizer enhancement ratio; that is the dose of cytotoxin required to achieve a given level of effect in the absence of sensitizer, divided by the dose required to give the same effect in the presence of sensitizer, was maintained compared to single dosing (Hirst et al, 1982) and in others there was a loss of enhancement (McNally et al, 1983;Twentyman & Workman, 1983;Randhawa et al, 1985). The administration of the drug combination in the form of a fractionated regime using higher doses, with intervals of the order of 1 day or more did however result in the maintenance of SER in several systems (Hill & Siemann, 1984;McNally et al, 1983;Randhawa, unpublished longer intervals between MISO doses allow recovery of the vasculature between fractions, consequently maintaining the SER. Conversely, during chronic dosing experiments, MISO levels were never high enough to achieve the required vascular effect and therefore no sensitization was observed.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…It is then a simple matter to determine that a lOx increase in mean plasma concentration of sensitizer achieves a 4x decrease in cell survival or that a lOx decrease in cell survival results from a 46x increase in sensitizer concentration. The existence of a threshold dose which must be achieved before measurable enhancement occurs has been proposed (McNally et al, 1983) to account for differing results with low levels of sensitizer from various laboratories. Our data do not support this.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In general, there is agreement that the largest enhancements are seen when nitroimidazoles, particularly misonidazole (MISO), are combined with compounds having bifunctional alkylating activity. There is evidence that at least part of this effect for some of these alkylating agents can result from altered pharmacokinetics of the agent (Hinchcliffe et al, 1983;Lee & Workman, 1983), but it seems likely that other mechanisms exist to explain the relative sparing of normal tissues reported in many studies. In particular, the hypoxia-mediated enhancement of the formation of DNA interstrand crosslinks seen in vitro (Taylor et al, 1983) is a particularly attractive explanation of this tumour selectivity.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These single dose studies are difficult to translate directly into clinical terms, because of the 10-fold difference between mouse and man in the half-life of MISO, particularly since the cytotoxic effect to MISO is reported to be a supralinear function of exposure time (Hall et al, 1978;Stratford & Adams, 1978). A few murine studies have been reported in which the human pharmacokinetics with lower plasma levels of MISO have been simulated by multiple injection schedules in order to assess the possible role of chemosensitization by MISO in the clinic (Hirst & Brown, 1982;McNally et al, 1983;Twentyman & Workman, 1983). Some of these studies have demonstrated significant chemosensitization, but it is not a universal finding.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%