Skip to main content
Log in

Evaluation of 9-dimethylaminomethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin against xenografts derived from adult and childhood solid tumors

  • Original Articles
  • 9-Dimethylaminomethyl-10-Hydroxycamptothecin, Xenografts, Solid Tumors, Children
  • Published:
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The topoisomerase I inhibitor 9-dimethylaminomethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin (topotecan) was evaluated against a panel of xenografts comprising four lines of adult colon adenocarcinoma, three colon tumors derived from adolescents, six childhood rhabdomyosarcomas from previously untreated patients as well as sublines selected in vivo for resistance to vincristine and melphalan, and three lines of childhood osteogenic sarcoma. Efficacy was determined at maximal tolerated dose levels using intermittent i.p. administration [every 4 days for 4 doses (q4d×4)] or daily p.o. or i. p. administration 5 days per week for up to 20 courses. On a q4d×4 schedule, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 12.5 mg/kg per administration, which caused marked weight loss and lethality in ≈5% of the tumor-bearing mice. This schedule caused significant growth inhibition (but no tumor regression) in advanced adult colon adenocarcinomas. The minimal treated/control (T/C) ratios were 0.49, 0.54, and 0.3 for three of the tumor lines and were achieved at 18–21 days after the initiation of treatment. In contrast, rhabdomyosarcomas were considerably more sensitive, with T/C ratios being <0.1 for three lines, whereas topotecan was less active against two other rhabdomyosarcoma xenografts (minimal T/C ratios, 0.17 and 0.14). As inhibitors of topoisomerase I have been demonstrated to have activity in the replication phase of the cell cycle (S-phase-specific), prolonged administration schedules were examined. Mice received topotecan 5 days per week for 3 weeks either by i.p. injection or by oral gavage (p.o.). In selected experiments, p.o. administration was continued for up to 20 weeks. Oral administration for 3 weeks (2 mg/kg per dose) resulted in complete regression of all six lines of rhabdomyosarcoma, with two lines demonstrating no regrowth during the period of observation (≥84 days). Similar results were obtained after i.p. administration, suggesting significant schedule dependency for these tumors. For colon tumors, the daily administration schedule (i.p. or p.o.) demonstrated some advantage over the intermittent schedule, resulting in partial regressions and significant inhibition of the growth of several colon adenocarcinoma lines. In rhabdomyosarcoma Rh 12 and VRC5 colon adenocarcinoma, both of which demonstrated intermediate sensitivity to topotecan, and in osteosarcoma OS33, protracted p.o. administration for 13–20 weeks (1.0–1.5 mg/kg per dose given daily x 5 days) caused complete regression without regrowth in Rh12 and OS33 tumors and partial regression of all VRC5 tumors. No toxicity was observed using this schedule of administration. Topotecan demonstrated significant activity against all three osteosarcoma xenografts examined, with optimal schedules causing complete regression in two lines. Topotecan demonstrated similar activity against KB 3-1 and KB 8-5 multidrug-resistant cells in culture, and the Rh 12/VCR an Rh 18/VCR xenografts selected for vincristine (VCR) resistance in vivo were as sensitive as their parental lines. However, Rh 28/L-PAM, selected for resistance to melphalan, was cross-resistant to topotecan. Plasma pharmacokinetics studies were carried out at the respective MTD for oral (2 mg/kg) or i.p. (1.75 mg/kg) administration. During oral administration the maximal plasma concentration (of the active lactone) was achieved at 0.25 h (Cmax 41.7 ng/ml) and thet 1/2α andt 1/2β values were 0.55 and 2.8 h, respectively. Administration i.p. resulted in peak plasma levels of 523 ng/ml, witht 1/2α andt 1/2β elimination rates being 0.29 and 2.5 h, respectively. Although i.p. administration resulted in a 3-fold increase in AUC as compared with oral dosing, similar antitumor activity was observed against most xenograft lines. These results suggest that topotecan may have significant activity against several human cancers and that its efficacy may be schedule-dependent. Topotecan may have a particular role to play in the treatment of childhood solid tumors such as rhabdomyosarcoma and osteosarcoma.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Akiyama S-I, Fojo A, Hanover JA, Pastan I, Gottesman MM (1985) Isolation and genetic characterization of human, KB cell lines resistant to multiple drugs. Somatic Cell Mol Genet 11: 117

    Google Scholar 

  2. Beijnen JH, Smith BR (1990) High-performance liquid chromatographic analysis of the new antitumor drug SK&F 104864-A (NSC 609 699). J Pharm Biomed Anal 8: 789

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bino GD, Lassota P, Darzynkiewicz Z (1991) The S-phase cytotoxicity of comptothecin. Exp Cell Res 193: 27

    Google Scholar 

  4. Chan HSL, Thorner PS, Haddad G, Ling V (1990) Immunohistochemical detection of P-glycoprotein: prognostic correlation in soft tissue sarcoma of childhood. J Clin Oncol 8: 689

    Google Scholar 

  5. Chan HSL, Thorner PS, Haddad G, Ling V (1991) Outcome of therapy in osteosarcoma correlates with P-glycoprotein expression. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 32: 366

    Google Scholar 

  6. D'Argenio DZ, Schumitzky A (1990) ADAPT II user's guide. Biomedical Simulations Resource, University of Southern California, Los Angeles

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dombernowsky P, Nissen NI (1973) Schedule dependency of the antileukemic activity of the podophyllotoxin derivative VP-16-213 (NSC 141 540) in L1210 leukemia. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand [A] 81: 715

    Google Scholar 

  8. Douglass EC, Valentine M, Etcubanas E, Parham DM, Webber BC, Houghton JA, Houghton PJ, Green AA (1987) A specific chromosomal abnormality in rhabdomyosarcoma. Cytogenet Cell Genet 45: 148

    Google Scholar 

  9. Fojo AT, Veda K, Slamon DJ, Poplack DG, Gottesman MM, Pastan I (1987) Expression of a multidrug-resistance gene in human tumors and tissues. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 84: 265

    Google Scholar 

  10. Giovanella BC, Stehlin JS, Wall ME, Wani MC, Nicholas AW, Liu LF, Silber R, Pomesil M (1989) DNA topoisomerase I-targeted chemotherapy of human colon cancer xenografts. Science 246: 1046

    Google Scholar 

  11. Gottlieb JA, Luce JK (1972) Treatment of malignant melanoma with camptothecin (NSC-100 880). Cancer Chemother Rep 56: 103

    Google Scholar 

  12. Gottlieb JA, Guarino AM, Call JB, Oliverio VT, Block JB (1970) Preliminary pharmacologic and clinical evaluation of camptothecin sodium (NSC 100 880). Cancer Chemother Rep 54: 461

    Google Scholar 

  13. Hazelton BJ, Houghton JA, Parham DM, Douglass EC, Torrance PM, Holt H, Houghton PJ (1987) Characterization of cell lines derived from xenografts of childhood rhabdomyosarcoma. Cancer Res 47: 4501

    Google Scholar 

  14. Horowitz ME, Etcubanas E, Christensen ML, Houghton JA, George SL, Green AA, Houghton PJ (1987) Phase II testing of melphalan in children with newly diagnosed rhabdomyosarcoma: a model for anticancer drug development. J Clin Oncol 6: 308

    Google Scholar 

  15. Horton JK, Houghton PJ, Houghton JA (1987) Reciprocal cross-resistance in human rhabdomyosarcomas selected in vivo for primary resistance to vincristine andl-phenylalamine mustard. Cancer Res 47: 6288

    Google Scholar 

  16. Horton JK, Houghton JA, Houghton PJ (1991) Expression of multidrug resistance gene (mdrl) in human tumor xenografts sensitive and resistant to natural products: failure to predict chemosensitivity. J Cell Pharmacol 2: 208

    Google Scholar 

  17. Houghton JA, Houghton PJ (1980) On the mechanism of cytotoxicity of fluorinated pyrimidines in four human colon adenocarcinoma xenografts maintained in immune-deprived mice. Cancer 45: 1159

    Google Scholar 

  18. Houghton JA, Houghton PJ (1987) The suitability and use of human tumor xenografts. In: Kallman RF (ed) Rodent tumor models in experimental cancer therapy. Pergamon, New York, p 199

    Google Scholar 

  19. Houghton JA, Taylor DM (1978) Maintenance of biological and biochemical characteristics of human colorectal tumours during serial passage in immune-deprived mice. Br J Cancer 37: 199

    Google Scholar 

  20. Houghton JA, Taylor DM (1978) Growth characteristics of human colorectal tumours during serial passage in immune-deprived mice. Br J Cancer 37: 213

    Google Scholar 

  21. Houghton JA, Houghton PJ, Webber BL (1982) Growth and characterization of childhood rhabdomyosarcomas as xenografts. J Natl Cancer Inst 68: 437

    Google Scholar 

  22. Houghton JA, Cook RL, Lutz PJ (1984) Childhood rhabdomyosarcoma xenografts: response to DNA interacting agents and agents used in current clinical therapy. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 20: 955

    Google Scholar 

  23. Houghton JA, Cook RL, Lutz PJ, Houghton PJ (1985) Melphalan: a potential new agent in the treatment of childhood rhabdomyosarcoma. Cancer Treat Rep 69: 9

    Google Scholar 

  24. Houghton JA, Houghton PJ, Hazelton BJ, Douglass EC (1985) In situ selection of a human rhabdomyosarcoma resistant to vincristine with altered β-tubulins. Cancer Res 45: 2706

    Google Scholar 

  25. Houghton PJ, Houghton JA, Myers L, Cheshire PJ, Howbert JJ, Grindey GB (1989) Evaluation ofN-(5-indanylsulfonyl)-N′-(4-chlorophenyl) urea against xenografts of pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 25: 84

    Google Scholar 

  26. Houghton PJ, Shapiro DN, Houghton JA (1991) Rhabdomyosarcoma, from the laboratory to the clinic. Pediatr Clin North Am 38: 349

    Google Scholar 

  27. Johnson DH, Greco FA, Strupp J, Handek R, Hainsworth JD (1990) Prolonged administration of oral etoposide in patients with relapsed or refractory small-cell lung cancer. A phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 8: 1613

    Google Scholar 

  28. Kingsbury WD, Boehm JC, Jakas DR, Holden KG, Hecht SM, Gallagher G, Caranfa MJ, McCabe FL, Faucette LF, Johnson RK, Hertzberg RP (1990) Synthesis of water-soluble (aminoalkyl) camptothecin analogues: inhibition of topoisomerase I and antitumor activity. J Med Chem 34: 98

    Google Scholar 

  29. Kuhn J, Burris S, Wall J et al. (1990) Pharmacokinetics of the topoisomerase I inhibitor. SK&F 104 864. Proc am Soc Clin Oncol 9: 70

    Google Scholar 

  30. Meyer WH, Houghton JA, Houghton PJ, Webber BL, Look AT (1990) Development and characterization of pediatric osteosarcoma xenografts. Cancer Res 50: 2781

    Google Scholar 

  31. Meyer WH, Loftin SK, Houghton JA, Houghton PJ (1990) Accumulation, intracellular metabolism, and antitumor activity of high-and low-dose methotrexate in human osteosarcoma xenografts. Cancer Commun 2: 219

    Google Scholar 

  32. Moertel CG, Schutt AJ, Reitemeier RJ, Hahn RG (1972) Phase II study of camptothecin (NSC-100 880) in the treatment of advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Cancer Chemother Rep 56: 95

    Google Scholar 

  33. Rowinsky E, Grochow C, Hendricks C et al. (1991) Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of topotecan (SK&F 104 864). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 10: 93

    Google Scholar 

  34. Sirott MN, Saltz L, Young C, et al. (1991) Phase I and clinical pharmacologic study of intravenous topotecan (T). Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 10: 104

    Google Scholar 

  35. Wall J, Burris H, Rodriguez G et al. (1991) Phase I trial of topotecan (SK&F 104 864) in patients with refractory solid tumors. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 10: 98

    Google Scholar 

  36. Wang JC (1985) DNA topoisomerases. Annu Rev Biochem 54: 665

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

This work was supported in part by grants CA23099, CA21765 (CoRe) and by the American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities (ALSAC)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Houghton, P.J., Cheshire, P.J., Myers, L. et al. Evaluation of 9-dimethylaminomethyl-10-hydroxycamptothecin against xenografts derived from adult and childhood solid tumors. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 31, 229–239 (1992). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00685553

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00685553

Keywords

Navigation