Advertisement

Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology

, Volume 36, Issue 6, pp 506–512 | Cite as

Etoposide protein binding in cancer patients

  • Bo Liu
  • Helena M. Earl
  • Christopher J. Poole
  • Janet Dunn
  • David J. Kerr
Original Article Etoposide, Protein Binding, Free Fraction

Abstract

The protein binding of etoposide was studied in vivo in 36 cancer patients receiving etoposide therapy. Free etoposide was separated from plasma using an ultrafiltration method and the etoposide concentrations (free and total) were measured by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Considerable interpatient variation in the protein binding of etoposide was observed. The protein binding of etoposide varied from 80% to 97% (mean, 93%). Univariate analysis showed a significant inverse correlation between the free fraction of etoposide and serum albumin (r=−0.74), daily dose (r=−0.37) and age (r=−0.34). Multivariate analysis demonstrated that serum albumin and age were independent predictors of the etoposide free fraction. Serum bilirubin showed no correlation with etoposide protein binding. There is wide variation in etoposide protein binding in cancer patients, which is mostly dependent on serum albumin concentration.

Key words

Etoposide Protein binding Free fraction 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Allen LM, Creaven PJ (1975) Comparison of the human pharmacokinetics of VM-26 and VP-16, two antineoplastic epipodophyllotoxin glucopyranoside derivatives. Eur J Cancer 11:697Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Brindley CJ, Antoniw P, Newlands ES, Bagshawe KD (1985) Pharmacokinetics and toxicity of the epipodophyllotoxin derivative etoposide (VP16-213) in patients with gestational choriocarcinoma and malignant teratoma. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 15:66Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Chatelut E, Chevreau C, Blancy E, Lequellec A, Canal P, Roche H, Houin G, Bugat R (1990) Pharmacokinetics and toxicity of two modalities of etoposide infusion in metastatic non-small-cell lung carcinoma. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 26:365Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Chen GL, Yang L, Rowe TC, Halligan BD, Tewey KM, Liu LF (1984) Nonintercalative antitumor drugs interfere with the breakage reunion reaction of mammalian DNA topoisomerase II. J Biol Chem 259:3560Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Clark PI, Slevin ML (1987) The clinical pharmacology of etoposide and teniposide. Clin Pharmacokinet 12:223Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cockcroft DW, Gault MH (1976) Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron 16:31Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dombernowsky P, Nissen NI (1973) Schedule dependency of the antileukemic activity of the podophyllotoxin-derivative VP-16-213 in L1210 leukemia. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand Immunobiol 81:715Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Donehower RC, Rowinsky EK (1993) Anticancer drugs derived from plants. In: DeVita VT, Hellman, JS, Rosenberg SA (eds) Cancer: principles and practice of oncology, 4th edn. J.B. Lippincott, Philadelphia, p 412Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Fleming RA, Evans WE, Arbuck SG, Stewart CF (1992) Factors affecting the in vitro protein binding in humans. J Pharm Sci 81:259Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gouyette A, Deniel A, Pico JL, Droz JP, Baume D, Ostronoff M, Bail N, Hayat M (1987) Clinical pharmacology of high-dose etoposide associated with cisplatin: pharmacokinetics and metabolic studies. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 23:1627Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hainsworth JD, Johnson DH, Frazier SR, Greco FA (1989) Chronic daily administration of oral etoposide—a phase I trial. J Clin Oncol 7:396Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harvey VJ, Joel SP, Johnston A, Slevin ML (1985) High-performance liquid chromatography of etoposide in plasma and urine. J Chromatogr 339:419Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Henwood JM, Brogden RN (1990) Etoposide—a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties, and therapeutic potential in combination chemotherapy of cancer. Drugs 39:438Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Jusko WJ, Gretch M (1976) Plasma and tissue protein binding of durg in pharmacokinetics. Drug Metab Rev 5:43Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lin JH, Cocchetto DM, Duggan DE (1987) Protein binding as a primary determinant of the clinical pharmacokinetic properties of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. Clin Pharmacokinet 12:402Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Schwinghammer TL, Fleming RA, Rosenfeld CS, Przepiorka D, Shadduck RK, Bloom EJ, Stewart CF (1993) Disposition of total and unbound etoposide following high-dose therapy. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 32:273Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sinkule J, Hutson P, Hayes FA, Etcubanas E, Evans W (1984) Pharmacokinetics of etoposide (VP16) in children and adolescents with refractory solid tumours. Cancer Res 44:3109Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Slevin ML, Clark PI, Joel SP Thompson P, Talbot D (1989) A randomized trial to examine the effect of more extended scheduling of etoposide administration in small cell lung cancer. Proc Am Soc Clin Oncol 8:236Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Slevin ML, Clark PI, Joel SP, Malik S, Osborne RJ, Gregory WM, Lowe DG, Reznek RH, Wrigley PF (1989) A randomized trial to evaluate the effect of schedule on the activity of etoposide in small cell lung cancer. J Clin Oncol 7:1333Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Stewart CF, Pieper JA, Arbuck SG, Evans WE (1989) Altered protein binding of etoposide in patients with cancer. Clin Pharmacol Ther 45:49Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Stewart CF, Fleming RA, Arbuck SG, Evans WE (1990) Prospective evaluation of a model for predicting etoposide plasma protein binding in cancer patients. Cancer Res 50:6854Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Svensson CK, Woodruff MN, Baxter JG, Lalka D (1986) Free drug concentration monitoring in clinical practice: rationale and current status. Clin Pharmacokinet 11:450Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Taal BG, Teller FGM, Huinink WWT, Boot H, Beijnen JH, Dubbelman R (1994) Etoposide, leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil (ELF) combination chemotherapy for advanced gastric cancer: experience with two treatment schedules incorporating intravenous or oral etoposide. Ann Oncol 5:90Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Ulrich KH (1981) Molecular aspects of ligand binding to serum albumin. Pharmacol Rev 33:17Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1995

Authors and Affiliations

  • Bo Liu
    • 1
    • 2
  • Helena M. Earl
    • 1
    • 2
  • Christopher J. Poole
    • 1
    • 2
  • Janet Dunn
    • 3
  • David J. Kerr
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Cancer Research Campaign, Institute for Cancer StudiesUniversity of BirminghamBirminghamUK
  2. 2.St. Chad's UnitCity Hospital NHS TrustBirminghamUK
  3. 3.CRC Trials Unit, CRC Institute for Cancer StudiesUniversity of Birmingham, 3rd Floor, Clinical Research Block, Queen Elizabeth HospitalBirminghamUK

Personalised recommendations