Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology

, Volume 25, Issue 2, pp 84–88 | Cite as

Evaluation of N-(5-indanylsulfonyl)-N′-(4-chlorophenyl)-urea against xenografts of pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma

  • Peter J. Houghton
  • Janet A. Houghton
  • Leann Myers
  • Pamela Cheshire
  • J. Jeffry Howbert
  • Gerald B. Grindey
Xenografts, Sulfonyl Urea, Cytotoxicity
Received:
Accepted:

Summary

N-(5-indanylsulfonyl)-N′-(4-chlorophenyl)-urea (LY186641), a novel anticancer compound, was evaluated against six lines of rhabdomyosarcoma xenografts, each of which was established from tissue biopsies from untreated patients, and additional sublines selected as xenografts for primary resistance to vincristine, melphalan, and ifosfamide. LY186641 was given by oral gavage twice daily for 10 consecutive days or as 5-day courses repeated at 7-day intervals. At the optimal schedule, complete regressions of advanced tumors were obtained in each of the six rhabdomyosarcoma lines. There was no apparent cross-resistance in RMS lines selected for vincristine resistance or against multiple-drug-resistance KB cells in vitro. There was slight cross-resistance in xenografts selected for melphalan resistance, but not in an ifosfamide-resistant line. These results indicate that LY186641 may have significant clinical activity in the treatment of childhood rhabdomyosarcoma.

Keywords

Melphalan Vincristine Ifosfamide Optimal Schedule Rhabdomyosarcoma 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Abbreviations

RMS

rhabdomyosarcoma

L-PAM

melphalan, L-phenylalanine mustard

ifos

ifosfamide

VCR

vincristine

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

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 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. Som Cell Mol Genet 11: 117Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Butler WB (1984) Preparing nuclei from cells in monolayer cultures suitable for counting or for following synchronized cells through the cell cycle. Anal Biochem 141: 70Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    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: 265Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Green DM, Jaffe N (1978) Progress and controversy in the treatment of childhood rhabdomyosarcoma. Cancer Treat Rev 5: 7Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grindey GB (1988) Identification of diarylsulfonylureas as novel anticancer drugs. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 29: 535Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grindey GB, Boder GB, Grossman CS, Howbert JJ, Poore GA, Shaw WN, Todd GC, Worzalla JF (1987) Further development of diarylsulfonylureas as novel anticancer drugs. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 28: 309Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    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: 308Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Horton JK, Houghton PJ, Houghton JA (1987) Reciprocal cross-resistance in human rhabdomyosarcomas selected in vivo for primary resistance to vincristine andl-phenylalanine mustard. Cancer Res 47: 6288Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Houghton JA, Taylor DM (1978) Growth characteristics of human colorectal tumours during serial passage in immune-deprived mice. Br J Cancer 37: 213Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Houghton JA, Houghton PJ, Webber BL (1982) Growth and characterization of childhood rhabdomyosarcomas as xenografts. J Natl Cancer Inst 68: 437Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Houghton JA, Cook RL, Lutz PJ, Houghton PJ (1984) Childhood rhabdomyosarcoma xenografts: response to DNA interacting agents and agents used in current clinical therapy. Eur J Cancer Clin Oncol 20: 955Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Houghton JA, Cook RL, Lutz PJ, Houghton PJ (1985) Melphalan: a potential new agent in the treatment of childhood rhabdomyosarcoma. Cancer Treat Rep 69: 9Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    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: 2706Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Houghton PJ, Tharp R, Houghton JA, Holland JF, Bekesi JG (1988) Evaluation of 3-(p-fluorophenyl)-l-alanyl-3-[m-bis-2-chloroethyl)aminophenyl]-l-alanyl-l-methionine ethyl ester HCl (PTT.119) against xenografts of human rhabdomyosarcoma. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 22: 201Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ling V, Kartner N, Sudo T, Siminovich L, Riordan JR (1983) Multidrug resistance phenotype in Chinese hamster ovary cells. Cancer Treat Rep 67: 869Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Maurer HM, Moon T, Donaldson M, Fernandez C, Gehan EA, Hammond D, Hays DM, Lawrence W, Newton W, Ragab A, Raney B, Soule EH, Sutow WW, Tefft M (1977) The Intergroup Rhabdomyosarcoma study: a preliminary report. Cancer 40: 2015Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Pratt CB, Hustu HO, Kumar AP (1981) Treatment of childhood rhabdomyosarcoma at St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, 1962–78. Natl Cancer Inst Monogr 56: 93Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 1989

Authors and Affiliations

  • Peter J. Houghton
    • 1
  • Janet A. Houghton
    • 1
  • Leann Myers
    • 1
  • Pamela Cheshire
    • 1
  • J. Jeffry Howbert
    • 2
  • Gerald B. Grindey
    • 2
  1. 1.Laboratories for Developmental Therapeutics, Department of Biochemical and Clinical PharmacologySt. Jude Childrens Research HospitalMemphisUSA
  2. 2.Eli Lilly and CompanyIndianapolisUSA

Personalised recommendations