Advertisement

Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology

, Volume 57, Issue 1, pp 40–45 | Cite as

Mild skin photosensitivity in cancer patients following injection of Photochlor (2-[1-hexyloxyethyl]-2-devinyl pyropheophorbide-a; HPPH) for photodynamic therapy

  • David A. Bellnier
  • William R. Greco
  • Hector Nava
  • Gregory M. Loewen
  • Allan R. Oseroff
  • Thomas J. Dougherty
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose: To measure skin photosensitivity in cancer patients infused with the new second-generation photodynamic sensitizer Photochlor (2-[1-hexyloxyethyl]-2-devinyl pyropheophorbide-a). A major disadvantage of using the clinically approved photosensitizer Photofrin is potentially prolonged and sometimes severe cutaneous phototoxicity. Patients and methods: Forty-eight patients enrolled in Phases 1 and 2 clinical trials underwent two or more exposures to four graded doses (44.4, 66.6, 88.8 or 133.2 J/cm2) of artificial solar-spectrum light (SSL) before and after administration of Photochlor at a dose of 2.5, 3, 4, 5 or 6 mg/m2 . Results: The most severe skin response, experienced by only six of the subjects, was limited to erythema without edema and could only be elicited by exposure to the highest light dose. Conversely, eight subjects had no discernible reaction to SSL at any light dose. For nearly all the patients, the peak skin response was obtained when the interval between sensitizer injection and exposure to SSL was 1 day and, generally, their sensitivity to SSL decreased with increasing sensitizer-light interval. For example, a 2-day sensitizer-SSL interval resulted in less severe reactions than those obtained with the 1-day interval in 79% of the subjects, while 90% of the subjects exposed to SSL 3 days after Photochlor infusion had responses that were less severe than those obtained with either the 1- or 2-day sensitizer-SSL interval. Conclusions: Photochlor, at clinically effective antitumor doses, causes only mild skin photosensitivity that declines rapidly over a few days.

Keywords

HPPH Photochemotherapy Photodynamic therapy Photofrin Phototoxicity Solar simulator 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This study was supported in part by NIH Grant PO155791 and the Oncologic Foundation of Buffalo, and utilized core facilities supported in part by Roswell Park Cancer Institute’s National Cancer Institute-funded Cancer Center Support Grant CA16056. The authors wish to thank Leroy Wood, Kenneth R. Keymel and Adam Sumlin for performing the clinical phototests, and Dr. Ian MacDonald for helpful suggestions in preparing this manuscript.

References

  1. 1.
    Bellnier DA, Greco WR, Loewen GM, Nava H, Oseroff AR, Pandey RK, Tsuchida T, Dougherty TJ (2003) Population pharmacokinetics of the photodynamic therapy agent 2-[1-hexyloxyethyl]-2-devinyl pyropheophorbide-a in cancer patients. Cancer Res 63:1806–1813PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bellnier DA, Dougherty TJ (1996) A preliminary pharmacokinetics study of intravenous Photofrin in patients. J Clin Laser Med Surg 14:311–314PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bellnier DA, Henderson BW, Pandey RK, Potter WR, Dougherty TJ (1993) Murine pharmacokinetics and antitumor efficacy of the photodynamic sensitizer 2-[1-hexyloxyethyl]-2-devinyl pyropheophorbide-a. J Photochem Photobiol B Biol 20:55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Berr F (2004) Photodynamic therapy for cholangiocarcinoma. Sem Liver Dis 24:177–187CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dougherty TJ, Levy JG (2003) Photodynamic therapy (PDT) and clinical applications Biomedical photonics handbook. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dougherty TJ, Cooper MT, Mang TS (1990) Cutaneous phototoxic occurrences in patients receiving Photofrin. Lasers Surg Med 10:485–488PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Eljamel MS (2003) New light on the brain: the role of photosensitizing agents and laser light in the management of invasive intracranial tumors. Tech Cancer Res Treat 2:303–309Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fitzpatrick TB (1988) The validity and practicality of sun-reactive skin types I through VI. Arch Dermatol 1988 124:869–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Friedberg JS, Mick R, Stevenson JP, Zhu T, Busch TM, Shin D, Smith D, Culligan M, Dimofte A, Glatstein E, Hahn SM (2004) Phase II trial of pleural photodynamic therapy and surgery for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer with pleural spread. J Clin Oncol 22:2192–2201CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kormeili T, Yamauchi PS, Lowe NJ (2004) Topical photodynamic therapy in clinical dermatology. Brit J Dermatol 150:1061–1069CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mlkvy P, Messman H, Regula J, Conio M, Pauer M, Millson CE, MacRobert AJ, Bown SG (1998) Photodynamic therapy for gastrointestinal tumors using three photosensitizers-ALA induced PPIX, Photofrin and MTHPC. A pilot study. Neoplasma 45:157–161PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Moghissi K, Dixon K (2003) Photodynamic therapy (PDT) in esophageal cancer: a surgical view of its indications based on 14 years experience. Tech Cancer Res Treat 2:319–326Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Moriwaki S-I, Misawa J, Yoshinari Y, Yamada I, Takigawa M, Tokura Y (2001) Analysis of photosensitivity in Japanese cancer-bearing patients receiving photodynamic therapy with porfimer sodium (Photofrin). Photodermatol Photoimmunol Photomed 17:241–243CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pandey RK (2004) Synthetic strategies in designing porphyrin-based photosensitizers for photodynamic therapy. CRC handbook of organic photochemistry and photobiology. CRC, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Vogl TJ, Eichler K, Mack MG, Zangos S, Herzog C, Thalhammer A, Engelmann K (2004) Interstitial photodynamic laser therapy in interventional oncology. Eur Radiol 14:1063–1073PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wagnieres G, Hadjur C, Grosjean P, Braichotte D, Savary J-F, Monnier P, van den Bergh H (1998) Clinical evaluation of the cutaneous phototoxicity of 5,10,15,20-tetra(m-hydroxyphenyl)chlorin. Photochem Photobiol 68:382–387CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Weishaupt KR, Gomer CJ, Dougherty TJ (1976) Identification of singlet oxygen as the cytotoxic agent in photoinactivation of a murine tumor. Cancer Res 36:2326–2329PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Wolfsen HC, Woodward TA, Raimondo M (2002) Photodynamic therapy for dysplatic Barrett esophagus and early esophageal adenocarcinoma. Mayo Clin Proc 77:1176–1181PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wooten RS, Smith KC, Ahlquist DA, Muller SA, Balm RK (1988) Prospective study of cutaneous phototoxicity after systemic hematoporphyrin derivative. Lasers Surg Med 8:294–300PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • David A. Bellnier
    • 1
  • William R. Greco
    • 2
  • Hector Nava
    • 3
  • Gregory M. Loewen
    • 4
  • Allan R. Oseroff
    • 5
  • Thomas J. Dougherty
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Cell Stress Biology (Photodynamic Therapy Center)Roswell Park Cancer InstituteBuffaloUSA
  2. 2.Cancer Prevention & Population SciencesRoswell Park Cancer InstituteBuffaloUSA
  3. 3.Department of SurgeryRoswell Park Cancer InstituteBuffaloUSA
  4. 4.Department of MedicineRoswell Park Cancer InstituteBuffaloUSA
  5. 5.Department of DermatologyRoswell Park Cancer InstituteBuffaloUSA

Personalised recommendations