Skip to main content
Log in

Skin ulceration potential without therapeutic anticancer activity for epipodophyllotoxin commercial diluents

  • Clinical
  • Published:
Investigational New Drugs Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

The epipodophyllotoxin derivatives, etoposide (VP-16) and teniposide (VM-26), are highly lipophilic anticancer drugs supplied with novel commercial solvent systems. A BALB/c mouse skin toxicity model was used to evaluate the ulcerative potential of intradermal (ID) VP-16 and its lipophilic solvent system along with the main ingredient of the VM-26 solvent, polyethoxylated castor oil (PECO). ID VP-16 caused dose-dependent ulceration following 0.17 mg, 0.33 mg (50 mg/M2) or 1.0 mg (150 mg/M2). Both normal saline (0.05 ml ID) and hyaluronidase (7.5 u ID) were effective as local VP-16 antidotes, presumably by diluting out the extravasated drug. The VP-16 solvent alone was as toxic as the 1.0 mg (undiluted) ID VP-16 injection. ID PECO was mildly ulcerative in mouse skin.

When given to P-388 lymphocytic leukemia-bearing mice, both VP-16 (24 mg/kg IP for 3 doses) and VM-26 (8 mg/kg IP for 2 doses) were active, producing increased life spans (ILS) of 160% and 90%, respectively. The solvents, given IP at the same schedule, did not increase or decrease the life span of tumor-bearing mice, but did increase morbidity. In an in vitro human tumor clonogenic assay (WiDr colon carcinoma and HEC-1A endometrial carcinoma in soft agar), both VP-16 and VM-26 showed moderate to complete inhibition of tumor colony forming units (TCFUs) by continuous exposure. 1-h drug exposures were marginally active at reducing TCFUs. None of the epipodohyllotoxin diluents at clinical concentrations reduced TCFUs. At very high concentrations, both epipodophyllotoxins were cytotoxic. They were more effective at reducing TCFUs when plated as a continuous exposure rather than a 1-h exposure.

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.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Issell BF: The podophyllotoxin derivatives VP16–213 and VM-26. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 7:73–80, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dombernowsky P, Nissen N, Larsen V: Clinical investigation of a new podophyllum derivative, epipodophyllotoxin, 4′-demethyl-9-(4,6–0–2-thenylidene-β-D-glucopyranoside) NSC 122819, in patients with malignant lymphomas and solid tumors. Cancer Chemother Rep 56:71–82, 1972

    Google Scholar 

  3. Avery TL, Roberts D, Price RA: Delayed toxicity of 4′-demethyl-epipodophyllotoxin 9-(4,6–0–2-thenylidene-D-glycopyramoside) NSC-122819, VM-26, in mice. Cancer Chemother Rep 51:165–173, 1973

    Google Scholar 

  4. Hacker M, Roberts D: Acute, chronic and terminal toxicity to 4′-demethylepipodophyllotoxin thenylidene glucoside (VM-26) in mice. Cancer Res 35:1756–1760, 1975

    Google Scholar 

  5. Stahelin H: Delayed toxicity of epipodophyllotoxin derivatives (VM-26 and VP-16–213), due to a local effect. Eur J Cancer 12:925–931, 1976

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dorr RT, Alberts DS, Chen H-SG: Experimental model of doxorubicin extravasation in the mouse. J Pharmacol Meth 4:237–250, 1980

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dorr RT, Alberts DS, Woods MW: Vinca alkaloid ulceration: experimental mouse model and effects of local antidotes. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 23:109, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dorr RT, Fritz WL: Cancer Chemotherapy Handbook. Elsevier North-Holland, New York, 1980, pp. 420, 701

    Google Scholar 

  9. Stahelin H: Activity of new glycosidic lignan derivative (VP-16–213) related to podophyllotoxin in experimental tumors. Eur J Cancer 9:215–221, 1973

    Google Scholar 

  10. Venditti J: Treatment schedule dependency of experimentally active antileukemic L-1210 drugs. Cancer Chemother Rep 55:35–59, 1971

    Google Scholar 

  11. Salmon SE, Hamburger AW, Soehnlen B, Durie BGM, Alberts DS, Moon TE: Quantitation of differential sensitivity of human-tumor stem cells to anticancer drugs. N Engl J Med 298(24):1321–1327, 1978

    Google Scholar 

  12. Murphy JC, Watson ES, Wirth PW, Skierkowski P, Folk RM, Peck G: Cutaneous irritation on the topical application of 30 antineoplastic agents to New Zealand white rabbits. Toxicol 14:117–130, 1979

    Google Scholar 

  13. Rozenzweig M, Von Hoff DD, Henney JE, Muggia FM: VM-26 and VP16–213: a comparative analysis. Cancer 40:334–342, 1977

    Google Scholar 

  14. Issell BF, Tihon C, Curry E: Etoposide (VP16–213) and teniposide (VM-26) comparative in vitro activities in human tumors. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 7:113–115, 1982

    Google Scholar 

  15. Dombernowsky P, Nissen NI: Schedule dependency of the antileukemic activity of the podophyllotoxin-derivative VP16–213 (NSC 141540) in L-1210 leukemia. Arch Path Microbiol Scand 81:715–724, 1973

    Google Scholar 

  16. Allen LM, Creaven PJ: Comparison of the human pharmacokinetics of VM-26 and VP16, two antineoplastic epipodophyllotoxin glucopyranoside derivatives. Eur J Cancer 11:697–707, 1975

    Google Scholar 

  17. Alberts DS, Salmon SE, Chen H-SG, Moon TE, Young L, Surwit EA: Pharmacologic studies of anticancer drugs with the human tumor cell assay. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 6:253–264, 1981

    Google Scholar 

  18. Ludwig R, Alberts DS: Chemical and biological stability of anticancer drugs used in a human tumor clonogenic assay. (Submitted to Cancer Chemother Pharmacol, 1982.)

  19. Ludwig R, Alberts DS, Miller TP, Salmon SE: Evaluation of anticancer drug schedule dependency using an in vitro human tumor clonogenic assay. (Submitted to Clin Pharmacol Therap, 1982.)

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Dorr, R.T., Alberts, D.S. Skin ulceration potential without therapeutic anticancer activity for epipodophyllotoxin commercial diluents. Invest New Drugs 1, 151–159 (1983). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00172074

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00172074

Key words

Navigation