Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology

, Volume 57, Issue 5, pp 654–662

Pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of the camptothecin–polymer conjugate IT-101 in rats and tumor-bearing mice

  • Thomas Schluep
  • Jianjun Cheng
  • Kay T. Khin
  • Mark E. Davis
Original Article

Abstract

Purpose: IT-101 is a camptothecin–polymer conjugate prepared by linking camptothecin (CPT) to a hydrophilic, cyclodextrin-based, linear polymer through ester bonds. In previous studies, these polymer conjugates with high molecular weights (ca 90 kDa) have shown significant antitumor effects against human colon carcinoma xenografts. The pharmacokinetics of IT-101 in plasma of rats and its biodistribution in nude mice bearing human LS174T colon carcinoma tumors is reported here. Methods: Sprague–Dawley rats were injected intravenously with three different doses of IT-101. Serial plasma samples were analyzed for polymer-bound and unconjugated CPT by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Concentration vs time data were modeled using non-compartmentalized methods and compared to CPT alone injected intravenously at an equivalent dose. Tumor-bearing mice were injected intravenously with IT-101 and intraperitoneally with CPT alone, and sacrificed after 24 and 48 h, and serum, heart, liver, spleen, lungs and tumor collected. Tissue samples were extracted and analyzed for polymer-bound and unconjugated CPT by HPLC. Results: Plasma concentrations and the area under the curve for polymer-bound CPT are approximately 100-fold higher than those of unconjugated CPT or CPT alone, injected intravenously at an equivalent dose. The plasma half-life of IT-101 ranges from 17 -20 h and is significantly greater than that of CPT alone (1.3 h). When CPT is conjugated to polymer, the biodistribution pattern of CPT is different from that taken alone. At 24 h post injection, the total CPT per gram of tissue is the highest in tumor tissue when compared to all other tissues tested. Tumor concentrations of active CPT released from the conjugate are more than 160-fold higher when administered as a polymer conjugate rather than as CPT alone. Conclusions: The studies presented here indicate that intravenous administration of IT-101, a cyclodextrin based polymer–CPT conjugate, gives prolonged plasma half-life and enhanced distribution to tumor tissue when compared to CPT alone. The data also show that active CPT is released from the conjugate within the tumor for an extended period of time. These effects likely play a significant role in the enhanced antitumor activity of IT-101 when compared to CPT alone or irinotecan.

Keywords

Camptothecin Polymer conjugate Pharmacokinetics Biodistribution 

References

  1. 1.
    Bhatt R, de Vries P, Tulinsky J, Bellamy G, Baker B, Singer JW, Klein P (2003) Synthesis and in vivo antitumor activity of poly(l-glutamic acid) conjugates of 20S-camptothecin. J Med Chem 46:190–193CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bissett D, Cassidy J, de Bono JS, Muirhead F, Main M, Robson L, Fraier D, Magne ML, Pellizzoni C, Porro MG, Spinelli R, Speed W, Twelves C (2004) Phase I and pharmacokinetic (PK) study of MAG-CPT (PNU 166148): a polymeric derivative of camptothecin (CPT). Br J Cancer 91:50–55CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Caiolfa VR, Zamai M, Fiorino A, Frigerio E, Pellizzoni C, d’Argy R, Ghiglieri A, Castelli MG, Farao M, Pesenti E, Gigli M, Angelucci F, Suarato A (2000) Polymer-bound camptothecin: initial biodistribution and antitumour activity studies. J Control Release 65:105–119CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cheng J, Khin KT, Davis ME (2004) Antitumor activity of beta-cyclodextrin polymer–campthothecin conjugates. Mol Pharm 1:183–193CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cheng J, Khin KT, Jensen GS, Liu A, Davis ME (2003) Synthesis of linear, beta-cyclodextrin-based polymers and their camptothecin conjugates. Bioconjug Chem 14:1007–1017PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Conover CD, Greenwald RB, Pendri A, Shum KL (1999) Camptothecin delivery systems: the utility of amino acid spacers for the conjugation of camptothecin with polyethylene glycol to create prodrugs. Anticancer Drug Des 14:499–506PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Creaven PJ, Allen LM, Muggia FM (1972) Plasma camptothecin (NSC-100880) levels during a 5-day course of treatment: relation to dose and toxicity. Cancer Chemother Rep 56:573–578PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Fujita F, Koike M, Fujita M, Sakamoto Y, Okuno S, Kawaguchi T, Yano S, Yano T, Kiuchi S, Fujiwara T, Kudoh S, Kakushima M (2005) MEN4901/T-0128, a new camptothecin derivative-carboxymethyldextran conjugate, has potent antitumor activities in a panel of human tumor xenografts in nude mice. Clin Cancer Res 11:1650–1657CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Greenwald RB, Pendri A, Conover C, Gilbert C, Yang R, Xia J (1996) Drug delivery systems. 2. Camptothecin 20-O-poly(ethylene glycol) ester transport forms. J Med Chem 39:1938–1940CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Greenwald RB, Pendri A, Conover CD, Lee C, Choe YH, Gilbert C, Martinez A, Xia J, Wu D, Hsue M (1998) Camptothecin-20-PEG ester transport forms: the effect of spacer groups on antitumor activity. Bioorg Med Chem 6:551–562CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hertzberg RP, Caranfa MJ, Hecht SM (1989) On the mechanism of topoisomerase I inhibition by camptothecin: evidence for binding to an enzyme–DNA complex. Biochemistry 28:4629–4638CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jorgensen KE, Moller JV (1979) Use of flexible polymers as probes of glomerular pore size. Am J Physiol 236:F103–F111PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kehrer DF, Soepenberg O, Loos WJ, Verweij J, Sparreboom A (2001) Modulation of camptothecin analogs in the treatment of cancer: a review. Anticancer Drugs 12:89–105CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Matsumura Y, Maeda H (1986) A new concept for macromolecular therapeutics in cancer chemotherapy: mechanism of tumoritropic accumulation of proteins and the antitumor agent smancs. Cancer Res 46:6387–6392PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Mi Z, Burke TG (1994) Differential interactions of camptothecin lactone and carboxylate forms with human blood components. Biochemistry 33:10325–10336CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Moertel CG, Schutt AJ, Reitemeier RJ, Hahn RG (1972) Phase II study of camptothecin (NSC-100880) in the treatment of advanced gastrointestinal cancer. Cancer Chemother Rep 56:95–101PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Muggia FM, Creaven PJ, Hansen HH, Cohen MH, Selawry OS (1972) Phase I clinical trial of weekly and daily treatment with camptothecin (NSC-100880): correlation with preclinical studies. Cancer Chemother Rep 56:515–521PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Muggia FM, Dimery I, Arbuck SG (1996) Camptothecin and its analogs. An overview of their potential in cancer therapeutics. Ann N Y Acad Sci 803:213–223PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Rowinsky EK, Rizzo J, Ochoa L, Takimoto CH, Forouzesh B, Schwartz G, Hammond LA, Patnaik A, Kwiatek J, Goetz A, Denis L, McGuire J, Tolcher AW (2003) A phase I and pharmacokinetic study of pegylated camptothecin as a 1-hour infusion every 3 weeks in patients with advanced solid malignancies. J Clin Oncol 21:148–157CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Sarapa N, Britto MR, Speed W, Jannuzzo M, Breda M, James CA, Porro M, Rocchetti M, Wanders A, Mahteme H, Nygren P (2003) Assessment of normal and tumor tissue uptake of MAG-CPT, a polymer-bound prodrug of camptothecin, in patients undergoing elective surgery for colorectal carcinoma. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 52:424–430 (Epub 2003 Aug 6)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Scott DO, Bindra DS, Stella VJ (1993) Plasma pharmacokinetics of lactone and carboxylate forms of 20(S)-camptothecin in anesthetized rats. Pharm Res 10:1451–1457CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Singer JW, Bhatt R, Tulinsky J, Buhler KR, Heasley E, Klein P, de Vries P (2001) Water-soluble poly-(l-glutamic acid)-Gly-camptothecin conjugates enhance camptothecin stability and efficacy in vivo. J Control Release 74:243–247CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Soepenberg O, de Jonge MJ, Sparreboom A, de Bruin P, Eskens FA, de Heus G, Wanders J, Cheverton P, Ducharme MP, Verweij J (2005) Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of DE-310 in patients with advanced solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res 11:703–711PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Twaites B, de las Heras Alarcon C, Alexander C (2005) Synthetic polymers as drugs and therapeutics. J Mater Chem 15:441–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wachters FM, Groen HJ, Maring JG, Gietema JA, Porro M, Dumez H, de Vries EG, van Oosterom AT (2004) A phase I study with MAG-camptothecin intravenously administered weekly for 3 weeks in a 4-week cycle in adult patients with solid tumours. Br J Cancer 90:2261–2267PubMedGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wall ME, Wani MC, Cook CE, Palmer KH, McPhail AT, Sims GA (1966) Plant antitumor agents. I. The isolation and structure of camptothecin, a novel alkaloid leukemia and tumor inhibitor from Camptotheca acuminata. J Am Chem Soc 88:3888–3890CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zamai M, VandeVen M, Farao M, Gratton E, Ghiglieri A, Castelli MG, Fontana E, D’Argy R, Fiorino A, Pesenti E, Suarato A, Caiolfa VR (2003) Camptothecin poly[n-(2-hydroxypropyl) methacrylamide] copolymers in antitopoisomerase-I tumor therapy: intratumor release and antitumor efficacy. Mol Cancer Ther 2:29–40PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Zou Y, Wu QP, Tansey W, Chow D, Hung MC, Charnsangavej C, Wallace S, Li C (2001) Effectiveness of water soluble poly(l-glutamic acid)-camptothecin conjugate against resistant human lung cancer xenografted in nude mice. Int J Oncol 18:331–336PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Schluep
    • 1
  • Jianjun Cheng
    • 1
  • Kay T. Khin
    • 1
  • Mark E. Davis
    • 2
  1. 1.Insert Therapeutics, Inc.PasadenaUSA
  2. 2.Chemical EngineeringCalifornia Institute of TechnologyPasadenaUSA

Personalised recommendations