Advertisement

Medical Oncology

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 151–159 | Cite as

Selection of chemotherapy by ex vivo assessment of tumor sensitivity to cytotoxic drugs

Results of a clinical trial
  • Åke Berglund
  • Bengt Glimelius
  • Jonas Bergh
  • Ola Brodin
  • Marie-Louise Fjällskog
  • Hans Hagberg
  • Anne von Heideman
  • Rolf Larsson
  • Bengt Tholander
  • Manuel de la Torre
  • Gunnar Åström
  • Kjell Öberg
  • Gunnar Parö
  • Peter NygrenEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

The feasibility of tumor sampling followed by ex vivo assessment of drug sensitivity, using the short-term fluorometric microculture cytotoxicty assay (FMCA), for selection of chemotherapy was investigated prospectively in patients with advanced cancer not amenable to standard treatment. Taxol (175 mg/m2 every 3 wk) was given to patients with tumor samples being low drug resistant (LDR) to Taxol ex vivo, to patients with no LDR drug, and if other drugs were unsuitable. The remaining patients received the most optimal drug(s) based on the FMCA results. Gastrointestinal cancer was dominating among the 61 eligible patients. Tumor sampling was safely performed in 75% by ultrasound-guided core biopsy. Eighty-two percent of the patients had Taxol. Five patients (8%) had a partial remission and 18 (30%) had stable disease. Tumor response was poorly predicted, probably because the Taxol excipient Cremophor EL is cytotoxic exclusively ex vivo. However, patients with tumor cells being LDR to at least one drug ex vivo lived significantly longer than those with no such drug.

Key Words

Chemotherapy ex vivo assay Taxol Cremophor EL solid tumor 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Fruehauf, J.P. and Bosanquet, A.G. (1993). In vitro determination of drug response: a discussion of clinical applications. PPO Updates 7:1–16.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Larsson, R. and Nygren, P. (1993). Laboratory prediction of clinical chemotherapeutic drug resistance: a working model exemplified by acute leukemia. Eur. J. Cancer 29A:1208–1212.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Gurney, H. (1996). Dose calculation of anticancer drugs: a review of the current practice and introduction of an alternative. J. Clin. Oncol. 14: 2590–2611.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sandström, M., et al. (1996). Lack of relationship between systemic exposure for the component drugs of the fluorouracil, epirubicin and 4-hydroxocyclophosphamide regimen in breast cancer patients. J. Clin. Oncol. 14:1581–1588.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hammond, M.E., et al. (2000). College of American Pathologists Conference XXXV: solid tumor prognostic factors — which, how and so what? Arch. Pathol. Lab. Med. 124:958–965.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Bergh, J., et al. (2000). Tailored fluorouracil, epirubicin and cyclophosphamide compared with marrow-supported high-dose chemotherapy as adjuvant treatment for high-risk breast cancer: a randomised trial. Lancet 356: 1384–1391.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nygren, P. (2001). What is cancer chemotherapy. Acta Oncol. 40:166–174.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Weisenthal, L. and Lippman, M. (1985). Clonogenic and nonclonogenic in vitro chemosensitivity assays. Cancer Treat. Rep. 69:615–632.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Weisenthal, L. and Nygren, P. (2002). Current status of cell culture drug resistance testing (CCDRT). Oncology, in press.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Larsson, R., Nygren, P., Ekberg, M. and Slater, L. (1990). Chemotherapeutic drug sensitivity testing of human leukemia cells in vitro using a semiautomated fluorometric assay. Leukemia 4:567–571.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nygren, P., et al. (1994). Detection of tumor specific cytotoxic drug activity in vitro using the fluorometric microculture cytotoxicity assay and primary cultures of tumor cells from patients. Int. J. Cancer 56:715–720.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Nygren, P., et al. (1994). In vitro drug sensitivity testing of tumor cells from patients with non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma using the fluorometric microculture cytotoxicity assay (FMCA). Ann. Oncol. 5:127–131.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Csoka, K., Tholander, B., Gerdin, E., Larsson, R. and Nygren, P. (1997). In vitro determination of cytotoxic drug-response in ovarian carcinoma using the fluorometric microculture cytotoxicity assay (FMCA). Int. J. Cancer 72:1008–1012.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rowinsky, E.K., Onetto, N., Canetta, R.M. and Arbuck, S.G. (1992). Taxol: the first of the taxanes, an important new class of antitumor agents. Semin. Oncol. 19:646–662.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kälkner, M., et al. (1994). Diagnostics of malignant lymphomas with ultrasound guided 1.2 mm biopsy-gun. Acta Oncol. 33:33–37.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Csoka, K., et al. (1994). Cytotoxic drug sensitivity testing of tumor cells from patients with ovarian carcinoma using the fluorometric microculture cytotoxicity assay (FMCA). Gynecol. Oncol. 54:163–170.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Larsson, R., Kristensen, J., Sandberg, C. and Nygren, P. (1992). Laboratory determination of chemotherapeutic drug resistance in tumor cells from patients with leukemia using a fluorometric microculture cytotoxicity assay (FMCA). Int. J. Cancer 50:177–185.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Fridborg, H., Nygren, P. and Larsson, R. (1995). Relationship between pharmacokinetic parameters in patients and cytotoxicity in vitro of standard and investigational anticancer drugs. Anti-Cancer Drugs 6:64–69.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Larsson, R. and Nygren, P. (1993). Prediction of individual patient response to chemotherapy by the fluorometric microculture cytotoxicity assay (FMCA) using drug specific cut-off limits and a Bayesian model. Anticancer Res. 13:1825–1830.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Miller, A.B., Hoogstraten, B., Staquet, M. and Winkler, A. (1981). Reporting results of cancer treatment. Cancer 47:207–214.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cortazar, P. and Johnson, B.E. (1999). Review of the efficacy of individualized chemotherapy selected by in vitro drug sensitivity testing for patients with cancer. J. Clin. Oncol. 17:1625–1631.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Nygren, P., et al. (1992). Feasbility of the fluorometric microculture cytotoxicity assay (FMCA) for cytotoxic drug sensitivity testing of tumor cells from patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia. Leukemia 6:1121–1128.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Weisenthal, L. (1991). Predictive assays for drug and radiation resistance, in Human Cancer in Primary Culture, a Handbook (J. Masters, eds), pp. 103–107, Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schuurhuis, G.J., et al. (1990). The polyoxyethylene castor oil Cremophor EL modifies multidrug resistance. Br. J. Cancer 62:591–594.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Webster, L., et al. (1993). Measurement of Cremophor EL following Taxol: plasma levels sufficient to reverse drug exclusion mediated by the multidrug-resistant phenotype. J. Natl. Cancer Inst. 85:1685–1690.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Millward, M.J., et al. (1998). Phase I trial of Cremophor EL with bolus doxorubicin. Clin. Cancer Res. 4:2321–2329.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nygren, P., et al. (1995). The cytotoxic effect of Taxol in primary cultures of tumour cells from patients is partly mediated by Cremophor EL. Br. J. Cancer 71:478–481.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Sparrebom, A., et al. (1998). Disposition of Cremophor EL in humans limits the potential for modulation of the multidrug resistance phenotype in vivo. Clin. Cancer Res. 4:1937–1942.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Pieters, R., et al. (1991). Relation of cellular drug resistance to long-term clinical outcome in childhood acute lymphoblastic leukaemia. Lancet 338:399–403.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Konecny, G., et al. (2000). Correlation of drug response with the ATP tumour chemosensitivity assay in primary FIGO stage III ovarian cancer. Gynecol. Oncol. 77:258–263.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Åke Berglund
    • 1
  • Bengt Glimelius
    • 1
  • Jonas Bergh
    • 1
  • Ola Brodin
    • 1
  • Marie-Louise Fjällskog
    • 1
    • 2
  • Hans Hagberg
    • 1
  • Anne von Heideman
    • 1
  • Rolf Larsson
    • 2
  • Bengt Tholander
    • 1
  • Manuel de la Torre
    • 3
  • Gunnar Åström
    • 1
  • Kjell Öberg
    • 2
  • Gunnar Parö
    • 4
  • Peter Nygren
    • 1
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Oncology, Radiology, and Clinical ImmunologyUniversity HospitalUppsalaSweden
  2. 2.Department of Medical SciencesUniversity HospitalUppsalaSweden
  3. 3.Department of Genetics and PathologyUniversity HospitalUppsalaSweden
  4. 4.Medical Department ScandinaviaBristol-Myers SquibbBrommaSweden

Personalised recommendations