Pharmacokinetics of the peritoneal-plasma barrier after systemic mitomycin C administration

  • Paul H. Sugarbaker
  • O. Anthony Stuart
  • Joan Vidal-Jove
  • Ann Marie Pessagno
  • Ernst A. DeBruijn
Part of the Cancer Treatment and Research book series (CTAR, volume 82)

Abstract

Intraperitoneal administration of drugs continues to be of considerable interest for regional and systemic drug delivery in both animals and humans. There have been extensive studies, notably by Lukas et al. [1] and Torres et al. [2], to determine the pharmacokinetics involved in the transport of drugs from the peritoneal cavity into the portal and systemic circulation. In recent years, interest in the exchange of substances between the peritoneal cavity and the systemic circulation has been focused on humans. This has been stimulated in large part by the utilization of chronic peritoneal dialysis for patients in renal failure. Also, the peritoneal cavity is an important site for the spread of cancer from gastrointestinal and ovarian tumors. Controversy currently exists regarding the use of intraperitoneal chemotherapy to optimize the management of cancers that involve the peritoneal surfaces. Investigations of the pharmacokinetics involved during the transport of drugs from the peritoneum into the blood gave birth to the pharmacologic entity known as the peritoneal-plasma barrier (PPB) [3–7].

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Lukas G, Brindle SD, Greengard P. The route of absorption of intraperitoneally administered compounds. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1971;178:562–566.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Torres IJ, Litterst CL, Guarino AM. Transport of model compounds across the peritoneal membrane in the rat. Pharmacology 1978;17:330–340.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Flessner MF, Dedrick RL, Schultz JS. Exchange of macromolecules between peritoneal cavity and plasma. Am J Physiol 1985;248:H15-H25.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Dedrick RL, Meyers CE, Bungay PM, DeVita VT, Jr. Pharmacokinetics rationale for peritoneal drug administration in the treatment of ovarian cancer. Cancer Treat Rep 1978;162:1–11.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dedrick RL. Interspecies scaling of regional drug delivery. J Pharm Sci 1986;75:1047–1052.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Speyer JL, Sugarbaker PH, Collins JM, Dedrick RL, Klecker RW, Jr, Meyers CE. Portal levels and hepatic clearance of 5-fluorouracil after intraperitoneal administration in humans. Cancer Res 1981;41:1916–1922.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Jacquet P, Vidal-Jove J, Zhu B, Sugarbaker PH. Peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastrointestinal malignancy: Natural history and new prospects for management. Acta Chir Belg, 1994;94:191–197.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Sugarbaker PH, Graves T, DeBruijn EA, et al. Early postoperative intraperitoneal chemotherapy as an adjuvant therapy to surgery for peritoneal carcinomatosis from gastrointestinal cancer: Pharmacological studies. Cancer Res 1990;50:5790–5794.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sugarbaker PH, Cunliffe W, Belliveau J, et al. Rationale for early postoperative intra-peritoneal chemotherapy as a surgical adjuvant for gastrointestinal malignancy. Reg Cancer Treat 1989;1:66–79.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sugarbaker PH. Cytoreductive approach to peritoneal carcinomatosis: Peritonectomy and intraperitoneal chemotherapy. In Postgraduate Advances in Colorectal Surgery. ••: Forum Medicum, 1991, pp II-X.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sugarbaker PH. Peritonectomy procedures. Ann Surg, in press.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Vidal-Jove J, Pessagno AM, Esquivei J, Buck DR, Steves MA, Sugarbaker PH. Technical aspect and morbidity assessment of intraperitoneal chemotherapy administered by repeated paracentesis. Reg Cancer Treat 1992;4:294–297.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    DenHartigh J, Boortman G, Van Oort WJ, et al. Handling of biologic samples in the determination of the anti-neoplastic drug mitomycin C. J Pharma Biomed Anal 1985;3: 417–423.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Eksborgh S, Ehrsson H, Lindfors A. Liquid chromatographic determination of mitomycin C in human plasma and urine. J Chromatogr 1983;274:263–270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Tjaden UR, DeBruijn EA, Van Der Hoeven RAM, et al. Automated analysis of mitomycin C in body fluids by high performance liquid chromatography with on-line sample pretreatment. J Chromatogr 1987;420:53–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wilke H, Preusser P, Fink U, et al. Preoperative chemotherapy in locally advanced and nonresectable gastric cancer: A phase II study with etoposide, doxorubicin, and cisplatin. J Clin Oncol 1989;7:1318–1326.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Sugarbaker PH, Gianola FJ, Speyer JL, Wesley R, Barofsky I, Meyers CE. Prospective randomized trial of intravenous versus intraperitoneal 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced primary colon or rectal cancer. Surgery 1985;98:414–421.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Den Hartigh J, McVie JG, Van Oort WJ, Pinedo HM. Pharmacokinetics of mitomycin C in humans. Cancer Res 1983;43:5017–5021.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Park JG, Kramer BS, Steinberg SM, et al. Chemosensitivity testing of human colorectal carcinoma cell lines using a tetrazolium-based colorimetric assay. Cancer Res 1987;47: 5875–5879.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Dedrick RL, Flessner MF, Collins JM, Schultz JS. Is the peritoneum a membrane? Am Soc Artif Intern Organs J 1982;5:1–8.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Paul H. Sugarbaker
  • O. Anthony Stuart
  • Joan Vidal-Jove
  • Ann Marie Pessagno
  • Ernst A. DeBruijn

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations