Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Physicochemical and pharmacokinetic parameters of seven lipophilic chlorambucil esters designed for brain penetration

  • Original Articles
  • Pharmacokinetics, Chlorambucil Esters, Plasma, Prednimustine, Brain
  • Published:
Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Summary

This report describes the physicochemical and pharmacokinetic parameters of seven chlorambucil esters, which were compared with those of chlorambucil. These esters were designed as chlorambucil prodrugs to increase the brain penetration and concentration vs time profile of chlorambucil within the CNS for potential treatment of brain tumors. They include four aliphatic esters from one to eight carbon chains in length (chlorambucil-methyl,-propyl,-hexyl, and-octyl esters) and three aromatic esters, including the phenylmethyl, phenylethyl and prednisolone ester of chlorambucil, prednimustine. The esters were lipophilic and possessed log octanol: water partition coefficients (log P values) that ranged from 4.05 to >8.0. All retained alkylating activity, which was reduced compared with that of chlorambucil. In addition, all were metabolized in vivo in the rat to yield chlorambucil alone. Measurement of the in vitro rate of ester hydrolysis of the compounds to yield chlorambucil in rat plasma demonstrated that short-chain aliphatic and aromatic chlorambucil esters were rapidly broken down to their parent compound. The plasma half-lives of the compounds increased with the increasing length and complexity of their ester chain. This may have been related to an increase in the binding of the long-chain esters to plasma proteins, protecting the ester from nonspecific plasma esterases, and to a reduced affinity of plasma esterases to these esters. Pharmacokinetic analysis of chlorambucilhexyl,-octyl, and-prednisolone esters by HPLC demonstrated that following their intravenous administration in the rat (in doses equivalent to equimolar chlorambucil, 10 mg/kg), they yielded only low concentrations of active compounds in plasma and brain. The brain: plasma ratio of these was low and similar to that of chlorambucil, and no ester demonstrated anticancer activity superior to that obtained after the administration of equimolar chlorambucil (5 mg/kg i. v., days 1–5) against brain-sequestered Walker 256 carcinosarcoma in the rat.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Anderson J, Christensen L, Krogshlom H (1984) Phase II trial of prednimustine in glioblastoma multiforme. Cancer Treat Rep 68: 795–797

    Google Scholar 

  2. Augustinsson KB (1961) Multiple forms of esterase in vertebrate blood plasma. Ann NY Acad Sci 94: 844–860

    Google Scholar 

  3. Blakelee D, Kennedy JC (1974) Factors affecting the noncovalent binding of chlorambucil to immunoglobulin G. Cancer Res 34: 882

    Google Scholar 

  4. Boyer PD (1971) The enzymes, vol 5. Academic, New York

    Google Scholar 

  5. Carter SK, Bakowski MT, Hellman K (1987) Chemotherapy of cancer, 3rd edn. Wiley Medical, New York

    Google Scholar 

  6. Connors TA (1974) Mechanisms of clinical drug resistance to alkylating agents. Biochem Pharmacol 23 [Suppl 2]: 89–100

    Google Scholar 

  7. Cornbleet M, Leonard R, Smyth J (1984) High-dose agent therapy: a review of clinical experiences. Cancer Drug Deliv 1: 227–238

    Google Scholar 

  8. Dorr R, Fritz W (1980) Cancer chemotherapy handbook. Kimpton, London

    Google Scholar 

  9. Ehrsson H, Eksborg S, Wallin I, Nilsson S (1980) Degradation of chlorambucil in aqueous solution. J Pharm Sci 69: 1091

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ehrsson H, Lonroth U, Wallin I, Ehrnebo M, Nilsson S (1981) Degradation of chlorambucil in aqueous solution: influence of human albumin binding. J Pharm Pharmacol 33: 313–315

    Google Scholar 

  11. Farmer PB, Foster AB, Jarman DR, Newell DR, Oddy DR, Kiburis JM (1979) The metabolism of deuterated analogues of chlorambucil in the rat. Chem Biol Interact 28: 211–220

    Google Scholar 

  12. Friedman HS, Schold SC, Bigner DD (1986) Chemotherapy of subcutaneous and intracerebral human medulloblastoma xenografts in athymic nude mice. Cancer Res 46: 224–228

    Google Scholar 

  13. Godeneche D, Madelmont J, Moreau M, Plagne R, Meyniel G (1980) Comparative physico-chemical properties, biological effects, and disposition in mice of four nitrogen mustards. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 5: 1–9

    Google Scholar 

  14. Goldie J, Coldman A (1979) A mathematical model for relating the drug sensitivity of tumors to their spontaneous mutation. Cancer Treat Rep 63: 172

    Google Scholar 

  15. Greig NH (1984) Chemotherapy of brain metastases: current status. Cancer Treat Rev 11: 157–180

    Google Scholar 

  16. Greig NH (1987) Optimizing drug delivery to brain tumors. Cancer Treat Rev 14: 1–28

    Google Scholar 

  17. Greig NH (1989) Drug delivery to the brain by blood-brain barrier circumvention and drug modification. In: Neuwelt EA (ed) Implications of the blood-brain barrier and its manipulation, vol 1. Plenum Press, NY, pp 311–367

    Google Scholar 

  18. Greig NH, Rapoport SI (1988) Comparative brain and plasma pharmacokinetics and anticancer activities of chlorambucil and melphalan in the rat. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 21: 1–8

    Google Scholar 

  19. Greig NH, Momma S, Sweeney DJ, Smith QR, Rapoport SI (1987) Facilitated transport of melphalan at the rat bloodbrain barrier by the large neutral amino acid carrier system. Cancer Res 47: 1571–1576

    Google Scholar 

  20. Greig NH, Sweeney DJ, Rapoport SI (1987) Melphalan concentration dependent plasma protein binding in healthy humans and rats. Eur J Clin Pharmacol 32: 179–185

    Google Scholar 

  21. Hansch C (1969) A quantitative approach to biochemical structure-activity relationships. Acc Chem Res 2: 232–239

    Google Scholar 

  22. Hill B (1972) Studies on the transport and cellular distribution of chlorambucil in the Yoshida ascites sarcoma. Biochem Pharmacol 21: 495–502

    Google Scholar 

  23. Hofstee BHJ (1954) Specificity of esterases: IV. Behavior of horse liver esterase towards a homologous series of n-fatty acid esters. J Biol Chem 207: 219–224

    Google Scholar 

  24. Jenner P, Testa B (1981) Concepts in drug metabolism, vol. 10, part B. Marcel Dekker, New York

    Google Scholar 

  25. Jusko W, Gretch M (1976) Plasma and protein binding of drugs in pharmacokinetics. Drug Metab Rev 5: 43–140

    Google Scholar 

  26. Lee FYF, Coe P, Workman P (1986) Pharmacokinetic basis for the comparative antitumor activity and toxicity of chlorambucil, phenylacetic mustard andB,B-difluorochlorambucil (CB 7103) in mice. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 17: 21–29

    Google Scholar 

  27. Leo A, Hansch C, Elkins D (1971) Partition coefficients and their uses. Chem Rev 71: 525–616

    Google Scholar 

  28. MacKichan J (1984) Pharmacokinetic consequences of drug displacement from blood and tissue proteins. Clin Pharmacokinet 9: 32–41

    Google Scholar 

  29. Malhotra OP, Philip G (1966) Specificity of goat intestinal esterase. Biochem Z 346: 386–402

    Google Scholar 

  30. Marquardt D (1963) An algorithm for least squares estimation of nonlinear parameters. J Soc Ind Appl Math 11: 431–441

    Google Scholar 

  31. McLean A, Newell D, Baker G (1976) The metabolism of chlorambucil. Biochem Pharmacol 25: 2331

    Google Scholar 

  32. McLean A, Woods RL, Catovsky D, Farmer P (1979) Pharmacokinetics and metabolism of chlorambucil in patients with malignant disese. Cancer Treat Rev [Suppl] 6: 33

    Google Scholar 

  33. Miller R (1966) Simultaneous statistical inference. McGraw-Hill, New York pp 76–81

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nemethy G (1967) Hydrophobe Weschselwirkungen. Angew Chem 79: 260–271

    Google Scholar 

  35. Neuwelt EA (1984) Therapeutic potential for blood-brain barrier modification in malignant brain tumor. Prog Exp Tumor Res 28: 51–66

    Google Scholar 

  36. Newell DR, Shepherd CR, Harrap KR (1981) The pharmacokinetics of prednimustine and chlorambucil in the rat. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 6: 85–91

    Google Scholar 

  37. Newell DR, Calvert AH, Harrap KR (1983) Studies on the pharmacokinetics of chlorambucil and prenimustine in man. Br J Clin Pharmacol 15: 253–258

    Google Scholar 

  38. Owen WR, Stewart PJ (1979) Kinetics and mechanism of chlorambucil hydrolysis. J Pharm Sci 68: 992–996

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rapoport S (1976) Blood-brain barrier in physiology and medicine. Raven, New York

    Google Scholar 

  40. Robinson PJ, Rapoport SI (1986) Kinetics of protein binding determine rates of uptake of drugs by brain. Am J Physiol 251: R1212-R1220

    Google Scholar 

  41. Roehrig GR, Billman JH, Marcec J, Fritz P, Shea F (1980) Synthesis and antitumor activity of 4-[p-[bis(2-chloroethyl)-amino]phenyl]butyrates. J Pharm Sci 69: 1232–1234

    Google Scholar 

  42. Schabel FM, Johnston TP, McCaler GS, Montgomery JA, Laster WR, Skipper HE (1963) Experimental evaluation of potential anticancer agents: VIII. Effects of certain nitrosoureas on intracerebral L1210 leukemia. Cancer 23: 725–733

    Google Scholar 

  43. Schabel FM, Trader MW, Laster WR, Wheeler GP, Witt MH (1978) Patterns of resistance and therapeutic synergism among alkylating agents. Fundam Cancer Chemother Antibiot Chemother 23: 200–215

    Google Scholar 

  44. Scholtan W (1968) Die hydrophobe Bindung der Pharmaka an human Albumin und Ribonucleinsäure. Arzneim-Forsch 18: 505–517

    Google Scholar 

  45. Sheridan MA, Nines RG, Riblet SM, Finfrock MF, Trigg NJ, Houchens DP (1986) Glioma and medulloblastoma xenografts as models for brain tumor development. Proc Am Assoc Cancer Res 27: 385

    Google Scholar 

  46. Skipper H, Schabel F, Wilcox W (1964) Experimental evaluation of anticancer agents: VII. On the criteria and kinetics associated with “curability” of experimental leukemia. Cancer Chemother Rep 35: 1–111

    Google Scholar 

  47. Stoops JK, Horgan DJ, Runnegar MTC, DeJersey J, Webb EC, Zerner B (1969) Carboxylesterases (EC 3.1.1). Kinetic studies on carboxylesterases. Biochemistry 8: 2026–2033

    Google Scholar 

  48. Walker MD (1977) Treatment of brain tumors. Med Clin North Am 61: 1045–1051

    Google Scholar 

  49. Walker MD, Green SB, Byar DP, Alexander E, Batzdorf U, Brooks WH, Hunt WE, MacCarty CS, Mahaley MS, Mealey J, Owens G, Ransohoff J, Robertson JT, Shapiro WR, Smith KR, Wilson CB, Strike TA (1980) Randomized comparisons of radiotherapy and nitrosoureas for the treatment of malignant glioma after surgery. N Engl J Med 303: 1323–1329

    Google Scholar 

  50. Wilkinson R, Gunnarsson PO, Plym-Forshell G, Renshaw J, Harrap KR (1978) The hydrolysis of prednimustine by enzymes from normal and tumour tissues. Exerpta Med Int Congr Ser 420: 260–273

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Laboratory of Neurosciences, National Institutes on Aging, National Institutes of Health, Bldg. 10, Rm 6C 103, 20892, Bethesda, MD, USA

    Nigel H. Greig, Shigeru Genka, Eileen M. Daly, Daniel J. Sweeney & Stanley I. Rapoport

Authors
  1. Nigel H. Greig
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Shigeru Genka
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Eileen M. Daly
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel J. Sweeney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Stanley I. Rapoport
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Greig, N.H., Genka, S., Daly, E.M. et al. Physicochemical and pharmacokinetic parameters of seven lipophilic chlorambucil esters designed for brain penetration. Cancer Chemother. Pharmacol. 25, 311–319 (1990). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00686229

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00686229

Keywords

Search

Navigation