Clinical Cancer Research Targets Frontiers in Basic Cancer Research
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Seo, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Kinsella, T. J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Seo, Y.
Right arrow Articles by Kinsella, T. J.
Clinical Cancer Research Vol. 11, 7499-7507, October 15, 2005
© 2005 American Association for Cancer Research


Cancer Therapy: Preclinical

Schedule-Dependent Drug Effects of Oral 5-Iodo-2-Pyrimidinone-2'-Deoxyribose as an In vivo Radiosensitizer in U251 Human Glioblastoma Xenografts

Yuji Seo1, Tao Yan1, Jane E. Schupp1, Tomas Radivoyevitch2 and Timothy J. Kinsella1

Authors' Affiliations: Departments of 1 Radiation Oncology and 2 Epidemiology and Biostatistics, Case Western Reserve University and University Hospitals of Cleveland/Case Comprehensive Cancer Center, Cleveland, Ohio

Requests for reprints: Timothy J. Kinsella, Department of Radiation Oncology, University Hospitals of Cleveland, Lerner Tower 6068, 11100 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44106-6068. Phone: 216-844-2530; Fax: 216-844-4799; E-mail: timothy.kinsella{at}uhhs.com.

Purpose: 5-Iodo-2-pyrimidinone-2'-deoxyribose (IPdR) is an oral prodrug of 5-iodo-2'-deoxyuridine (IUdR), an in vitro/in vivo radiosensitizer. IPdR can be rapidly converted to IUdR by a hepatic aldehyde oxidase. Previously, we found that the enzymatic conversion of IPdR to IUdR could be transiently reduced using a once daily (q.d.) treatment schedule and this may affect IPdR-mediated tumor radiosensitization. The purpose of this study is to measure the effect of different drug dosing schedules on tumor radiosensitization and therapeutic index in human glioblastoma xenografts.

Experimental Design: Three different IPdR treatment schedules (thrice a day, t.i.d.; every other day, q.o.d.; every 3rd day, q.3.d.), compared with a q.d. schedule, were analyzed using athymic nude mice with human glioblastoma (U251) s.c. xenografts. Plasma pharmacokinetics, IUdR-DNA incorporation in tumor and normal proliferating tissues, tumor growth delay following irradiation, and body weight loss were used as end points.

Results: The t.i.d. schedule with the same total daily doses as the q.d. schedule (250, 500, or 1,000 mg/kg/d) improved the efficiency of IPdR conversion to IUdR. As a result, the percentage of IUdR-DNA incorporation was higher using the t.i.d. schedule in the tumor xenografts as well as in normal small intestine and bone marrow. Using a fixed dose (500 mg/kg) per administration, the q.o.d. and q.3.d. schedules also showed greater IPdR conversion than the q.d. schedule, related to a greater recovery of hepatic aldehyde oxidase activity prior to the next drug dosing. In the tumor regrowth assay, all IPdR treatment schedules showed significant increases of regrowth delays compared with the control without IPdR (q.o.d., 29.4 days; q.d., 29.7 days; t.i.d., 34.7 days; radiotherapy alone, 15.7 days). The t.i.d. schedule also showed a significantly enhanced tumor growth delay compared with the q.d. schedule. Additionally, the q.o.d. schedule resulted in a significant reduction in systemic toxicity.

Conclusions: The t.i.d. and q.o.d. dosing schedules improved the efficiency of enzymatic activation of IPdR to IUdR during treatment and changed the extent of tumor radiosensitization and/or systemic toxicity compared with a q.d. dosing schedule. These dosing schedules will be considered for future clinical trials of IPdR-mediated human tumor radiosensitization.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Clin. Cancer Res.Home page
T. J. Kinsella
Coordination of DNA Mismatch Repair and Base Excision Repair Processing of Chemotherapy and Radiation Damage for Targeting Resistant Cancers
Clin. Cancer Res., March 15, 2009; 15(6): 1853 - 1859.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Cancer Res.Home page
B. E. Lally, G. A. Geiger, S. Kridel, A. E. Arcury-Quandt, M. E. Robbins, N. D. Kock, K. Wheeler, P. Peddi, A. Georgakilas, G. D. Kao, et al.
Identification and Biological Evaluation of a Novel and Potent Small Molecule Radiation Sensitizer via an Unbiased Screen of a Chemical Library
Cancer Res., September 15, 2007; 67(18): 8791 - 8799.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
JCOHome page
D. S. Shewach and T. S. Lawrence
Antimetabolite Radiosensitizers
J. Clin. Oncol., September 10, 2007; 25(26): 4043 - 4050.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Cancer Research Clinical Cancer Research
Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention Molecular Cancer Therapeutics
Molecular Cancer Research Cancer Prevention Research
Cancer Prevention Journals Portal Cancer Reviews Online
Annual Meeting Education Book Meeting Abstracts Online
Copyright © 2005 by the American Association for Cancer Research.