Departments of 1 Haematology, Oncology and Transfusion Medicine, 3 Ophthalmology and 4 General Pathology, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Berlin; 2 Department of Internal Medicine, Medical University of Lübeck, Lübeck, Germany
* Correspondence to: Dr K. Jahnke, Department of Haematology, Oncology and Transfusion Medicine, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Campus Benjamin Franklin, Hindenburgdamm 30, D-12200 Berlin, Germany. Tel: +49-30-8445-2337; Fax: +49-30-8445-4468; E-mail: kristoph.jahnke{at}charite.de
![]() |
Abstract |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Patients and methods: We prospectively evaluated the efficacy and aqueous penetration of intravenous IFO, oral TRO and their active 4-hydroxy (4-OH) metabolites in 10 patients with IOL. Doses varied from 1500 to 2000 mg/m2/day on days 13 for IFO and from 150 to 400 mg/day (continuous or intermittent administration) for TRO. Four patients had newly diagnosed disease, and six had relapsed after pretreatment.
Results: All patients responded to first treatment with IFO or TRO, and both of two patients responded to re-treatment with IFO on ocular relapse. Progression-free survival from the first treatment with IFO or TRO was 618 months. In six of six patients, 4-OH metabolites were detected in the aqueous humor at a concentration of 0.321.56 µM immediately after IFO infusion with an aqueous/serum ratio of 0.190.54. 4-OH metabolites could be detected in one of three patients at a concentration of 7.2 µM 316 h after ingestion of TRO.
Conclusions: IFO and TRO are active in IOL. IOL patients evidence aqueous penetration of 4-OH metabolites after intravenous administration of IFO.
Key words: aqueous, ifosfamide, intraocular lymphoma, trofosfamide
![]() |
Introduction |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Compared with local treatment, systemic chemotherapy enables simultaneous treatment of the prognosis-determining intracranial disease with a relatively low risk of ocular toxicity. Ifosfamide (IFO) and trofosfamide (TRO), which are alkylating oxazaphosphorine derivatives, have been successfully used to treat non-Hodgkin lymphomas [68
]. They are prodrugs which require hydroxylation at the cyclic carbon-4 position by hepatic cytochrome P-450 isoenzymes [8
]. A penetration of IFO and TRO through the bloodbrain barrier (BBB) can be assumed based on the lipid solubility, small molecular size, and minimal binding to plasma and tissue proteins. Active metabolites of IFO were detected in 89% of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) samples in a study of children with acute lymphoblastic leukaemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, medulloblastoma and rhabdomyosarcoma; however, a high degree of interpatient variation was observed [9
]. Since there is a free exchange between intercellular brain fluid and CSF, drug concentration in the CSF is generally regarded as a useful estimation of intracerebral tumour exposure to systematically administered cytostatics [9
]. Based on this fact, IFO was included in a chemotherapy protocol for PCNSL and proved to be active against this lymphoma entity [10
]. The ocular penetration of IFO and its metabolites has never been evaluated, but appears probable when the similarities of the bloodretinal barrier (BRB) and the BBB are taken into consideration [11
].
After oral administration, TRO is mainly metabolized to its active 4-hydroxy derivative IFO and, in smaller amounts, to another active metabolite 4-hydroxy (4-OH)-IFO. Compared with IFO, TRO seems to be much more strongly hydroxylated to the tumoristatically active 4-OH derivatives with a 2030 times higher mean area under the curve and maximum concentration after TRO administration [12, 13
]. Thus a better ocular penetration of TRO may be assumed. Both drugs are usually well tolerated, with side-effects being restricted to dose-dependent haematotoxicity and, rarely, haemorrhagic cystitis, nausea and vomiting [6
, 7
]. Activity of TRO against PIOL has already been demonstrated in two patients [14
]. The present study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of IFO and TRO in IOL patients and the aqueous penetration of the 4-OH metabolites.
![]() |
Patients and methods |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
IFO was given as a i.v. infusion for 1 h at a dose of 15002000 mg/m2/day on days 13 every 3 weeks. TRO was given orally to those requesting outpatient treatment as one of two schedules: 150 mg/day continuously or 400 mg/day on days 15 followed by a 5 day drug-free interval. Safety measures were as follows: complete blood count every 2 weeks and additional serum electrolytes, creatinine and liver transaminases before each course in patients treated with IFO, and complete blood count, serum creatinine, electrolytes and liver transaminases every 4 weeks in patients treated with TRO. Ophthalmological evaluation was performed after every second treatment course during IFO therapy, every 4 weeks in patients on TRO and every 3 months during follow-up. The primary endpoint was ocular response; secondary endpoints were response duration and survival. Complete remission (CR) was defined as complete resolution of intraocular lymphoma manifestations on ophthalmoscopy for a minimum of 4 weeks without prior or concomitant steroid medication. Partial remission (PR) required a decrease in vitreous cells or retinal infiltrates with persistent malignant or suspicious cells. Progressive disease was defined as an increase in size and/or number of lymphoma infiltrates. Stable disease included all other conditions [15]. Progression-free survival was measured from start of treatment to ocular disease progression or death as a result of lymphoma progression. Survival was measured from the first treatment with IFO/TRO to death or last follow-up.
In patients 16, after having obtained 5 ml of blood as negative control, blood samples (5 ml) and a sample of aqueous humour (100 µl) were drawn immediately after infusion of IFO for 1 h. Another blood sample was collected 2 h later. In patients 810, the aqueous humour sample was collected together with 5 ml of blood 416 h after TRO ingestion. Patient 7 refused the puncture. All samples were immediately (bedside) spiked with trichloroacetate (10% dilution) to avoid rapid decay of the 4-OH metabolites. Blood samples were shaken vigorously and centrifuged at 4g for 5 min. All samples were immediately stored at 70°C until analysis. IFO concentrations were analysed by gas chromatography, and the 4-OH metabolites were assayed by high-performance liquid chromatography as previously described [16, 17
].
![]() |
Results |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
|
Toxicity was mainly haematological; however, grade 3 leucopenia occurred in only one patient. Other toxicities were nausea up to grade 2 in two patients and grade 2 haemorrhagic cystitis in one patient.
4-OH metabolites were detected in the aqueous humour samples at a concentration of 0.321.56 µM immediately after IFO infusion with an aqueous/serum ratio of 0.190.54 in six of six patients (Table 2). 4-OH metabolites at a concentration of 7.2 µM could be detected in one of three patients 416 h after ingestion of TRO.
|
![]() |
Discussion |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
Data on ocular penetration of cytostatics from the systemic circulation are limited to two reports. In the study by Batchelor et al. [24], micromolar MTX concentrations were reached in both ocular chambers with four remissions persisting after
8 to
36 months in eight of eight patients with PIOL treated with HDMTX [24
]. In the case report by Bauman et al. [25
], therapeutic levels were documented in the aqueous from the anterior chamber and the vitreous, and a response for
15 months was achieved following systemic application of HDAra-C in one patient [25
]. Applying very high doses of cytostatics with haematopoietic stem cell support may result in better intraocular penetration and longer disease control. Nine of 12 patients treated with high-dose thiotepa, busulfan and cyclophosphamide for refractory or relapsed PIOL achieved CR with a median survival of
53 months [26
]. However, systemic toxicity was considerable; five of seven patients aged
60 years died during therapy. A pharmacokinetic analysis was not performed in this study.
Here, we demonstrate an aqueous penetration of active 4-OH metabolites after intravenous administration of IFO. Measuring vitreous drug levels would have been the most appropriate proof of drug penetration into the lymphoma sites. We have chosen the drug-level measurement in the anterior chamber since it is significantly less invasive and troublesome than vitreous aspirates. According to the most recent concept of the BAB [19], aqueous drug concentration in the anterior chamber possibly only provides an indirect estimation of penetration into the ocular lymphoma sites, which are the retina and the vitreous. For lipophilic drugs such as IFO and TRO, whose penetration from blood into ocular tissues is much less restricted compared with hydrophilic drugs, the concentration in the posterior eye segment presumably approaches that in the anterior chamber. This has been confirmed by Mian et al. [27
] who measured similar concentrations of fluconazole, another lipophilic small-molecule drug, in the vitreous and aqueous of the anterior chamber after systemic application. In contrast, levels of hydrophilic MTX in the vitreous were 1351% of the concentration in the aqueous in four of six evaluable patients, and higher or similar concentrations in the vitreous compared with the aqueous were measured in one patient each in the study by Batchelor et al. [24
].
There have not yet been any data on the ocular penetration of IFO and TRO or its metabolites. After a single short i.v. infusion, the terminal half-life of IFO in the serum ranged from 4 to 8 h with a peak plasma concentration of 15 µM and a wide interindividual variation [28]. Our data certainly support the wide variation of concentrations found, but serum IFO concentrations after i.v. administration were higher than expected. In contrast with IFO, 4-OH-IFO is extremely unstable in blood. Thus relatively low peak plasma concentrations with wide interindividual variations (1.52.7 µM) were found after applying therapeutic IFO doses [28
], which is in agreement with our data. In the present study, IFO infusion led to aqueous 4-OH-IFO concentrations ranging from 19% to 54% of the corresponding serum concentrations. It is unclear to what extent the ocular penetration of IFO and its 4-OH metabolites measured in this study was influenced by the breakdown of the BRB by lymphoma infiltration or previous diagnostic surgery. Better penetration of several drugs into eyes affected by a malignant or inflammatory disease has been reported [11
].
Neither TRO nor its metabolites could be detected in either serum or aqueous humour in two of three patients. This is most probably due to an inadequate interval between TRO ingestion and sampling. In our patients, this interval ranged from 4 to 16 h for logistic reasons (long distance between the patients' homes and our institution, inadequate adherence to physician's instructions). This must be considered an important bias, since TRO has a fast metabolism with a terminal half-life of only 1 h [16]. However, the only patient (patient 8) in whom aqueous 4-OH-IFO levels were detectable after TRO had the longest interval between ingestion and sampling. This patient was an 83-year-old obese female. The elimination half-life of IFO has been reported to be prolonged in adipose women (body weight >25% of the ideal value) [29
]. Furthermore, slowed IFO metabolism in elderly patients may play a role in this case, even though no correlation was found between age and systemic IFO clearance in patients aged 4071 years [30
]. Interactions with other drugs may provide another possible explanation, but reports on drug interactions with IFO and TRO in humans are rare [31
]. Only one of our patients treated with TRO (patient 8) was regularly taking other drugs (nifedipine and spironolactone). However, interactions with IFO or TRO have not yet been reported for either drug.
Our study demonstrates activity of IFO and TRO against IOL, even if long-term control of this highly aggressive tumour can probably not be achieved by monotherapy. Because of their low toxicity, both drugs may represent suitable combination partners for other cytostatics used for PCNSL and IOL treatment (e.g. HDMTX). As for TRO, prolonged exposure to the drug by continuous administration may be important for tumour regression, as postulated by others [23]. Furthermore, the fact that TRO can be administered on an outpatient basis renders it a candidate for maintenance treatment in PCNSL and IOL. However, a general treatment recommendation for IFO and TRO cannot be given based on only 10 treated patients. The standard treatment for IOL still remains to be defined. Further studies should be performed to assess the effectiveness of IFO and TRO in IOL patients.
Received for publication June 6, 2005. Revision received August 2, 2005. Accepted for publication August 4, 2005.
![]() |
References |
---|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
---|
2. Coupland SE, Heimann H, Bechrakis NE. Primary intraocular lymphoma: a review of the clinical, histopathological and molecular biological features. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2004; 242: 901913.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
3. Jaffe ES, Harris NL, Stein H, Vardiman JW. World Health Organization Classification of Tumours. Pathology and Genetics of Tumours of Haematopoietic and Lymphoid Tissues. Lyon: IARC Press 2001.
4. Eby NL, Grufferman S, Flannelly CM et al. Increasing incidence of primary brain lymphoma in the U.S. Cancer 1988; 62: 26412665.
5. Ferreri AJ, Blay JY, Reni M et al. Relevance of intraocular involvement in the management of primary central nervous system lymphomas. Ann Oncol 2002; 13: 531538.
6. Rodeghiero F, Elice F. Ifosfamide in hematological malignancies of adults. Oncology 2003; 65 (Suppl 2): 8593.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
7. Sneller V, Armitage J. Current role and future perspectives for ifosfamide in the treatment of malignant non-Hodgkin's lymphoma-results from an expert meeting. Ann Oncol 2003; 14 (Suppl 1): i1i3.
8. Wagner A, Hempel G, Boos J. Trofosfamide: a review of its pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic properties and therapeutic potential in the oral treatment of cancer. Anticancer Drugs 1997; 8: 419431.[ISI][Medline]
9. Yule SM, Price L, Pearson AD, Boddy AV. Cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide metabolites in the cerebrospinal fluid of children. Clin Cancer Res 1997; 3: 19851992.
10. Schlegel U, Pels H, Glasmacher A et al. Combined systemic and intraventricular chemotherapy in primary CNS lymphoma: a pilot study. J Neurol Neurosurg Psychiatry 2001; 71: 118122.
11. Cunha-Vaz J. The blood-ocular barriers. Surv Ophthalmol 23; 1979: 279296.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
12. Preiss R, Baumann F, Stefanovic D et al. Investigations on the pharmacokinetics of trofosfamide and its metabolites: first report of 4-hydroxy-trofosfamide kinetics in humans. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2004; 53: 496502.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
13. Kurowski V, Wagner T. Comparative pharmacokinetics of ifosfamide, 4-hydroxyifosfamide, chloroacetaldehyde, and 2- and 3-dechloroethylifosfamide in patients on fractionated intravenous ifosfamide therapy. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1993; 33: 3642.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
14. Jahnke K, Bechrakis NE, Coupland SE et al. Treatment of primary intraocular lymphoma with oral trofosfamide: report of two cases and review of the literature. Graefes Arch Clin Exp Ophthalmol 2004; 242: 771776.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
15. Abrey LE, Batchelor TT, Ferreri AJM et al. Report of an international workshop to standardize baseline evaluation and response criteria for primary CNS lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2005; 23: 50345043.
16. Brinker A, Kisro J, Letsch C, Brüggemann SK, Wagner T. New insights into the clinical pharmacokinetics of trofosfamide. Int J Clin Pharmacol Ther 2002; 40: 376381.[ISI][Medline]
17. Kaijser GP, Ter Riet PG, de Kraker J et al. Determination of 4-hydroxyifosfamide in biological matrices by high-performance liquid chromatography. J Pharm Biomed Anal 1997; 15: 773781.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
18. Raviola G. The structural basis of the bloodocular barriers. Exp Eye Res 1977; 25 (Suppl): 2763.[ISI][Medline]
19. Freddo TF. Shifting the paradigm of the blood-aqueous barrier. Exp Eye Res 2001; 73: 581592.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
20. De Smet MD, Vancs VS, Kohler D et al. Intravitreal chemotherapy for the treatment of recurrent intraocular lymphoma. Br J Ophthalmol 1999; 83: 448451.
21. Fishburne BC, Wilson DJ, Rosenbaum JT, Neuwelt EA. Intravitreal methotrexate as an adjunctive treatment of intraocular lymphoma. Arch Ophthalmol 1997; 115: 11521156.[Abstract]
22. Smith JR, Rosenbaum JT, Wilson DJ et al. Role of intravitreal methotrexate in the management of primary central nervous system lymphoma with ocular involvement. Ophthalmology 2002; 109: 17091716.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
23. Mason JO, Fischer DH. Intrathecal chemotherapy for recurrent central nervous system lymphoma. Ophthalmology 2003; 110: 12411244.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
24. Batchelor TT, Kolak G, Ciordia R et al. High-dose methotrexate for intraocular lymphoma. Clin Cancer Res 2003; 9: 711715.
25. Baumann MA, Ritch PS, Hande KR et al. Treatment of intraocular lymphoma with high-dose Ara-C. Cancer 1986; 57: 12731275.[ISI][Medline]
26. Soussain C, Suzan F, Hoang-Xuan K et al. Results of intensive chemotherapy followed by hematopoietic stem-cell rescue in 22 patients with refractory or recurrent primary CNS lymphoma or intraocular lymphoma. J Clin Oncol 2001; 19: 742749.
27. Mian UK, Mayers M, Garg Y et al. Comparison of fluconazole pharmacokinetics in serum, aqueous humor, vitreous humor, and cerebrospinal fluid following a single dose and at steady state. J Ocul Pharmacol Ther 1998; 14: 459471.[ISI][Medline]
28. Wagner T. Ifosfamide clinical pharmacokinetics. Clin Pharmacokinet 1994; 26: 439456.[ISI][Medline]
29. Lind MJ, Margison JM, Cerny T et al. Prolongation of ifosfamide elimination half-life in obese patients due to altered drug distribution. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 1989; 25: 139142.[CrossRef][ISI][Medline]
30. Lind MJ, Margison JM, Cerny T et al. The effect of age on the pharmacokinetics of ifosfamide. Br J Clin Pharmacol 1990; 30: 140143.[ISI][Medline]
31. Fleming RA. An overview of cyclophosphamide and ifosfamide pharmacology. Pharmacotherapy 1997; 17: 146S154S.[Medline]
|