Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Development of new anti-cancer drugs

  • Review
  • Published:
Medical Oncology and Tumor Pharmacotherapy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In the first award lecture of the European Society of Medical Oncology (ESMO) the topic of new drug development and the role of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) was highlighted. New aspects in each of the drug development steps are discussed: acquisition, screening, formulation, toxicology and phase I studies. In the search for new compounds to treat human solid tumors it is proposed to use human tumors as xenografts in primary screening. Phenomena related to doxorubicin resistance are presented together with a new approach to circumvent this in the clinic. The value of biochemical modulation is discussed, exemplified by the combination of 5-fluorouracil and uridine. The complexity of the biological response modifiers and the importance of evaluating them adequately in the clinic is stressed. The EORTC has recently decided on requirements for the minimum toxicology for phase I trials of a new cytostatic drug in order to ensure safe and rapid evaluation of new anti-cancer compounds. The therapeutic intents of phase I studies are questionable and therefore the main goals of these studies to be reached quickly; possibly supported by a pharmacokinetic rational.

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. Venditti J M: Preclinical drug development: rationale and methods.Seminars in Oncology 8, 349 (1981).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Golding A, Venditti J M, MacDonald J S, Muggia F M, Henney J E and DeVita V T: Current results of the screening program at the division of cancer treatment, National Cancer Institute.Eur J Cancer 17, 129 (1981).

    Google Scholar 

  3. NCI planning to switch drug development emphasis from compound to human cancer oriented strategy.Cancer Lett 10, 1–3 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Shoemaker R H, Wolpert-DeFilippes M K, Kern D H, Lieber M M, Makuch R W, Melnick N R, Miller W T, Salmon S E, Simon R M, Venditti J M and Von Hoff D D: Application of a human tumor colony-forming assay to new drug screening.Cancer Res 45 2145 (1985).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Martin D S, Balis M E, Frei E, Goldin A, Heppner G H, Holland J F, Houghton J A, Houghton P J, Johnson R K, Mittelman A, Rustum Y, Sawyer R C, Schmid F A, Stolfi R L, Young C W: The role of murine tumor models in cancer treatment research. Presented at the Work Shop on Disease Oriented Antitumor Drug Discovery and Development, NCI, Bethesda, MD, U.S.A., 9–10 January (1985).

  6. DCT Board approves new screening program, natural product concepts.Cancer Lett 11, 4–6 (1985)

  7. Steel G G, Courtenay V D, Peckham M J: The response to chemotherapy of a variety of human tumor xenografts.Br J Cancer 47, 1 (1983).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Osieka R: Studies on drug resistance in a human melanoma xenograft system.Cancer Treat Rev 11 (A), 85 (1984).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Fiebig H H, Schuchhartdt C, Henss H, Fiedler L, Loehr G W: Comparison of tumor response in nude mice and in the patients.Behring Inst Mitt 74, 343 (1984).

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Shorthouse A J, Jones J M, Steel G G, Peckham M J: Experimental combination and single-agent chemotherapy in human lung-tumour xenografts.Br J Cancer 46, 35 (1982).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Bailey M J, Gazet J-C, Smith I E, Steel G G: Chemotherapy of human breast-carcinoma xenografts.Br J Cancer 42, 530 (1980).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Nowak K, Peckham M J, Steel G G: Variation in response of colorectal carcinoma to chemotherapy.Br J Cancer 37, 576 (1978).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Braakhuis B J M, Snow G B: Current therapy series (In press)

  14. Boven E: Human ovarian cancer xenografts in nude mice. Application of a new model in the selection of novel agents for ovarian cancer. Rodopi, Amsterdam (1986).

    Google Scholar 

  15. Giovanella B C, Stehlin J S, Shepard R C, Williams L J: Correlation between response to chemotherapy of human tumors in patients and in nude mice.Cancer 52, 1146 (1983).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Boven E, Vijgh W J F van der, Nauta M M, Schlüper H M M, Pinedo H M: Comparative activity and distribution studies of five platinum analogues in nude mice bearing human ovarian carcinoma xenografts.Cancer Res 45, 86 (1985).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Tsuruo T, Iida H, Nojiri M, Tsukagoshi S, Sakurai Y: Circumvention of vincristine and adriamycin resistancein vitro andin vivo by calcium influx blockers.Cancer Res 43, 2905 (1983).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Peters G J, van Dijk J, van Groeningen C, Laurensse E J, Leyva A, Lankelma J, Pinedo H M: Toxicity and antitumor effects of 5-fluorouracil and its rescue by uridine, in:Purine and Pyrimidine Metabolism in Man, V, Part B, 121 (1986).

  19. Martin D S, Stolfi F L, Sawyer R V, Spiegelman F, Jung C W: High dose 5-fluorouracil with delayed uridine rescue in mice.Cancer Res 42, 3964 (1982)

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Kok R M, De Jong A P J M, Van Groeningeu C J, Peters G J, Lankelma J: Highly sensitive determination of 5-fluorouracil in human plasma by capillary gas chromatography and negative ion chemical ionization mass spectometry.J Chromatogr 343, 59 (1985).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Oldham R K, Thurman B G, Talmadge J E, Stevenson H C, Foon K A: Lymphokines, monoclonal antibodies, and other biological response modifiers in the treatment of cancer.Cancer 54, 2795 (1984).

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Colcher D, Zalutsky M, Kaplan W, Kufe D, Austin F, Schlom J: Radiolocalization of human mammary tumors in athymic mice by a monoclonal antibody.Cancer Res 43, 736 (1983).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Meeker T, Lowder J, Cleary M L, Stewart S, Warnke R, Sklar J, Levy R: Emergence of idiotype variants during treatment of B-cell lymphoma with antiidiotype antibodies.New Engl J Med 312, 1658 (1985).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Rozencweig M, Von Hoff D D, Staquet M J, Guarino A M, Schein P S, Penta J S, Golding A, Muggia F, DeVita V T, Freireich E J: Animal toxicology for early clinical trials with anticancer agents.Cancer Clin Trials 4, 21 (1981).

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Lelieveld P, Velzen D van, Vijgh W J F van der, Klein I, Pinedo H M, Putten L M van: Toxicology of 5 platinum derivatives in dogs.Invest New Drugs 2, 101 (1984).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Collins J M, Zaharko D S, Dedrick R L, Chabner B A: Potential roles for preclinical pharmacology in phase I trials.Cancer Treatment Rep 70, 73 (1986).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Oncology, Free University Hospital, P.O. Box 7057, 1007 MB, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

    H. M. Pinedo

Authors
  1. H. M. Pinedo
    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

Pinedo, H.M. Development of new anti-cancer drugs. Med. Oncol. & Tumor Pharmacother. 3, 63–69 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02934555

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02934555

Key words

Search

Navigation