Advertisement

Targeted Drug Therapy in Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

  • Mary V. Relling
  • Ching-Hon Pui
  • William E. Evans
Conference paper
Part of the Haematology and Blood Transfusion / Hämatologie und Bluttransfusion book series (HAEMATOLOGY, volume 37)

Abstract

Pediatric acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is one of the most drug-responsive cancers, with approximately 70% of children being cured with chemotherapy alone (Pui and Crist, 1994). Focussing on the collective good responsiveness, however, may obscure the fact that there remain children who are not cured, and there are children who experience excessive toxicity from regimens that are well tolerated by the majority of children. Of the many factors that can affect how an individual responds to a particular ALL treatment regimen, one factor may be variability in the pharmacokinetics of antineoplastic agents. We describe herein our studies of whether overall clinical outcome is related to pharmacokinetic variability.

Keywords

Acute Myeloid Leukemia Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia Systemic Exposure Conventional Dose Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Abromowitch M, Ochs J, Pui C-H, Kalwinsky D, Rivera GK, Fairclough D, Look AT, Hustu O, Murphy SB, Evans WE, Dahl GV, Bowman WP. High-dose methotrexate improves clinical outcome in children with acute lymphoblastic Leukemia: St. Jude Total Therapy Study X. Med Pediatr Oncol 16: 297–303, 1988.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Camitta B, Leventhal B, Lauer S, et al. Intermediate-dose intravenous methotrexate and mercaptopurine therapy for non-T, non-B acute lymphocytic leukemia of childhood: a Pediatric Oncology Group study. J Clin Oncol 7: 1539–44, 1989.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    D’Argenio DZ, A. Schumitzky. A program package for simulation and parameter estimation in pharmacokinetic systems. Computer Programs in Biomedicine. 9, 115–134 (1979).PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Evans WE, Rodman JR, Relling MV, Crom WR, Rivera GK, Crist WM, Pui C-H. Individualized dosages of chemotherapy as a strategy to improve response for acute lymphocytic leukemia. Semin Hematology 1991a; 28: (suppl 4) 15–21.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Evans WE, Crom WR, Abromowitch M, Dodge R, Look T, Bowman P, George SL, Clinical pharmacodynamics of high-dose methotrexate in acute lymphocytic leukemia: Identification of a concentration-effect relationship. N Engl J Med 314: 471–477, 1986.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Evans WE, Abromowitch M, Crom WR, Relling MV, Bowman WP, Pui C-H, Ochs J, Dodge R. Clinical pharmacodynamic studies of high-dose methotrexate in acute lymphocytic leukemia. NCI Monogr 5: 81–85, 1987.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Evans WE, Horner M, Chu YQ, Kalwinsky D, Roberts WM. Altered mercaptopurine metabolism, toxicity and dosage requirements in a thiopurine methyltransferase-deficient child with acute lymphocytic leukemia. J. Peds. 119: 985–989. 1991b.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Evans WE, Pui C-H, Schell MJ. MTX clearance more important for intermediate-risk ALL (Letter). J Clin Oncol 8: 1115–1116, 1990.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Feickert HJ, Bettoni C, Schrappe M, Reiter A, Ludwig W-D, Bode U, Ebell W, Riehm H. Event-free survival of children with T-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia after introduction of high dose methotrexate in multicenter trial ALL-BFM 86. ASCO Proc 12: 317, 1993.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Lennard L, and Lilleyman JS. Variable mercaptopurine metabolism and treatment outcome in childhood lymphoblastic leukemia. J Clin Oncol 1989; 7: 1816–23.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Pui CH, Riberio R, Hancock ML, Rivera GK, Evans WE, Raimondi, S, David R. Head, Fred G. Behm, M. Hazem Mahmoud, John T Sandlund, William Crist: Acute myeloid leukemia in children treated with epipodophyllotoxins for acute lymphocytic leukemia. N. Engl. J. Med. 325: 1682–7, 1991.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pui C-H, Crist WM. Biology and treatment of acute lymphoblastic leukemia. J Peds (in press) 1994.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Relling MV, Evans R, Desiderio D, Dass C, Nemec and J. Human cytochrome P450 metabolism of teniposide and etoposide. J Pharmacol Exp Ther 1992; 261: 491–96.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Rodman JH, Abromowich M, Sinkule JA et al. Clinical Pharmacodynamics os Continuous Infusion Teniposide: Systemic Exposure as a Determinant of Response in a Phase I trial. J Clin Oncol. 7: 1007–1014, 1987.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Sinkule J, Evans WE. High performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) assay of cytosine arabinoside. J Chrom 274: 87–93, 1983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Sinkule JA, Evans WE. High-performance liquid chromatographic analysis of the semi-synthetic epipodophyllotoxins, teniposide (VM26) and etoposide (VP16) using electrochemical detection. J Pharm Sci 73: 164–168, 1984.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Mary V. Relling
    • 1
  • Ching-Hon Pui
    • 1
  • William E. Evans
    • 1
  1. 1.St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital and Colleges of Pharmacy and MedicineUniversity of TennesseeMemphisUSA

Personalised recommendations