Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Amifostine”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1999

Supportive use of amifostine in patients with head and neck tumors undergoing radio-chemotherapy. Is it possible to limit the duration of the application of amifostine?

BACKGROUND: Amifostine is a new cancer-supporting agent to protect normal tissue in patients receiving radio-chemotherapy. The main question of our study is whether the application of amifostine can be limited on the duration of chemotherapy in patients with advanced head and neck tumors undergoing radio-chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In a randomized study 14 patients were treated with amifostine (500 mg, day 1 to 5 and 29 to 33) during concurrent radio-chemotherapy with carboplatin (70 mg/m2, day 1 to 5 and 29 to 33), 14 patients were treated without amifostine. The analyzed parameters were dermatitis, mucositis, skin temperature, white blood and platelet count, creatinine and scintigram of salivary glands. Median survival of the amifostine group was 19 months, of the control group 10 months. RESULTS: There were no relevant differences in all analyzed parameters between both arms of the study. CONCLUSION: Our form of amifostine application is probably not able to obtain a relevant reduction of the toxicity of radio-chemotherapy.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2006

Radiotherapy alone, versus radiotherapy with amifostine 3 times weekly, versus radiotherapy with amifostine 5 times weekly: A prospective randomized study in squamous cell head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: The main objective of this study was to investigate whether nondaily intravenous administration of amifostine was as effective as daily intravenous administration with regard to the reduction of the incidence of Grade 2 or greater xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancer. METHODS: Ninety-one patients who received bilateral irradiation for head and neck cancer were included. Thirty patients received no amifostine (AMI-0), 31 patients received amifostine at a dose of 200 mg/m2 3 times weekly (AMI-3), and 30 patients received amifostine at a dose of 200 mg/m2 daily (5 times weekly) (AMI-5). Acute and late xerostomia and quality of life (QOL) were assessed at baseline, 6 weeks later, and at 6-month intervals from 6 months to 24 months postradiotherapy. RESULTS: Grade 2 or greater late xerostomia differed significantly at 6 months (AMI-0 74% vs. AMI-3 67% vs. AMI-5 52%; P = .03), but not thereafter. During follow-up, patient-rated xerostomia deteriorated more in AMI-0 patients (mean difference score:, 52 for AMI-0 compared with 25 for AMI-3, and 29 for AMI-5; P = .01). Nausea and emesis were reported most frequently as side effect, but Grade 2 or greater toxicity was observed in only 4 patients. However, 28% of patients discontinued amifostine before the end of radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Long-term, patient-rated xerostomia was less for the AMI-3 and AMI-5 groups through 2-year follow-up, but no difference was noted between the AMI-3 and AMI-5 groups. For late xerostomia according to the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group criteria, the same effect was observed at 6 months, but not thereafter.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Assessment and management of cutaneous reactions with amifostine administration: findings of the ethyol (amifostine) cutaneous treatment advisory panel (ECTAP).

PURPOSE: To review reports of severe skin reactions during amifostine treatment. METHODS AND MATERIAL: The expert panel reviewed postmarketing reports of skin reactions and discussed strategies for evaluation and management. RESULTS: Between 1994 and April 2002, 35 events were classified as severe skin reactions worldwide: erythema multiforme (8), Stevens-Johnson syndrome (10), toxic epidermal necrolysis (11), toxicoderma (3), and bullae (3). Unadjusted incidences were 6-9 per 10,000 radiotherapy patients and 0.8-1 per 10,000 chemotherapy patients. In 10 patients (29%) amifostine was continued after cutaneous signs and symptoms appeared. CONCLUSIONS: Practical recommendations for practicing clinicians were developed. Cutaneous evaluation for rash, ulceration, or lesions-particularly on lips/mucosa, palmar/plantar surfaces, and the trunk-should be performed before amifostine administration. Reactions can be classified as local injection site/radiation port reactions or non-injection site reactions; and non-injection site reactions with associated fever or constitutional symptoms must be differentiated from radiation-induced dermatitis or cutaneous reaction with another etiology. Amifostine should be permanently discontinued for severe skin reactions or reactions associated with constitutional symptoms not known to be due to any other etiology. Increased physician awareness, proper patient management, monitoring before administration, and early intervention/discontinuation for non-injection site reactions may reduce the incidence of cutaneous reactions and enhance amifostine safety.

Adolescent↗
PubMed1999

The potential of amifostine: from cytoprotectant to therapeutic agent.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Amifostine is an inorganic thiophosphate cytoprotective agent known chemically as ethanethiol, 2-[(3-aminopropyl)amino]dihydrogen phosphate. It is a pro-drug of free thiol that may act as a scavenger of free radicals generated in tissues exposed to cytotoxic drugs, and binds to reactive metabolites of such drugs. Amifostine was originally developed as a radioprotective agent in a classified nuclear warfare project. Following declassification of the project it was evaluated as a cytoprotective agent against toxicity of the alkylating drugs and cisplatin. In fact, pretreatment with amifostine was well tolerated and reduced the cumulative hematologic, renal and neurological toxicity associated with cisplatin, cyclophosphamide and vinblastine therapy of advanced and metastatic solid tumors. The objective of this review is to focus the importance of amifostine as a myeloprotective and cytoprotective drug during treatment with chemotherapeutics, presenting the most recent results, and to discuss the application of amifostine in the therapy of myelodysplastic syndromes. EVIDENCE AND INFORMATION SOURCES: The material analyzed in this study includes data published or under publication by the authors as full papers or clinical protocols. Articles and abstracts published in Journals covered by Medline constitute the other source of information. STATE OF THE ART AND PERSPECTIVES: Amifostine, formerly known as WR-2721, is an organic thiophosphate that was developed to protect normal tissues selectively against the toxicities of chemotherapy and radiation. Amifostine is a pro-drug that is dephosphorylated at the tissue site to its active metabolite by alkaline phosphatase. Differences in the alkaline phosphatase concentrations of normal versus tumor tissues can result in greater conversion of amifostine in normal tissues. Once inside the cell the free thiol provides an alternative target to DNA and RNA for the reactive molecules of alkylating or platinum agents and acts as a potent scavenger of the oxygen free radicals induced by ionizing radiation and some chemotherapies. Preclinical animal studies demonstrated that the administration of amifostine protected against a variety of chemotherapy-related toxicities including cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity, cisplatin-induced neurotoxicity, cyclophosphamide- and bleomycin-induced pulmonary toxicity, and the cytotoxicities (including cardiotoxicity) induced by doxorubicin and related chemotherapeutic agents. Amifostine was shown to protect a variety of animal species from lethal doses of radiation. Studies in tumor-bearing animals demonstrated that the administration of amifostine results in cytoprotection without loss of antitumor activity. Multiple phase I studies were carried out with amifostine in combination with chemotherapy for various neoplasms. Appropriate doses of amifostine resulted to be 740-910 mg/m(2) in a single dose regimen, and 340 mg/m(2) in a multiple dose regimen. Amifostine afforded not only hematologic protection, but also other organ protection from cytotoxic agents such as nephrotoxicity, mucositis and peripheral neuropathy from cisplatin. Many studies have been performed to investigate cytoprotective efficacy of amifostine. In brief, amifostine gives hematologic protection from cyclophosphamide, carboplatin, mitomycin C, fotemustine and radiotherapy; renal and peripheral nerve protection from cisplatin; mucosa, skin, and salivary gland from radiotherapy. In phase I/II studies these properties have been confirmed, together with a generally good tolerability of the drug, hypotension being the most common side effect. It has been observed that amifostine possibly enhances the anti-tumor effect of carboplatin, nitrogen mustard, melphalan, and cisplatin combined with 5-FU or vinblastine. For all these characteristics, amifostine is at present broadly used as supportive treatment during chemotherapy, in lymphomas and solid tumors, and its spec

Amifostine↗
PubMed1999

Effects of amifostine on perfused isolated rat heart and on acute doxorubicin-induced cardiotoxicity.

PURPOSE: To determine the effects of amifostine on an isolated perfused rat-heart model and its protective activity with regard to cardiotoxic doxorubicin perfusion. METHODS: Langendorff constant-pressure isolated rat-heart preparations were used to analyze the effects of the drugs during a 40-min period of perfusion after a 20-min stabilization interval. The first study was conducted with amifostine alone (controls and 10(-6), 10(-5), and 10(-4) M amifostine; n=6 in each group). The second study was conducted with amifostine and doxorubicin (controls, 2.5 x 10(-5) M doxorubicin, 2.5 x 10(-5) M doxorubicin and 10(-5) M amifostine, and 2.5 x 10(-5) M doxorubicin and 10(-4) M amifostine; n=4 in each group). RESULTS: Amifostine had no significant effect on hemodynamic parameters at 10(-6), 10(-5), and 10(-4) M concentrations. However. amifostine increased the coronary flow expressed as a percentage+/-SEM of the baseline flow as follows: 82+/-4% for controls, 95+/-6% for 10(-6) M amifostine, (P=0.13), 111+/-4% for 10(-5) M amifostine (P < 0.01), and 104+/-3% for 10(-6) M amifostine (P < 0.01). When we commenced an amifostine perfusion 20 min in advance of and then during a 40-min perfusion with doxorubicin, at a cardiotoxic concentration of 2.5 x 10(-5) M the left ventricular pressures (LVDP, expressed as percentages +/-SEM of the baseline LVDP before doxorubicin) were 55+/-3% for the doxorubicin controls, 68+/-2% for doxorubicin with 10(-5) M amifostine (P=0.05), and 80+/-3% for doxorubicin with 10(-4) M amifostine (P < 0.01). Whether this protective effect might be related to the known free-radical-scavenging activity of amifostine remains to be determined. CONCLUSION: On a Langendorff-type model of rat heart, 10(-5) and 10(-4) M amifostine alone induced a coronary dilation and, when associated with a cardiotoxic concentration of 2.5 x 10(-5) M doxorubicin, 10(-5) and 10(-4) M amifostine displayed a cardioprotective effect.

Amifostine↗
PubMed2002

Phase II trial of subcutaneous amifostine in patients undergoing radiation therapy for head and neck cancer.

The availability of subcutaneously (SC) administered amifostine may present an advantage for radioprotectant therapy in head and neck cancer patients. In a randomized phase II trial comparing SC amifostine versus no amifostine in 140 patients undergoing radiation therapy for head and neck, thoracic, or pelvic cancers, amifostine treatment was associated with reductions in mucosal toxicity and delays in radiation therapy among the 19 patients with head and neck cancer, as well as in the thoracic and pelvic cancer groups. A phase II trial of SC amifostine in head and neck cancer was performed in a patient population (n = 54) similar to that studied in a phase III trial of intravenous amifostine to allow comparisons of outcomes. Acute xerostomia grade 2 occurred in 56% with SC amifostine and 51% with intravenous amifostine (78% in the no-amifostine group in phase III trial), with median time to onset being 40 days and 45 days, respectively (30 days with no amifostine), and cumulative radiation dose to onset being 58 Gy and 60 Gy (42 Gy with no amifostine), respectively. Amifostine SC was well tolerated, with three quarters of patients receiving > or =75% of the planned dose. Nausea, vomiting, and hypotension were less severe with SC amifostine, but cutaneous toxicity was more frequent. The reduction in radiation therapy-induced acute xerostomia with SC amifostine is similar to that with intravenous amifostine in patients with head and neck cancer. If cutaneous toxicity is judged an acceptable risk, SC amifostine may represent a second, more convenient option for treating physicians.

Adult↗
PubMed1996

Clinical effects of amifostine (Ethyol) in patients treated with carboplatin.

Amifostine is a compound that has been developed as a radio- and chemoprotectant. It is a prodrug, giving rise to the active thiol, WR-1065. Amifostine has been demonstrated to reduce the toxicity of ionising radiation, alkylating agents and platinum compounds. Preclinical studies have shown that amifostine can reduce the myelosuppression of carboplatin in a murine model tumour system without reducing the efficacy of therapy. In fact, in this model system, the antitumour effects of carboplatin against the OVCAR-3 cell line were actually greater with than without amifostine. Based on these preclinical studies, clinical trials of the combination of carboplatin and amifostine have been undertaken. A phase I trial of carboplatin and amifostine in pretreated patients demonstrated that two doses of amifostine 740 mg/m2/dose may be safely administered with carboplatin. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of carboplatin that could be administered with amifostine was 500 mg/m2, suggesting the hypothesis that amifostine increases the MTD of carboplatin from 400 to 500 mg/m2. To test this hypothesis, a randomised trial of carboplatin 500 mg/m2 versus carboplatin 500 mg/m2 plus two doses of amifostine 910 mg/m2/dose has been performed. Analysis of this trial is not complete, but initial results suggest a reduction of first-cycle thrombocytopenia, from a median platelet nadir value of 85 x 10(9) cells/l for carboplatin alone to 144 x 10(9) cells/l for the combination of carboplatin plus amifostine. Similarly, the median first-cycle granulocyte nadir was 1.6 x 10(9) cells/l without amifostine but 2.4 x 10(9) cells/l with the cytoprotectant. Neither of these first-cycle differences was statistically significant, but these effects are being maintained with repeated dosing, so that an increase in delivered cumulative carboplatin dose seems possible with the use of amifostine. These promising data indicate that continued studies of amifostine with carboplatin are justified and that the effects of amifostine on the thrombocytopenia produced by carboplatin-containing combination chemotherapy regimens should be investigated.

Amifostine↗
PubMed2001

Phase I trial of a twice-daily regimen of amifostine with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide chemotherapy in children with refractory carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Amifostine protects normal tissues against chemotherapy and radiation-induced toxicity without loss of antitumor effects. Evidence suggests that multiple daily doses of amifostine may improve its cytoprotective effects. The purpose of this study was to assess the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of twice-daily doses of amifostine with ifosfamide, carboplatin, and etoposide (ICE) chemotherapy for children with refractory malignancies and to determine the pharmacokinetic properties of amifostine, WR-1065, and the disulfide metabolites of amifostine. METHODS: Patients with refractory malignancies were treated with amifostine 15 minutes before and 2 hours after chemotherapy with ifosfamide (3 g/m(2) per dose on Days 1 and 2) and carboplatin (635 mg/m(2) on Day 3). Etoposide was administered on Days 1 and 2 (150 mg/m(2)). The starting dose of amifostine was 740 mg/m(2). Pharmacokinetic studies were performed after the first dose of amifostine. RESULTS: Twelve patients received 23 courses of ICE and amifostine. Dose-limiting toxicities for amifostine at 740 mg/m(2) were somnolence and anxiety. The other Grade 3 and 4 toxicities included asymptomatic, reversible hypocalcemia, vomiting, and reversible hypotension. At a dose of 600 mg/m(2), amifostine was well tolerated. Hypocalcemia, due to rapid, transient suppression of parathyroid hormone production, required close monitoring and aggressive intravenous calcium supplementation. Pharmacokinetic studies revealed high interpatient variability with rapid plasma clearance of amifostine and WR-1065. The median elimination half-life of amifostine (9.3 minutes) and WR-1065 (15 minutes) was much shorter than the disulfide metabolites (74.4 minutes). CONCLUSIONS: The recommended pediatric dose of amifostine for a twice-daily regimen is 600 mg/m(2) per dose (1200 mg/m(2)/day) with DLTs of anxiety and somnolence, lower than the previously recommended single dose of 1650 mg/m(2).

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

A randomized trial of amifostine in patients with high-dose VIC chemotherapy plus autologous blood stem cell transplantation.

This pilot study evaluates the degree of side effects during high-dose chemotherapy (HD-VIC) plus autologous bone marrow transplant (HDCT) and its possible prevention by the cytoprotective thiol-derivate amifostine. Additionally, the in-patient medical costs of both treatment arms were compared. 40 patients with solid tumours were randomized to receive HD-VIC chemotherapy with or without amifostine (910 mg/m(2)at day 1-3) given as a short infusion prior to carboplatin and ifosfamide. Patients were stratified according to pretreatment. HDCT consisted of an 18 h infusion of carboplatin (500 mg/m(2/)d over 18 h), ifosfamide (4 g/m(2)/d over 4 h) and etoposide (500 mg/m(2)/d) all given for 3 consecutive days. All patients received prophylactic application of G-CSF (5 microg kg(-1)subcutaneously) to ameliorate neutropenia after treatment. Patients were monitored for nephrotoxicity, gastrointestinal side effects, haematopoietic recovery, as well as frequency of fever and infections. The median fall of the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) was 10% from baseline in the amifostine group (105 to 95 ml min(-1)) and 37% in the control patient group (107 to 67 ml min(-1)) (P< 0.01). Amifostine-treated patients revealed a less pronounced increase in albumin and low molecular weight protein urinary excretion. Stomatitis grade III/IV occurred in 25% without versus 0% of patients with amifostine (P = 0.01). Acute nausea/vomiting was frequently observed immediately during or after the application of amifostine despite intensive antiemetic prophylaxis consisting of 5-HT3-receptor antagonists/dexamethasone/trifluorpromazine. However, delayed emesis occurred more often in the control patients. Engraftment of neutrophil (> 500 microl(-1))and thrombocytes (> 25 000 microl(-1))were observed at days 9 versus 10 and 10 versus 12, respectively, both slightly in favour of the amifostine arm. In addition, a lower number of days with fever and a shortened duration of hospital stay were observed in the amifostine arm. The reduction of acute toxicity observed in the amifostine arm resulted in 30% savings in costs for supportive care (Euro 4396 versus Euro 3153 per patient). Taking into account the drug costs of amifostine, calculation of in-patient treatment costs from the start of chemotherapy to discharge revealed additional costs of Euro 540 per patient in the amifostine arm. This randomized pilot study indicates that both organ and haematotoxicity of HD-VIC chemotherapy can be ameliorated by the use of amifostine. Additionally, a nearly complete preservation of GFR was observed in amifostine-treated patients which may be advantageous if repetitive cycles of HDCT are planned. Larger randomized trials evaluating amifostine cytoprotection during high-dose chemotherapy are warranted.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Radioprotective effects of amifostine in vitro and in vivo measured with the comet assay.

PURPOSE: The authors investigated whether a potential radioprotective effect of amifostine (WR-2721) after in vitro or in vivo administration can be detected with the comet assay. Moreover, it was determined whether radioprotection by WR-2721 is dependent on the concentration of amifostine or alkaline phosphatase (AP, the enzyme which activates the prodrug). Furthermore, the authors tried to detect possible interindividual differences in radioprotection by amifostine. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In vitro administration of amifostine: Freshly isolated lymphocytes from two healthy volunteers were incubated with different concentrations of AP (0-210 U/ml) and amifostine (0-5,000 microg/ml). IN VIVO ADMINISTRATION OF AMIFOSTINE: Blood samples were collected from six postoperative rectal cancer patients before and after intravenous administration of amifostine 500 mg (no pretreatment with radio- or chemotherapy). Leukocytes and lymphocytes were irradiated and repaired in vitro and investigated with the alkaline comet assay. The radioprotective effect was evaluated by calculating dose-modifying factors (DMFs) and the paired t-test. RESULTS: Amifostine alone did not alter the radiation-induced DNA damage in vitro. The addition of at least 0.5-1 U/ml AP was required. A significant radioprotective effect (p < 0.05) was seen after administration of amifostine in vitro for all concentrations investigated (250-5,000 microg/ml, initial DNA damage). A comparable radioprotective effect after in vivo administration of 500 mg amifostine was measured with a mean DMF of 0.87. Interindividual differences were present in vivo and in vitro. CONCLUSION: Amifostine 500 mg intravenously yields an adequate radioprotective concentration. The effect was only marginally improved by extreme concentrations of amifostine in in vitro experiments. The comet assay is capable of detecting small changes in radiosensitivity by amifostine.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

A Phase II trial of subcutaneous amifostine and radiation therapy in patients with head-and-neck cancer.

PURPOSE: Intravenous amifostine 200 mg/m2 reduces xerostomia in head-and-neck cancer patients. This Phase II study evaluated subcutaneous (s.c.) amifostine in a similar patient population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received amifostine 500 mg, administered as two 250-mg s.c. injections 60 min before once-daily radiation for head-and-neck cancer (50-70 Gy in 5-7 weeks). The primary endpoint was the incidence of > or =Grade 2 acute xerostomia. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients received s.c. amifostine and radiotherapy. The incidence of > or =Grade 2 acute xerostomia was 56% (95% CI, 43-69%) and the incidence of > or =Grade 2 late xerostomia at 1 year was 45% (95% CI, 29-61%). The incidence of acute xerostomia was lower than reported previously with no amifostine in a controlled study; rates of acute xerostomia were similar between s.c. and i.v. amifostine in the two studies. The rate of late xerostomia with s.c. amifostine was intermediate between rates for i.v. amifostine and no amifostine, and not statistically significantly different from either historical control. Grades 1-2 nausea and emesis were the most common amifostine-related adverse events. Grade 3 amifostine-related adverse events reported by >1 patient included: dehydration (11%); rash (6%); and weight decrease, mucositis, dyspnea, and allergic reaction (each 4%). Seven patients (13%) had serious cutaneous adverse events outside the injection site. One-year rates of locoregional control, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 78%, 75%, and 85%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous amifostine provides a well-tolerated yet simpler alternative to i.v. amifostine for reducing acute xerostomia in head-and-neck cancer patients.

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Serious adverse effects of amifostine during radiotherapy in head and neck cancer patients.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Amifostine has been shown to protect against xerostomia induced by radiotherapy for head and neck cancer, but its impact on the therapeutic index is unknown. This is the first report focusing on amifostine related adverse effects leading to discontinuation of amifostine treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty-nine patients from two centers irradiated for head and neck cancer received i.v.-infusions of amifostine prior to each radiation fraction. In a phase III study, two daily amifostine doses, 200 mg/m(2) (n = 21) and 340 mg/m(2) (n = 18), were compared for protection against radiation induced toxicity. Total radiation dose was 60-70Gy (2Gy per fraction), nine patients received concurrent chemotherapy with cisplatin/5-FU. amifostine was usually discontinued after >1 episode of serious toxicity during subsequent treatment sessions. RESULTS: In 16/39 patients (41%) amifostine was discontinued due to severe adverse effects, which led to discontinuation of the phase III study. In four of 16 patients radiotherapy was delayed due to amifostine related adverse effects for 1-3 days. Discontinuation occurred more often in patients receiving chemotherapy. The results led to a literature review for amifostine treatment during radiotherapy in head and neck cancer patients. Regarding our series and published series using an amifostine schedule comparable to ours, total discontinuation rate was 27% (57/214). Discontinuation was significantly influenced by chemotherapy (P = 0.007) but not by amifostine dose (P = 0.156). CONCLUSION: Daily i.v. administration of amifostine during radiotherapy in head and neck cancer is associated with a high rate of serious adverse effects leading to discontinuation of amifostine treatment and sometimes delay of radiotherapy.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Assessment of the protective effect of amifostine on radiation-induced pulmonary toxicity.

The objective of this study was to assess the radioprotective effects of amifostine in the rat model of radiation-induced lung injury using fractionated doses of radiation, to determine whether amifostine given before irradiation protects tumor from radiation cytotoxicity, and to determine whether changes in plasma levels of transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta correlate with radioprotective effect of amifostine. R3230 AC mammary adenocarcinoma was transplanted on the right posterior chest wall of female Fisher-344 rats. Both tumor-bearing and non-tumor-bearing animals were irradiated to the tumor or right lung using 4 MV photons and fractionated dose of 35 Gy/5 fractions/5 days. Animals with tumors and those without were randomized into 4 groups, respectively (8 to 10 rats per group), to receive (1) radiation alone; (2) radiation + amifostine; (3) amifostine alone; (4) sham radiation. Amifostine (150 mg/kg) was given intraperitoneally 30 minutes before each fraction of irradiation. The tumor size was measured twice a week. Breathing rate was assessed every 2 weeks. TGF-beta levels in plasma were assessed monthly after treatment. Six months after irradiation, animals were euthanized and lung tissue was processed for hydroxyproline content analysis. A significant increase in breathing frequency started 9 weeks after irradiation in animals that received radiation only. In the radiation + amifostine group, there was both a delay and a significantly lower peak in breathing frequency (P < .001). Hydroxyproline content was higher in the radiation-alone group than in rats given amifostine prior to radiation (P < .05). The TGF-beta levels in plasma showed an increase from 1 to 3 months after radiation, peaking at 2 months in the rats with (2.80 +/- 0.23) or without (5.32 +/- 1.21) amifostine compared to sham irradiation. TGF-beta levels were significantly lower at 1 to 3 months in rats receiving amifostine plus radiation versus those receiving radiation alone. Tumor growth delay and regrowth rate after radiation were not different between radiation-alone and radiation + amifostine groups. This study confirms the protective effect of amifostine in reducing radiation-induced pulmonary toxicity. No tumor protection was demonstrated after fractionated radiotherapy. The reduction in pulmonary injury with amifostine in paralleling lower plasma levels of TGF-beta, suggesting that monitoring plasma levels of this cytokine may reflect the efficacy of an intervention aimed at preventing radiation-induced lung injury.

Adenocarcinoma↗
PubMed2001

Amifostine: an update on its clinical status as a cytoprotectant in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy or radiotherapy and its potential therapeutic application in myelodysplastic syndrome.

UNLABELLED: Amifostine (WR-2721) is a cytoprotective agent that protects a broad range of normal tissues from the toxic effects of chemotherapy and radiotherapy without attenuating tumour response. This selective protection is due to the greater conversion and uptake of the active metabolite, WR- 1065, in normal versus neoplastic tissues. In a pivotal phase III trial, 242 patients with advanced ovarian cancer were randomised to receive treatment with cisplatin 100 mg/m2 and cyclophosphamide 1000 mg/m2 every 3 weeks with or without pretreatment with intravenous amifostine 910 mg/m2. Over 6 cycles of therapy, amifostine significantly reduced haematological, renal and neurological toxicities: treatment delays, treatment discontinuation and days in hospital related to these adverse events were also significantly reduced in patients receiving amifostine versus patients receiving chemotherapy alone. In another randomised phase III trial in 303 patients with head and neck cancer undergoing irradiation therapy (total dose 50 to 70Gy), pretreatment with intravenous amifostine 200 mg/m2 significantly reduced the incidence of acute and late grade > or =2 xerostomia. However, mucositis was not significantly reduced in amifostine recipients compared with patients receiving radiotherapy alone, although this has been shown in smaller randomised trials. Amifostine (340 mg/m2) also provided significant protection against pneumonitis and oesophagitis in patients with lung cancer receiving thoracic irradiation in a preliminary report from a phase III trial (n = 144). Other studies have demonstrated protective effects of amifostine in other tumour types and other chemotherapy, radiation and radiochemotherapy regimens; however, evidence is still limited in these indications. No evidence of tumour protection by amifostine has been demonstrated in any clinical trials. Amifostine has also been shown to stimulate haematopoietic stem cells and has been investigated as a therapy for patients with myelodysplastic syndrome in number of small preliminary studies. At the recommended dose and schedule, amifostine is generally well tolerated. Adverse effects are usually reversible and manageable and those most frequently experienced include nausea and vomiting, transient hypotension and somnolence and sneezing. CONCLUSION: The results of phase III trials have confirmed the safety and efficacy of amifostine as a cytoprotectant to ameliorate cisplatin-induced cumulative renal toxicity, for which it is the only agent proven to be effective, and neutropenia in patients with advanced ovarian cancer, and to reduce xerostomia in patients with head and neck cancer receiving irradiation therapy. Depending on the outcome of numerous ongoing clinical trials, amifostine may eventually find broader clinical applications, both as a cytoprotectant and as a potential therapy in myelodysplastic syndrome.

Amifostine↗
PubMed1995

A phase I trial of amifostine (WR-2721) and melphalan in children with refractory cancer.

Melphalan has a steep dose-response curve, but the use of high doses results in unacceptable myelosuppression. Strategies to circumvent this dose-limiting myelosuppression would allow for the administration of higher, more effective doses of melphalan. Amifostine (WR-2721) has been shown in preclinical studies to protect the bone marrow from the myelotoxicity of melphalan, and in clinical trials, to protect from the myelotoxicity of other alkylating agents. A Phase I trial of the combination of amifostine and melphalan was performed in children with refractory cancers to: (a) define the acute toxicities of amifostine and its maximum tolerated dose (MTD); and (b) to determine whether the dose of melphalan could be safely escalated when administered in combination with amifostine. Amifostine was administered i.v. as a 15-min infusion 30 min before melphalan. The starting dose of amifostine was 750 mg/m2, with planned dose escalations in 30% increments. Melphalan was administered as a 5-min infusion using the previously defined MTD in heavily pretreated patients, 35 mg/m2, as the starting dose. The dose of melphalan was escalated by 30% increments. Nineteen patients, ranging in age from 3 to 24 years (median, 15 years), were entered on trial. The dose of amifostine was escalated to 2700 mg/m2, which is approximately 3-fold higher than the adult recommended dose, without reaching a MTD. Fifteen patients experienced nondose-limiting (< 25%), transient decreases in blood pressure after the amifostine infusion. Other nondose-limiting toxicities of amifostine included mild nausea and vomiting, flushing, anxiety, diarrhea, and urinary retention. Six patients, three each at the 2100 and 2700 mg/m2 amifostine dose levels were treated with an escalated dose of melphalan (45 mg/m2). All of these patients experienced grade 4 neutropenia (< 500/mm3), and five of six patients had grade 4 thrombocytopenia. The duration of this dose-limiting myelosuppression exceeded 7 days in four of six patients. Although no dose-limiting (grade 3 or 4) toxicity was attributed to amifostine, significant anxiety and reversible urinary retention occurred at the two highest amifostine dose levels. A dose of 1650 mg/m2 for pediatric Phase II trials is recommended. High doses of amifostine, however, do not appear to allow for escalation of melphalan beyond its single agent MTD of 35 mg/m2.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2000

Intermittent use of amifostine during postoperative radiochemotherapy and acute toxicity in rectal cancer patients.

PURPOSE: Amifostine has been shown to be able to reduce acute radiation toxicity if administered daily prior to radiation during a course of a conventionally fractionated radiotherapy. A disadvantage is the necessity of daily intravenous injection. We have used amifostin in patients undergoing adjuvant radiochemotherapy for rectal cancer. Amifostine was administered only in the first and fifth week of radiotherapy together with 5-FU chemotherapy. The objective was to determine whether the intermittent use of amifostine may be effective in reducing acute radiation toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: From September 1997 through October 1998, 30 patients with stage II/III rectal cancer underwent postoperative radiochemotherapy at our department. All patients had undergone curative (R0) resection and received 50.4 Gy to the pelvis with a 3-field technique using a belly board followed by a boost of 5.4 Gy to the presacral space in conventional fractionation with 1.8 Gy per fraction. 5-FU chemotherapy was administered as 120-hours continuous infusion in the first and fifth radiation week via a central venous catheter in a daily dosage of 1,000 mg/m2. All patients were offered to participate in a phase-II study using additional amifostine. Fifteen patients participated and received 500 mg amifostine daily on chemotherapy days (days 1 to 5 and 29 to 33) immediately prior to the daily radiation fraction. Fifteen patients did not participate and served as non-randomized control. The study was approved by the ethical committee of the Martin-Luther-University and informed consent was obtained from all patients. RESULTS: The distribution of patients' characteristics and prognostic parameters was comparable in both groups. Side effects of amifostine were mild and included hypotension (53% grade I, 7% grade II) and nausea (47% grade I, 13% grade II). Antiemetics were not routinely used. All patients completed radiochemotherapy plus amifostine without unplanned breaks or dose reductions. One patient developed a cerebral infarction which was considered to be not related to the use of amifostine. As compared to the non-randomized control group, patients with additional amifostine had less acute skin and bowel toxicity (maximum erythema score 1.47 +/- 0.64 without vs 0.87 +/- 0.52 with amifostine, p = 0.009 and maximum diarrhea score 1.07 +/- 1.03 vs 0.40 +/- 0.63, p = 0.044). Oral 5-FU-related mucositis and hematological toxicity were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS: In this phase-II study, amifostine significantly reduced acute skin and bowel toxicity of adjuvant chemoradiation in patients with rectal cancer even if the drug was administered only intermittently and not during the whole course of radiotherapy. This finding might be important with regard to intense combined regimes and should be further investigated.

Amifostine↗
PubMed2005

Cytoprotection by amifostine during autologous stem cell transplantation for advanced refractory hematologic malignancies.

This study evaluated whether amifostine protects against mucositis and other toxicities in patients with advanced, refractory, or recurrent hematologic malignancies undergoing high-dose chemotherapy and total body irradiation. Thirty-five patients (20 with non-Hodgkin lymphoma, 12 with Hodgkin disease, and 3 with acute myelogenous leukemia) who underwent autologous stem cell transplantation were conditioned with total body irradiation 2 Gy twice daily on days -8 through -6; cyclophosphamide 6 g/m(2), etoposide 1.8 g/m(2), and carboplatin 1 g/m(2) on days -5 through -3; and amifostine 500 mg/m(2) on days -8 through -2. Prior institutional experience in patients treated without amifostine was used as a historical comparison (no-amifostine group). Severe mucositis occurred in 14 (40%) of 35 patients in the amifostine group, compared with 33 (94%) of 35 in the no-amifostine group (P < .0001). Total parenteral nutrition was used by 4 (11%) of 35 amifostine-treated patients and 34 (97%) of 35 no-amifostine patients (P < .0001). The median duration of narcotic use decreased from 15.5 days with no amifostine to 11 days with amifostine (P = .002). Granulocyte and platelet engraftment times were similar. Prospective trials with innovative designs and clearly defined stopping rules are warranted to confirm whether amifostine reduces the toxicities of a myelosuppressive conditioning regimen before autologous stem cell transplantation without compromising therapeutic response.

Acute Disease↗