Ramesh R Boinpally, Lisa Polin, Sen-Lin Zhou, Bhaskara R Jasti, Richard A Wiegand, Kathryn White, Juiwanna Kushner, Jerome P Horwitz, Thomas H Corbett, Ralph E Parchment
The Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48201, USA.
Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology 2003 JulTo compare the pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution (both normal and tumor) of cryptophycin 52 (C-52) and its putative chlorohydrin prodrug cryptophycin 55 (C-55) in a murine model and to investigate a possible mechanism behind the superior activity of C-55. Mammary adenocarcinoma 16/c tumor-bearing mice were treated with an i.v. bolus of 11 mg/kg C-52 or 38 mg/kg C-55 in Cremophor-alcohol. At predetermined time intervals, C-52 and C-55 concentrations in plasma, liver, kidney, small intestine and tumors were measured using a previously described HPLC method. Pharmacokinetic parameters were computed using noncompartmental methods. Tissue (both normal and tumor) to plasma ratios as a function of time were also calculated for comparison. Both C-52 and C-55 were rapidly distributed into different tissues including tumors following i.v. administration. However, the affinities of these compounds towards different tissues were different. Thus, the half-lives (minutes) of C-55 were in the decreasing order liver (725), intestine (494), tumor (206), kidney (62) and plasma (44), whereas the AUC values (microg x min/ml) were in the order tumor (9077), liver (7734), kidney (6790), plasma (2372) and intestine (2234). For C-52, the half-lives (minutes) were in the decreasing order liver (1333), kidney (718), intestine (389), tumor (181) and plasma (35), and the AUC values (microg x min/ml) were in the order kidney (1164), liver (609), intestine (487), plasma (457) and tumor (442). The relative exposures to C-52 after i.v. injection of C-55 were plasma 3.9%, tumor 80.8%, kidney 3.4%, liver 1.1% and intestine 2.8%. Although plasma exposure to C-52 following C-55 administration was relatively small, the use of C-55 to deliver C-52 increased the retention of C-52 and its AUC in tumor compared to direct injection of C-52. Simultaneously, this approach shortened C-52 retention in all normal tissues studied. The distribution of C-55 and its bioconversion to C-52 in different organs and tumor tissue observed in this study suggest the ability of C-55 to target tumor tissue, creating a depot of C-52 in tumor. Increased C-52 exposure of tumor, with concomitant decreased exposure of normal tissue, is a contributing factor to the superior activity of C-55 versus C-52. However, except in the case of tumor tissue in which 81% of C-55 converts to C-52, only a minor amount of C-55 may serve as a prodrug for C-52, whereas the majority is handled by the biosystem through a different route of elimination. Tissue distribution combined with rate of conversion may be an important determinant of the relative effectiveness of other epoxide-chlorohydrin pairs of cryptophycins.
Ramesh R Boinpally, Lisa Polin, Sen-Lin Zhou, Bhaskara R Jasti, Richard A Wiegand, Kathryn White, Juiwanna Kushner, Jerome P Horwitz, Thomas H Corbett, Ralph E Parchment. Pharmacokinetics and tissue distribution of cryptophycin 52 (C-52) epoxide and cryptophycin 55 (C-55) chlorohydrin in mice with subcutaneous tumors. Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology. 2003 Jul;52(1):25-33
PMID: 12739061
View Full Text