Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23626804›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Treatment of colorectal cancer using a combination of liposomal irinotecan (Irinophore C™) and 5-fluorouracil.

Jennifer I Hare, Robert W Neijzen, Malathi Anantha, Nancy Dos Santos, Natashia Harasym, Murray S Webb, Theresa M Allen, Marcel B Bally, Dawn N Waterhouse

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
1.6field-weighted citation impact, top 17% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Irinotecan Liposome Injection.Hospital pharmacy · 2017
    Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Jennifer I HareDepartment of Pharmacology, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada.
Robert W Neijzen
Malathi Anantha
Nancy Dos Santos
Natashia Harasym
Murray S Webb
Theresa M Allen
Marcel B Bally
Dawn N Waterhouse
BC Cancer Agency · CACentre for Drug Research and Development · CAUniversity of Alberta · CAUniversity of British Columbia · CAUtrecht University · NL

Funding

Canadian Institutes of Health Research 82583
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo investigate the use of liposomal irinotecan (Irinophore C™) plus or minus 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) for the treatment of colorectal cancer. EXPERIMENTAL

designThe effect of irinotecan (IRI) and/or 5-FU exposure times on cytotoxicity was assessed in vitro against HT-29 or LS174T human colon carcinoma cells. The pharmacokinetics and biodistribution of Irinophore C™ (IrC™) and 5-FU, administered alone or in combination, were compared in vivo. A subcutaneous model of HT-29 human colorectal cancer in Rag2-M mice was utilized to assess the efficacy of IrC™ alone, and in combination with 5-FU.

resultsThe cytotoxicity of IRI and 5-FU were strongly dependent on exposure time. Synergistic interactions were observed following prolonged exposure to IRI/5-FU combinations. Pharmacokinetics/biodistribution studies demonstrated that the 5-FU elimination rate was decreased significantly when 5-FU was co-administered intravenously with IrC™, versus alone. Significant decreases in 5-FU elimination were also observed in plasma, with an associated increase of 5-FU in some tissues when 5-FU was given by intraperitoneal injection and IrC™ was given intravenously. The elimination of IrC™ was not significantly different when administered alone or in combination with 5-FU. Therapeutic studies demonstrated that single agent IrC™ was significantly more effective than the combination of IRI/5-FU; surprisingly, IrC™/5-FU combinations were no more effective than IrC™ alone. The administration of combinations of 5-FU (16 mg/kg) and IrC™ (60 mg IRI/kg) showed increased toxicity when compared to IrC™ alone. Treatment with IrC™ alone (60 mg IRI/kg) delayed the time required for a 5-fold increase in initial tumor volume to day 49, compared to day 23 for controls. When IrC™ (40 mg IRI/kg) was used in combination with 5-FU (16 mg/kg), the time to increase tumor volume 5-fold was 43 days, which was comparable to that achieved when using IrC™ alone (40 mg IRI/kg).

conclusionsSingle agent IrC™ was well tolerated and has significant therapeutic potential. IrC™ may be a suitable replacement for IRI treatment, but its use with free 5-FU is complicated by IrC™-engendered changes in 5-FU pharmacokinetics/biodistribution which are associated with increased toxicity when using the combination.

Indexed as

AnimalsCamptothecinCell Line, TumorColorectal NeoplasmsDisease Models, AnimalDrug CombinationsFemaleFluorouracilHT29 CellsHumansIrinotecanLiposomesMaleMiceTumor BurdenCamptothecinDrug CombinationsFluorouracilIrinotecanLiposomes

Identifiers

PMID23626804
PMCPMC3633892
OpenAlexW2021857073

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.