Jackson D V, Powell B L, Cruz J M, Spurr C L, Muss H B
Cancer Center of Wake Forest University, Bowman Gray School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, NC.
Sel Cancer Ther. 1989;5(3):129-36. doi: 10.1089/sct.1989.5.129.
Infusion of etoposide has previously been evaluated in phase I trials. Vincristine (VCR) given by infusion has been shown in a phase II trial to be active in some cases of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma despite prior exposure to bolus VCR. Infusion of etoposide and the combination of VCR infusion with etoposide (given either as an infusion or bolus) were evaluated in 24 patients with previously treated non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. Five-day infusions of etoposide alone (n = 10), both etoposide and VCR (n = 9), or VCR with bolus etoposide (n = 5) were evaluated. Partial responses were observed in 0, 2 (22%), and 1 (20%) of the patients, respectively. Myelosuppression was the principal toxicity with the 5-day infusions of etoposide alone and with the double infusion combination, but was mild in the VCR infusion coupled with etoposide bolus. Non-hematologic toxicity was mild to moderate in each. For patients with refractory non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, the infusion of etoposide with or without VCR infusion appeared to offer no advantage over bolus administration of etoposide or infusion of VCR alone.
此前已在I期试验中对依托泊苷的输注进行了评估。在一项II期试验中，尽管此前接受过静脉推注长春新碱（VCR），但输注长春新碱在某些非霍奇金淋巴瘤病例中显示出活性。对24例先前接受过治疗的非霍奇金淋巴瘤患者评估了依托泊苷的输注以及VCR输注与依托泊苷联合使用（以输注或推注方式给药）的情况。分别评估了单独5天输注依托泊苷（n = 10）、依托泊苷和VCR联合输注（n = 9）或VCR与静脉推注依托泊苷联合使用（n = 5）的情况。分别在0、2例（22%）和1例（20%）患者中观察到部分缓解。骨髓抑制是单独5天输注依托泊苷以及联合输注组合的主要毒性，但在VCR输注联合依托泊苷推注时毒性较轻。每种治疗的非血液学毒性均为轻至中度。对于难治性非霍奇金淋巴瘤患者，输注依托泊苷无论是否联合VCR输注，似乎都不比单独静脉推注依托泊苷或输注VCR更具优势。
