Pharmacokinetics of an intravenous-oral versus intravenous-mesna regimen in lung cancer patients receiving ifosfamide.

Abstract

PURPOSE To compare the pharmacokinetics of the approved I.V. (intravenous) mesna regimen and an investigational I.V.-oral regimen that could be used in outpatients who receive ifosfamide. PATIENTS AND METHODS The I.V. regimen consisted of three I.V. mesna doses given at 0, 4, and 8 hours after ifosfamide administration. The investigational regimen included an I.V. mesna dose given concurrently with ifosfamide, followed 2 and 8 hours later by oral administration of mesna tablets. I.V. and oral mesna doses equaled 20% and 40%, respectively, of the ifosfamide dose. The study subjects were 12 lung cancer patients who received ifosfamide 1.2 g/m2 daily for 5 days. The patients were randomized to receive either the I.V.-oral or I.V. mesna regimen on day 1, followed by crossover to the other regimen on days 2 through 5 of ifosfamide treatment. The urinary profiles of mesna and dimesna excretion were determined on days 1, 2, and 5; pharmacokinetic parameters for blood samples were determined only on day 5. RESULTS During the first 12 hours after ifosfamide administration, the amount of mesna excreted and the profile of urinary mesna excretion was similar for both regimens; however, the I.V.-oral regimen showed less fluctuation in the excretion rate and higher trough values. During hours 12 to 24, about eightfold more mesna was excreted by patients given the I.V.-oral than the I.V. regimen. CONCLUSION These pharmacokinetic data show that the I.V.-oral regimen should be at least as uroprotective as the I.V. mesna regimen. Patients may also benefit from the I.V.-oral regimen because of the higher trough values during hours 0 through 12 and the sustained urinary mesna excretion during hours 12 through 24.