Equivalency challenge: Evaluation of Lipodox® as the generic equivalent for Doxil® in a human ovarian cancer orthotropic mouse model
- PMID: 26946092
- DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.02.033
Equivalency challenge: Evaluation of Lipodox® as the generic equivalent for Doxil® in a human ovarian cancer orthotropic mouse model
Erratum in
-
Corrigendum to 'Equivalency challenge: evaluation of Lipodox® as the generic equivalent for Doxil® in a human ovarian cancer orthotropic mouse model' [Gynecol. Oncol. 141 (2016) 357-363].Gynecol Oncol. 2017 Feb;144(2):448. doi: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2016.10.034. Gynecol Oncol. 2017. PMID: 28089052 No abstract available.
Abstract
Background: The objective of this study was to evaluate the in vivo growth inhibition activity and tumor distribution of Doxil® compared to Lipodox® as its generic (GLD) in human ovarian cancer orthotopic mouse model.
Methods: In the efficacy study 50 mice were randomized to: vehicle, Doxil® 5mg/kg or 10mg/kg, or GLD 5mg/kg or 10mg/kg for a total of three cycles with monitoring for response and toxicity with 10 mice in each arm. In the microdialysis(MD) study, 60 mice were randomized to: Doxil® 5mg/kg or 10mg/kg, or GLD 5mg/kg or 10mg/kg single dose (n=15 mice/arm). MD sample time points included total of 29 samples from baseline through 100h and were evaluated with a validated PaperSpray LC/MS assay.
Results: There was 15.7% decrease (p<0.0001) in efficacy of GLD the 5mg/kg and 21.3% decrease (p<0.0001) in efficacy of the 10mg/kg dose of GLD when compared to equivalent doses of Doxil®. The intratumoral concentration for the GLD ranged from 1.0 to 25.5ng/mL (5mg/kg) and 2.9-35.6ng/mL (10mg/kg) compared to 2.7-42.2ng/mL (p<0.04, 5mg/kg) and 2.0-76ng/mL (p<0.02, 10mg/kg) for the Doxil®, respectively.
Conclusion: Significant differences in preclinical efficacy were observed between Doxil® and GLD. These may be due to significant pharmacodynamic effects of drug distribution and decrease uptake of GLD in tumor tissue. A prospective clinical comparison of these two products is warranted to determine equivalency.
Keywords: Bioequivalence; Doxil; Doxorubicin; Lipodox; Liposomal; Microdialysis; Ovarian cancer.
Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Similar articles
-
Is it equivalent? Evaluation of the clinical activity of single agent Lipodox® compared to single agent Doxil® in ovarian cancer treatment.J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2016 Aug;22(4):599-604. doi: 10.1177/1078155215594415. Epub 2015 Jul 15. J Oncol Pharm Pract. 2016. PMID: 26183293
-
Pharmacokinetics, efficacy and toxicity of different pegylated liposomal doxorubicin formulations in preclinical models: is a conventional bioequivalence approach sufficient to ensure therapeutic equivalence of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin products?Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2010 Nov;66(6):1173-84. doi: 10.1007/s00280-010-1406-x. Epub 2010 Jul 27. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 2010. PMID: 20661737
-
Lipodox® (generic doxorubicin hydrochloride liposome injection): in vivo efficacy and bioequivalence versus Caelyx® (doxorubicin hydrochloride liposome injection) in human mammary carcinoma (MX-1) xenograft and syngeneic fibrosarcoma (WEHI 164) mouse models.BMC Cancer. 2017 Jun 6;17(1):405. doi: 10.1186/s12885-017-3377-3. BMC Cancer. 2017. PMID: 28587612 Free PMC article.
-
New insights and evolving role of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in cancer therapy.Drug Resist Updat. 2016 Nov;29:90-106. doi: 10.1016/j.drup.2016.10.003. Epub 2016 Oct 29. Drug Resist Updat. 2016. PMID: 27912846 Review.
-
In vitro and in vivo characterizations of PEGylated liposomal doxorubicin.Bioanalysis. 2011 Feb;3(3):333-44. doi: 10.4155/bio.10.204. Bioanalysis. 2011. PMID: 21320053 Review.
Cited by
-
Importance of Drug Pharmacokinetics at the Site of Action.Clin Transl Sci. 2017 May;10(3):133-142. doi: 10.1111/cts.12448. Epub 2017 Feb 3. Clin Transl Sci. 2017. PMID: 28160433 Free PMC article. Review. No abstract available.
-
Regulatory assessment of nano-enabled health products in public health interest. Position of the scientific advisory board of the French National Agency for the Safety of Medicines and Health Products.Front Public Health. 2023 Mar 2;11:1125577. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1125577. eCollection 2023. Front Public Health. 2023. PMID: 36935690 Free PMC article.
-
Development of Pharmaceutical Nanomedicines: From the Bench to the Market.Pharmaceutics. 2022 Jan 3;14(1):106. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14010106. Pharmaceutics. 2022. PMID: 35057002 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Recent Advances in Nanoparticle-Based Co-Delivery Systems for Cancer Therapy.Nanomaterials (Basel). 2022 Aug 4;12(15):2672. doi: 10.3390/nano12152672. Nanomaterials (Basel). 2022. PMID: 35957103 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Beyond Formulation: Contributions of Nanotechnology for Translation of Anticancer Natural Products into New Drugs.Pharmaceutics. 2022 Aug 17;14(8):1722. doi: 10.3390/pharmaceutics14081722. Pharmaceutics. 2022. PMID: 36015347 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Other Literature Sources
Medical