Comparative pharmacokinetic study of continuous venous infusion fluorouracil and oral fluorouracil with eniluracil in patients with advanced solid tumors

Alex A. Adjei, Joel M. Reid, Robert B. Diasio, Jeff A. Sloan, Deborah A. Smith, Joseph Rubin, Henry C. Pitot, Steven R. Alberts, Richard M. Goldberg, Lorelei J. Hanson, Pamela Atherton, Matthew M. Ames, Charles Erlichman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

30 Scopus citations


Purpose: To compare the pharmacokinetics of continuous venous infusion (CVI) fluorouracil (5-FU) with that of oral eniluracil/5-FU and to describe toxicities and clinical activity of prolonged oral administration of eniluracil/5-FU. Patients and Methods: A randomized, open-label, cross-over study compared CVI 5-FU to an oral 5-FU/eniluracil combination. Seventeen patients (arm A) were randomly assigned to receive eniluracil/5-FU combination tablets (10:1 mg/m2 BID for 7 days) during the first study period, followed by 5-FU (300 mg/m2 CVI for 7 days) during period 2, with a 14-day washout between periods. Sixteen patients (arm B) received treatment in the opposite sequence. In period 3, all patients received eniluracil/5-FU tablets BID for 28 days. Plasma levels of 5-FU during CVI and oral administration were analyzed in periods 1 and 2. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) activity was determined by measuring plasma uracil, urinary α-fluoro-β-alanine, and peripheral-blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) DPD activity. Results: There were no grade 3 or 4 toxicities in either arm. Partial responses were observed in three patients. Another three patients had stable disease for ≥ 3 months. Eniluracil and 5-FU pharmacokinetics were similar to those observed in previous studies and were unaffected by administration sequence. The mean ± SD steady-state plasma concentration (Cp) and area under the curve (AUC)144-168h for CVI 5-FU (104 ± 45 ng/mL and 2,350 ± 826 ng·h/mL, respectively) were three-fold greater than those for oral 5-FU (38.1 ± 7.7 ng/mL and 722 ± 182 ng·h/mL, respectively [P < .00001]). Individual 5-FU concentrations during CVI were highly variable, whereas those after eniluracil/5-FU were very reproducible. DPD activity in PBMCs before each study period was normal. Conclusion: Both CVI 5-FU and oral eniluracil/5-FU were well tolerated, with moderate activity in these heavily pretreated patients. However, 5-FU steady-state Cp and AUCs achieved with oral eniluracil/5-FU were significantly less than with CVI 5-FU.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)1683-1691
Number of pages9
JournalJournal of Clinical Oncology
Issue number6
StatePublished - Mar 15 2002

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Cancer Research


Dive into the research topics of 'Comparative pharmacokinetic study of continuous venous infusion fluorouracil and oral fluorouracil with eniluracil in patients with advanced solid tumors'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this