METHOD OF PROLONGING CANCEROUS PATIENT SURVIVAL IN HUMANS WITH HYDRAZINE SULFATE

Abstract: Hydrazine sulfate, along or formulated with liquid or solid carriers will prolong patient survival when administered to humans parenterally or orally.

Description: METHOD OF PROLONGING CANCEROUS PATIENT SURVIVAL IN HUMANS WITH HYDRAZINE SULFATE BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION Many different types of chemical compounds have been used in the past to retard or inhibit various tumors in man. More than thirty compounds are approved for use in cancer therapy in various countries, but the achievement of therapeutic benefit has reached a plateau, and the search for antitumor agents continues in various directions. In 1967, Weitzel and co-workers reported in the Zeitschrift fuer Physiologische Chemie 348, 433- 442 that hydrazine acetate and sulfate inhibit in vivo the growth of ascites carcinoma and sarcoma 180 in the mouse and Walker carcinosarcoma in the rat. It is well known that the results from lower animals cannot be extrapolated in humans. Indeed, the experience at the U.S. National Institutes of Health has been that more than 200 new chemotypes having antitumor activity in animals have failed to show clinically useful anticanceractivity in humans, as shown in the following table: (Table 1 was compiled from various reports of the U.S. National Cancer Institute.) TABLE I New Chemotypes evaluated against cancer 1960-1985 Succeeded Failed Adriamycin Cisplatin Tripdiolide Bleomycin Maytansine Mitomycin Sangivamycin Vincristine Penta ethylmelamine Cyclophoεphamide Taxol Etoposide Bactobolin Alanosine PALA Acivicin Methyl GAG Menogarol Triciribine Disuccinimide Flavoneacetic acid * Analog of nitrogen mustard Teroxirone Acodazole ** Analog of podophyllotoxin Benzisoguinolinedione Didemnin B Phy1lanthoside Ellipticine Emetine Indicine-N-oxide Bouvardin Thalicarpine Tetrand ine Acronycine Tylocrebrine Lapachol Nitidine Neocarzinostatin Macromomycin Largomycin Streptimidone Valinomycin Piperazinedione Fagaronine Coralyne Benzophenanthridine Camptothecin Acosamine Acy1agmatine Allamandicin Allamandin Agolosamine Anguidine Angustmycin Ansamycin TABLE I Failed (continued) Aureolic acid Baccharin 5 Bakkenolide Baumycin Bisnorditerpene Bouvardin Bredenine Bruceolide Bryogenin 10 Bufadienolide Cardenolides Catharanthus Cephalotaxine Chapparinone Cofoπαycin Colcemid Colchicine 15 Colubrinol Coralyne Cucurbitacin Daphnetoxin Datiscacin Cecoyinine Angustmycin 20 Scirpenol Isobruceine Nitidine Duborimycin Elemanolide Elephantopin Ellipticine Elephantopin 25 Enteromycin Eremantholides Eriofertopin Eudes anolides Eupacunin Euparotin Fabacein Fagaronine Fusarenon Ger acranolide Glaucarubinone Guaianolide Helenolin Homoerythrina Hycanthone 35 Picrasin Iridoid lactose Isobruceine Isocucurbitacin w * *w TABLE I Failed (continued) Iεoplumericin 5 Iatrophone Lapachol leurosidine Leuroεine Liatrin Masine Maytanbutacine Maytanbutine 1 Maytanprine Maytanvaline Miracil D Mitrymicin Mycophenolic acid Neosolaneol Nitidine 15 Nivalenol Normaysine Oxazinomycin Peltatin Penstemide Phleomycin Picrasane 2 Picropodophyllin Piptocarphins Plumericin Porfiromycin Pseudoguaianolides Puromycin Pyrazomycin Quadrone 25 Quassimarin Roridin Samaderine Sangivamycin Eudes anolide Showdomysin Sikkimototoxin Simalikalactone Simaroubolide Stachybotrytoxin Steganacin Streptonigrin Taxodione Tenulin Tetrandrine 35 Thalicarpine Trichodermin Undulatone Vernolepin SUBSTΪTUTE___5HEET TABLE I Failed (continued) Verrucarin Vincadioline Vindoline Withaferin Withanolide Phosphonoacetic acid Pentosta in Deazaguanine Tiazofurin Ocodazole Bisbenzimidazole ICRF JB-11 Dihydrotriazine benzene sulfonyl fluoride Glyoxylic acid sulfonylhydrazone N-Methy1formamide Caracemide Isopropylpyrrolizine deriv. Phyllanthside Aphidicolin Largomycin In addition, hundreds of analogs of the new and old chemotypes have failed to show anticancer activity in man, in spite of good antitumor activity in animals. In contrast to the above, only about five new chemotype anticancer drugs have reached the market in the last 25 years. Hence early reports that hydrazine sulfate had antitumor activity in animals did not serve to predict that it might have anticancer activity in humans. Because of this poor predictability of animal models, the National Cancer Institute of the U.S. National Institutes of Health has now abandoned the mouse model after 25 years of unproductive trial and is instituting a new in vitro program for discovering new antitumor drugs (E. Eckholm, New York Times, Dec. 23, 1986, p. Cl) . A total inventory of cancer drugs approved for sale in the U.S. is set forth in Table II, and it will be seen that most of these are analogs of other drugs. Table III shows that with one exception, all of the recent New Drug Applications filed for anticancer drugs led to unapprovable ratings by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Table IV shows that the last new chemotype which succeeded in the clinic was discovered more than 20 years ago. TABLE II Anticancer Drugs Approved in U.S. in Order of Approval by FDA. leuprolide - Lupron Takeda-Abbott 4/9/85 (gonadotropin releasing hormone) etoposide - Vepesid BMY 11/10/83 streptozotocin - Zanosar Upjohn 7/7/82 estramustine - Emcyt Roche 12/24/81 daunorubicin - Cerubidine Ives 12/19/79 cisplatin - Platinol BMY 12/19/78 tamoxifen - Nolvadex ICI 12/30/77 (antiestrogen) carmustine BiCNU 3/7/77 lomustine - CEENU BMY 8/4/76 dacarbazine - DTIC-Dome Miles 5/27/75 doxorubicin - Adriamycin Farmitalia 8/7/74 itomycin C - Mutamycin BMY 5/28/74 bleomycin - Blenoxane BMY 7/31/73 egestrol acetate - Megace BMY 8/18/71 floxuridine - FUDR Roche 12/18/70 mitotane - Lysodren BMY 7/8/70 plica ycin - Mithracin Pfizer 5/5/70 procarbazine - Matulane Roche 7/22/69 cytarabine - Cytosar U Upjohn 6/17/69 testolactone - Teslac Squibb 6/3/69 x^ _ ■ j ■ *■»#- -+. ψ*-* r- --' --■ .-i-xn— - * hydroxyurea - Hydrea Squibb 12/7/67 pipobroman - Vercyte Abbott 7/1/66 melphalan - Alkeran BW 1/17/64 vincristine - Oncovin Lilly 7/10/63 uracil mustard - Uracil Mustard U john 9/13/62 5-fluorouracil - Fluorouracil Roche 4/25/62 dromostanolone - Drolban Lilly 10/26/61 vinblastine - Velban Lilly 3/6/61 cyclophosphamide - Cytoxan BMY 11/16/59 thiotepa - Thio-Tepa Lederle 3/9/59 chlorambucil - Leukeran BW 3/18/57 busulfan - Myleran BW 6/26/54 ethotrexate - Methotrexate Lederle 12/7/53 A review of the FDA's New Drug Evaluation - Statistical Report (March 1986) shows that no novel anticancer drug is pending approval at the FDA. TABLE III The following are the dispositions of antineoplastics filed in 1980 to 1984: Filed in 1980 Not approvable MDA No. 18-348 Antineoplasti Not approvable MDA No. 18-529 Antineoplasti Not approvable MDA No. 18-554 Antineoplasti Filed in 1981 Not approvable MDA No. 18-641 Antineoplasti Not approvable MDA No. 18-653 Antineoplasti Filed in 1982 Not approvable MDA No. 50-569 Antineoplasti Filed in 1984 Not approvable MDA No. 50-595 Antineoplasti Table IV lists the anticancer drugs approved in the United States. The last non-hormonal anticancer agent approved was etoposide in 1983. The following are the years of discovery of the major anticancer drugs on the U.S. market (arbitrarily -__ • _, < *---?l r, 7' sit-. assumed to be one year before the first publication): TABLE IV Etoposide 1966 Adriamycin 1966 Bleomycin 1966 Cisplatin 1965 Mitomycin C 1965 Vincristine 1961 5-Fluorouracil 1957 Cyclophosphamide 1957 Methotrexate 1949 Thus there have been no new chemotype cytotoxic cancer drugs discovered in the past twenty years. Consequently there remains an unfulfilled need for additional cancer drugs for clinical use against tumors in humans. Up to the present time it has been generally unrecognized that a specific anticachexia agent (by virtue of its ability to interrupt those specific thermodynamic metabolic processes leading to cancer cachexia possesses antitumor potential, by virtue of a systemic thermodynamic interrelationship between tumor progression (tumor energy gain) and cancer cachexia (host energy loss) ; this has been taught in the scientific literature since 1974 (J. Gold, Cancer Cachexia and Gluconeogenesis, Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci. 230. 103-110 (1974)). Thus, while it is true that any antitumor agent may have anticachexia potential, if curative, it is also true that a specific anticachexia agent may have potential for increased patient survival. However, it is not obvious, nor predictable, from the prior art that hydrazine sulfate would possess this potential. In 1978 the present inventor was issued U.S. Patent 4,110,437 for the treatment of cancer cachexia with hydrazine sulfate. Investigations were also undertaken to ascertain whether hydrazine sulfate could retard tumor growth in humans. However, these early studies were inadequate and failed to statistically demonstrate antitumor activity. A group at Sloan-Kettering concluded after a trial that: "The clinical observations recorded in this report fail to support a role for hydrazine sulfate as an anticancer agent. We conclude that its clinical .Ϊ»Γ » »»» '*.Hι • h i utilization is not warranted at present and do not plan further trials." (Ochoa et al. Cancer Chemotherapy Reports Part. 1 Vol. 59 Mo. 6, Nov./Dec. 1975; pps 1151-1154). In addition a group at the University of Virginia reported that: "Hydrazine sulfate as administered in this series failed to demonstrate any objective or subjective antitumor activity and no further trials are currently planned" (Lerner and- Regelson Cancer Treatment Reprts, Vol. 60, No. 7, July 1976, pps 959-966). Another later publication by Regelson et al stated: "In conclusion we feel that hydrazine sulfate as given in this study is an inactive compound" (Cancer Che other. Pharmacol. _., 121- 124; 1979). Thus the prior art taught that hydrazine sulfate appeared to be inactive against primary tumor growth in man. SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION This invention is based on the discovery that hydrazine sulfate, when administered parenterally or orally in effective, non-toxic amounts to humans with tumors of the lung, prostate, breast, ovaries, thyroid, pancreas, lymph, cervix, gastrointestinal tract and other sites will significantly prolong survival of patients, while improving the patient's quality of life. DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION The dosages of hydrazine sulfate employed in the present invention can vary from 1 to 5 mg/kg daily, which is well below the LD50 and has been found to be well tolerated in the majority of patients so treated for periods of up to four years. Preferably the regimen followed is one 60 mg capsule of hydrazine sulfate daily for the first three days, then two such capsules daily for the next three days, and then three 60 mg capsules each day thereafter. In actual practice, patients weighing over 130 pounds do well on three or four 60 mg capsules daily, whereas patients weighing less than 100 pounds generally respond on a dosage of 30 mg administered two or three times a day. For best results blood levels of hydrazine sulfate should be determined on these patients in order to establish a most effective non-toxic dose. I have found that treatment of patients according to the present invention at each stages of the disease is beneficial. In particular substantial benefits can be obtained by treatment with hydrazine sulfate prior to the development of cachexia. Hydrazine sulfate therapy can advantageously be combined with other modalities for cancer treatment like chemotherapy, immunotherapy, radiation and surgery. Hydrazine sulfate is most effective when administered usually by itself one or two hours before meals in the form of a gelatin capsule. If desired, the sulfate can be dissolved or suspended in sterile, aqueous, isotonic saline solution and given orally and parenterally. Likewise, hydrazine sulfate can be formulated with solid carriers such as talc, corn starch or stearic acid and compressed into tablets for oral administration. Such tablets can be enteric coated with shellac or cellulose acetate phthalate in a manner well known to those skilled in the pharmaceutical art. The efficacy of hydrazine sulfate in prolonging survival in humans has now been demonstrated for the first time in a placebo-controlled, double-blind experi¬ ment with a statistically significant number of subjects. In this experiment, to determine whether hydrazine sulfate treatment is associated with a survival benefit (R.T. Chlebowski et al., "Influence of Hydrazine Sulfate on Survival in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Trial", to be presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Clinical Oncology, May 17-19, 1987, Atlanta, Georgia), sixty-five patients with unresectable, non-small cell lung cancer and no prior chemotherapy were randomized to receive combination chemotherapy with either hydrazine sulfate or placebo addition for a period of up to four years. All received Platinol/Velban/Blenoxane (PVB) chemotherapy every 28 days, consisting of Platinol 100 mg/m 2 ; Velban 4 mg/m 2 , days 1 and 2; and Blenoxane 10 units every 8 hours for three doses. After the initial three cycles the Blenoxane c>: ψ - < * .__ -_ξ.'l__ was discontinued and the Platinol dose was reduced to 50 mg/m 2 . Pre-chemotherapy factors including age, sex, performance status (PS) , prior weight loss and disease extent were comparable in the two groups, with pre- chemotherapy performance status (0-1 vs 2) and prior weight loss (>10%) subsequently influencing overall survival (p<0.05). Toxicity was that expected from PVB with three patients not continuing hydrazine sulfate because of additional nausea. Survival by hydrazine sulfate or placebo group were: Median Survival by Patient Group Treatment Group All Patients PS 0-1 Patients Hydrazine Sulfate 292 days 328 days* Placebo 173 days 209 days Statistical analysis of the data was by the generalized Wilcoxon (Breslau) method. Comparison of the hydrazine sulfate and placebo groups showed significance at the *P<0.01 level. All of the survival benefit of hydrazine sulfate was in the performance status 0-1 group. For the performance status (PS) 2 patients, whose condition was poor, survivals were short (median 132 days) and closely comparable whether on placebo or hydrazine sulfate. Thus, hydrazine sulfate addition, as an anticachexia agent directed primarily at correcting abnormal host metabolism and as an agent which may possess some antitumor effect, impacted on patient survival as well in patients with non-small cell lung cancer. Several patients with tumors of the prostate, lung, breast, ovary lymph, cervix thyroid, pancreas and other tumor sites were treated with hydrazine sulfate according to the preferred regimen previously set forth.

Claims: C L A I M S 1. λ medicine for prolonging patient survival in a human cancer patient which comprises a therapeutically •ffective dosage of hydrazine sulfate. 2. Use of hydrazine sulfate for preparing a medicament tor prolonging patient survival in a cancer patient. 3. λ method for prolonging patient survival in a human cancer patient which comprises internally administering to said human hydrazine sulfate in an effective dosage sufficient in amount and duration to prolong patient survival. 4. The method of claim 3, wherein the hydrazine sulfate ' is administered orally in dosage form. 5. The method of claim 4, wherein the dosage form is a gelatine capsule or tablet. 6. The method of claim 3 wherein the hydrazine sulfate is administered parenterally. 7. The method of any of the preceding claims 3-6 wherein the dosage of hydrazine sulfate is 1 to 5 mg/kg of body weight daily. 8. The method of any one of preceding claims 3-7 wherein the hydrazine sulfate is administered in a daily regimen of one 60 milligram capsule for 3 days, then two 60 milligram capsules for the next 3 days, and three 60 milligram capsules each day thereafter for up to four years. 9. The method of any of the preceding claims 3-8 wherein hydrazine sulfate is administered in combination with other modalities for cancer treatment such as radiation, chemotherapy, immunotherapy or surgery.

Inventors: GOLD JOSEPH, GOLD, JOSEPH
Applicants: GOLD JOSEPH, GOLD, JOSEPH
Application year: 1988
Main classification: A61K33
IPC codes: A61K31, A61K33, A61P35