Levodopa in Parkinsonism: the Effects of Withdrawal of Anticholinergic Drugs

The results are reported of a trial in which 34 patients receiving a stable dose of levodopa for the treatment of idiopathic Parkinsonism, as well as anticholinergic drugs which they had been taking before the introduction of levodopa, underwent withdrawal of their anticholinergic remedies. Withdrawal was gradual over four weeks in 17 patients (group 1) and abrupt in the remaining 17 (group 2).Only 11 out of 34 patients on stable levodopa therapy were able to tolerate withdrawal of anticholinergic drugs for more than eight weeks. The main reasons for the resumption of these remedies were subjective increases in slowness in 20 (59%), tremor in 15 (44%), and recurrence of hypersalivation in 5 (15%). Hypersalivation was the single feature which was most significantly and adversely influenced by anticholinergic withdrawal in patients on levodopa irrespective of whether withdrawal was sudden or gradual. It is suggested that the synergism which seems to exist between anticholinergic remedies and levodopa may be due to inhibition of dopamine inactivation by anticholinergic drugs, thus ensuring continual utilization, or alternatively, to a primary central anticholinergic effect.Objective and more severe subjective deterioration occurred only on sudden withdrawal. Hence we would advise that if for any reason anticholinergic drugs are to be withdrawn in patients receiving a stable dosage of levodopa this must be done slowly. Conversely it would appear from our results that the introduction of anticholinergic drugs in patients treated initially with levodopa is likely to produce additional benefit, particularly when the maximum tolerated dose of levodopa is small.     

Idiopathic Parkinsonism Treated with an Extracerebral Decarboxylase Inhibitor in Combination with Levodopa

The clinical actions of levodopa in Parkinsonism, given with and without an extracerebral decarboxylase in hibitor, L-alpha-methyldopahydrazine, were compared. Twenty-one patients were investigated in a “double-blind cross-over” study, administering levodopa in maximum tolerated dosage. L-Alpha-methyldopahydrazine failed to augment the overall therapeutic actions of levodopa but it consistently alleviated nausea. It is concluded that L-alpha-methyldopahydrazine will prove useful in the management of some Parkinsonian patients who have difficulty in taking levodopa alone.     

Effect of Age and Arteriosclerosis on the Response of Parkinsonian Patients to Levodopa

Twenty-four patients with Parkinsonism were treated with levodopa for up to one year. Ten were aged under 65, 12 were aged 65 or over, and two were specifically included because they were considered to have arteriosclerotic Parkinsonism. These two patients showed no response to treatment. The 10 younger patients showed less clinical evidence of arteriosclerosis than the older ones, and responded significantly better to treatment with levodopa. Mean improvement was 61% in the younger group after 12 months'' treatment and 28% in the older group. Improvement was greatest within three months of starting treatment. Abnormal movements which resulted from treatment with levodopa could be reduced with only slight loss of therapeutic benefit by the addition of tetrabenazine.     

A Bayesian seamless phase I–II trial design with two stages for cancer clinical trials with drug combinations

The use of drug combinations in clinical trials is increasingly common during the last years since a more favorable therapeutic response may be obtained by combining drugs. In phase I clinical trials, most of the existing methodology recommends a one unique dose combination as “optimal,” which may result in a subsequent failed phase II clinical trial since other dose combinations may present higher treatment efficacy for the same level of toxicity. We are particularly interested in the setting where it is necessary to wait a few cycles of therapy to observe an efficacy outcome and the phase I and II population of patients are different with respect to treatment efficacy. Under these circumstances, it is common practice to implement two-stage designs where a set of maximum tolerated dose combinations is selected in a first stage, and then studied in a second stage for treatment efficacy. In this article we present a new two-stage design for early phase clinical trials with drug combinations. In the first stage, binary toxicity data is used to guide the dose escalation and set the maximum tolerated dose combinations. In the second stage, we take the set of maximum tolerated dose combinations recommended from the first stage, which remains fixed along the entire second stage, and through adaptive randomization, we allocate subsequent cohorts of patients in dose combinations that are likely to have high posterior median time to progression. The methodology is assessed with extensive simulations and exemplified with a real trial.     

Drug treatment of Parkinson's disease.

A wide variety of drugs is available for treating Parkinson''s disease, including anticholinergics, amantadine levodopa, dopamine agonists, and selegiline. In younger patients (less than 50) levodopa is usually delayed provided that adequate relief of symptoms can be achieved with other drugs. In older patients (greater than 70) levodopa should be started as soon as symptom relief is required. Between these ages there is no consensus, but at present most such patients should probably be given controlled release levodopa before a dopamine agonist is added. Fluctuations can often be alleviated by giving controlled release preparations of levodopa, by giving small doses at frequent intervals, by adding selegiline or a long acting oral agonist, or by subcutaneous apomorphine. Dyskinesia can be peak dose, diphasic, or "off period." The diphasic form is hardest to alleviate. Psychiatric side effects should initially be managed by changing the antiparkinsonian treatment before resorting to antipsychotic drugs.     

Bromocriptine Markedly Suppresses Levodopa-Induced Abnormal Increase of Dopamine Turnover in the Parkinsonian Striatum

Bromocriptine, a dopamine agonist, is commonly used in combination with levodopa for the treatment of Parkinson's disease (PD). To investigate the theoretical basis of such combination therapy, we examined the effects of bromocriptine administered alone or in combination with levodopa on dopamine turnover in the striatum of hemi-parkinsonism rats. The parkinsonian striatum showed a 3.4-fold increase of dopamine turnover relative to the control striatum, as often observed in the brain of PD patients. A 7-day course of levodopa therapy markedly increased dopamine turnover in the parkinsonian striatum (53-fold of control level) than in the control striatum (5-fold of the control level). However, bromocriptine specifically and markedly suppressed the levodopa-induced abnormal activation of dopamine turnover in the parkinsonian striatum. Our findings explain the pharmacological basis for the introduction of bromocriptine during long-term levodopa therapy.     

The effects of levodopa therapy in patients with Parkinson's disease I. Clinical response

Eighty-eight patients with Parkinson''s disease were treated with levodopa. A group of elderly patients 65 years and older was compared with a second group under the age of 65, and it was found that generally the younger patients could be treated with greater success than the older ones. Most of the elderly could not tolerate the large doses required to produce optimal physical recovery. Severity of complications forced discontinuance of treatment in a larger percentage of elderly patients. The rate of complications was about equal in the two groups, except the incidence of confusion, which was significantly higher in the elderly. Of the two deaths that occurred, both were in the older group. Results of treatment were better in patients whose families gave positive support.     

NXX-066 in patients with Alzheimer's disease: a bridging study

Reduced cholinergic transmission is a key neurotransmitter dysfunction in Alzheimer's Disease (AD). NXX-066, a physostigmine analog and acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitor, has demonstrated activity in animal models of memory function, and was well tolerated in healthy subjects up to a single dose of 64 mg and multiple doses of 60 mg QD for seven days. Since AChE inhibitors are often tolerated differently in AD patients than in healthy volunteers, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind, single-center, inpatient bridging study was conducted to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of NXX-066 in the target patient population. Seven consecutive panels of eight AD patients each (6 active, 2 placebo) received fixed oral doses of NXX-066 (20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, or 80 mg BID) for seven days. Initiation of each subsequent panel (dose group) was contingent upon the tolerability of lower dose levels. The MTD was determined to be 70 mg BID when four of six patients receiving 80 mg BID were prematurely discontinued from the study due to nausea and/or vomiting, accompanied in some patients by mild to moderate dizziness, headache, asthenia, and gastric symptoms. Wide variability in plasma levels of NXX-066 was observed in all dose panels. AChE inhibition in whole blood correlated with both maximum plasma concentration and dose; however, AChE inhibition was not predictive of adverse events. In this study, AD patients tolerated larger daily doses of NXX-066 on a BID regimen than healthy normal subjects had tolerated with QD dosing. Further studies are warranted to examine whether differing tolerability between patients and healthy subjects or the reduced dosing interval explains these findings.     

Comparison of therapeutic effects and mortality data of levodopa and levodopa combined with selegiline in patients with early,mild Parkinson's disease. Parkinson's Disease Research Group of the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: To compare effectiveness of levodopa and levodopa combined with selegiline in treating early, mild Parkinson''s disease. DESIGN: Open, long term, prospective randomised trial. SETTING: 93 hospitals throughout United Kingdom. SUBJECTS: 520 patients with early Parkinson''s disease who were not receiving dopaminergic treatment. INTERVENTIONS: Treatment with levodopa and dopa decarboxylase inhibitor (arm 1) or levodopa and decarboxylase inhibitor in combination with selegiline (arm 2). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Assessments of serial disability, frequency and severity of adverse events, and deaths from all causes. RESULTS: After average of 5-6 years'' follow up, mortality ratio in arm 2 compared with arm 1 was 1.57 (95% confidence interval 1.09 to 2.30), and difference in survival between the two arms was significant (log rank test, P = 0.015). Hazard ratio adjusted for age and sex was 1.49 (1.02 to 2.16), and after adjustment for other baseline factors it increased to 1.57 (1.07 to 2.31). Patients in arm 1 had slightly worse disability scores than those in arm 2, but differences were not significant. Functionally disabling peak dose dyskinesias and on/off fluctuations were more frequent in arm 2 than arm 1. During the trial the dose of levodopa required to produce optimum motor control steadily increased in arm 1 (median daily dose 375 mg at 1 year and 625 mg at 4 years), but median dose in arm 2 did not change (375 mg). CONCLUSIONS: Levodopa in combination with selegiline seemed to confer no clinical benefit over levodopa alone in treating early, mild Parkinson''s disease. Moreover mortality was significantly higher with combination treatment, casting doubts on its chronic use in Parkinson''s disease.     

Find the path of least resistance: Adaptive therapy to delay treatment failure and improve outcomes

Cytotoxic chemotherapy and targeted therapies help people with advanced cancers, but for most, treatment fails. Cancer heterogeneity is one cause of treatment failure, but also suggests an opportunity to improve outcomes; reconceptualising cancer therapy as an ecological problem offers the strategy of adaptive therapy. If an agent is active against a patient's cancer, instead of traditional continuous dosing at the maximum tolerated dose until treatment failure, the patient and their oncologist may instead choose to pause treatment as soon as the cancer responds. When tumour burden increases, the cancer is rechallenged with the same agent in hope of delivering another response, ideally before symptoms occur or quality-of-life is impacted. These ‘loops’ of ‘pause/restart’ allows an active treatment to be used strategically, to delay the development of evolutionary selection within the cancer, delaying the onset of treatment resistance, controlling the cancer for longer. Modelling predicts patients can navigate several ‘loops’, potentially increasing the utility of an active treatment by multiples, and early trials suggest at least doubling of progression-free survival. In this narrative review we confront how cancer heterogeneity limits treatment effectiveness, re-examine cancer as an ecological problem, review the data supporting adaptive therapy and outline the challenges and opportunities faced in clinical practice to implement this evolutionary concept. In an era where multiple novel active anti-neoplastic agents are being used with ancient inflexibile maximum tolerated dose for maximum duration approaches, adaptive dosing offers a personalised, n = 1 approach to cancer therapy selection.     

Single-dose murine monoclonal antibody ricin A chain immunotoxin in the treatment of metastatic melanoma: a phase I trial.

To determine the maximally tolerated dose of a ricin A chain-conjugated antimelanoma antibody (XomaZyme-Mel), 20 patients with metastatic melanoma were treated with escalating doses of the murine immunotoxin given as single intravenous infusion over 30 minutes. The starting dose was 0.6 mg/kg and was escalated in five groups to a maximum of 1.6 mg/kg. The maximally tolerated dose was 1.25 mg/kg as three of six patients treated at 1.6 mg/kg developed unacceptable toxicity. The dose-limiting toxicity consisted of profound fatigue, myalgias, and arthralgias. These occurred within 4 days and resolved in 7 to 10 days. Other non-dose-limiting toxicities encountered consisted of hypoalbuminemia, weight gain, peripheral edema, mild hypotension, and flu-like syndrome; the severity of these was also dose related. In addition, two allergic reactions occurred, one severe. There was one durable complete response of 12+ months' duration and one brief mixed response lasting 3 months. We conclude that the maximum tolerated single dose of XomaZyme-Mel is 1.25 mg/kg. Phase I studies evaluating 1.25 mg/kg given in multiple doses at 2- to 4-week intervals and phase II studies to determine the response rate of a single 1.25 mg/kg dose are warranted.     

MTP-PE in liposomes as a biological response modifier in the treatment of cancer: Current status

MTP-PE in liposomes is a BRM which can be given relatively safely to patients with cancer. The maximum tolerated dose appears to be higher than the optimal dose inducing immunomodulatory effects such as cytokine induction and monocyte/macrophage activation. The most consistently induced cytokines measured in the plasma of patients a few hours after MTP-PE are TNF and IL-6. Indirect evidence supports the assumption that increased levels of TNF and IL-6 are signs of macrophage activation occurringin situ in tissues taking up liposomal MTP-PE shortly after injection. These tissues are mainly lungs, liver and spleen, as shown in 4 patients injected with radiolabelled liposomes containing MTP-PE. Assuming that activated monocytes and macrophages cannot eliminate gross tumor load, the main targets for MTP-PE are micrometastases after removal of the primary tumor. Thus, adjuvant treatment using liposomal MTP-PE in combination with chemotherapy is a major goal for the future.     

Gait stride-to-stride variability and foot clearance pattern analysis in Idiopathic Parkinson’s Disease and Vascular Parkinsonism

The literature on gait analysis in Vascular Parkinsonism (VaP), addressing issues such as variability, foot clearance patterns, and the effect of levodopa, is scarce. This study investigates whether spatiotemporal, foot clearance and stride-to-stride variability analysis can discriminate VaP, and responsiveness to levodopa.Fifteen healthy subjects, 15 Idiopathic Parkinson's Disease (IPD) patients and 15 VaP patients, were assessed in two phases: before (Off-state), and one hour after (On-state) the acute administration of a suprathreshold (1.5 times the usual) levodopa dose. Participants were asked to walk a 30-meter continuous course at a self-selected walking speed while wearing foot-worn inertial sensors. For each gait variable, mean, coefficient of variation (CV), and standard deviations SD1 and SD2 obtained by Poincaré analysis were calculated. General linear models (GLMs) were used to identify group differences. Patients were subject to neuropsychological evaluation (MoCA test) and Brain MRI.VaP patients presented lower mean stride velocity, stride length, lift-off and strike angle, and height of maximum toe (later swing) (p < .05), and higher %gait cycle in double support, with only the latter unresponsive to levodopa. VaP patients also presented higher CV, significantly reduced after levodopa. Yet, all VaP versus IPD differences lost significance when accounting for mean stride length as a covariate.In conclusion, VaP patients presented a unique gait with reduced degrees of foot clearance, probably correlated to vascular lesioning in dopaminergic/non-dopaminergic cortical and subcortical non-dopaminergic networks, still amenable to benefit from levodopa. The dependency of gait and foot clearance and variability deficits from stride length deserves future clarification.     

Comparison of rosuvastatin and atorvastatin for lipid lowering in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus: results from the URANUS study

Objective

The Use of Rosuvastatin versus Atorvastatin iN type 2 diabetes mellitUS (URANUS) study compared rosuvastatin with atorvastatin for the reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) in patients with type 2 diabetes.

Methods

After a 6-week dietary run-in, patients aged ≥ 18 years with type 2 diabetes and LDL-C ≥ 3.3 mmol/L were randomised to double-blind treatment with rosuvastatin 10 mg (n = 232) or atorvastatin 10 mg (n = 233) for 4 weeks. Doses were then titrated up to a maximum of rosuvastatin 40 mg or atorvastatin 80 mg over 12 weeks to achieve the 1998 European LDL-C goal (<3.0 mmol/L).

Results

Rosuvastatin reduced LDL-C levels significantly more than atorvastatin during the fixed-dose and titration periods (p < 0.0001). Significantly more patients reached the 1998 LDL-C goal with rosuvastatin 10 mg compared with atorvastatin 10 mg at 4 weeks (81% vs 65%, p < 0.001). At 16 weeks, significantly more patients achieved their LDL-C goal with rosuvastatin compared with atorvastatin (94% vs 88%, p < 0.05) and more patients receiving rosuvastatin remained at their starting dose with reduced requirement for dose titration. At 4 weeks, 65% of rosuvastatin patients had reached their 2003 European LDL-C goal (< 2.5 mmol/L), compared with 33% of atorvastatin patients (p < 0.0001). Both treatments were similarly well tolerated with no unexpected safety concerns.

Conclusion

At the start dose and following dose titration, rosuvastatin was significantly more effective than atorvastatin at reducing LDL-C and achieving European LDL-C goals in patients with type 2 diabetes.     

One to Two Year Treatment of Parkinson's Disease with Levodopa

One hundred patients with Parkinson''s disease were treated with levodopa for more than a year at UCLA Medical Center. They were examined at given intervals and their improvement was graded. The optimum therapeutic dose was attained by balancing side effects against relief of symptoms and ranged from 1.5 grams to 8.0 grams per day (average 4.3 grams). There is no doubt that levodopa is the most effective treatment now available for Parkinson''s disease. At the end of the first year, 60 percent of the patients improved 50 percent or better, and 10 percent were considered symptom-free. All major symptoms of this disease, including rigidity, akinesia and tremor, improved in variable degree.There were no serious abnormalities in the routine clinical laboratory tests. The comon side effects included nausea, vomiting and choreoathetoid dyskinesias. The side effects were not life threatening, but occasionally were major therapeutic challenges.Maximal benefits with minimal side effects were achieved only by careful adjustments of the levodopa dosage as the months went by. This needed careful management by the physician and cooperation by the patient. Anticholinergic medications or amantadine hydrochloride, sometimes both, usually supplemented the effect of the levodopa.     

Modern radiotherapy techniques in the treatment of tumour of the base of tongue

AIM: To demonstrate the role, the execution and the importance of the computed tomography (CT) based three-dimensional brachytherapy and conformal percutan radiotherapy in the treatment of the advanced tumour of the base of tongue. METHODS: Between January 1993 and June 2000, 27 patients with stage III-IV squamous cell cancers of the base of tongue were treated after 60 Gy percutan irradiation with interstitial, high dose rate brachytherapy (23 patients) or conformal, multi-fields radiotherapy (4 patients) as a boost. The dose of the boost irradiation varied between 12 and 24 Gy. RESULTS: Boost irradiation was well tolerated by the patients. The local tumour control at the mean follow-up period (39 months) was 52%. Using this two treatment methods in case of percutan conformal irradiation 6%, in case of brachytherapy 1.5% of the mandible received the prescribed boost dose. The spinal cord received a maximum of 15%, and 8% of the boost dose, respectively, depending on the two treatment types. CONCLUSION: With the help of these two radiotherapeutic modalities locally higher cumulative dose and better tumour control can be achieved without the higher risk of radiation injury of the surrounding normal tissues and the two most critical organs (medulla, mandible).     

A latent contingency table approach to dose finding for combinations of two agents

Summary .  Two-agent combination trials have recently attracted enormous attention in oncology research. There are several strong motivations for combining different agents in a treatment: to induce the synergistic treatment effect, to increase the dose intensity with nonoverlapping toxicities, and to target different tumor cell susceptibilities. To accommodate this growing trend in clinical trials, we propose a Bayesian adaptive design for dose finding based on latent 2 × 2 tables. In the search for the maximum tolerated dose combination, we continuously update the posterior estimates for the unknown parameters associated with marginal probabilities and the correlation parameter based on the data from successive patients. By reordering the dose toxicity probabilities in the two-dimensional space, we assign each coming cohort of patients to the most appropriate dose combination. We conduct extensive simulation studies to examine the operating characteristics of the proposed method under various practical scenarios. Finally, we illustrate our dose-finding procedure with a clinical trial of agent combinations at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center.     

Safety and Efficacy of Apatinib Combined with Temozolomide in Advanced Melanoma Patients after Conventional Treatment Failure

OBJECTIVE: Asian melanoma patients, predominantly comprised of acral and mucosal subtypes, might not benefit from immunotherapy and targeted therapy as much as Caucasian patients. Novel treatment strategies are demanded after conventional treatment failure. This was a prospective, single-arm, and single-center dose escalation study to investigate the safety and preliminary efficacy of apatinib combined with temozolomide in heavily treated advanced melanoma patients. METHODS: Patients were sequentially admitted to four dose-escalating groups of apatinib and temozolomide (three cases in each group) using a traditional 3?+?3 dose escalation design method. RESULTS: Twelve patients were enrolled between December 2016 and August 2017. Most patients with an acral or mucosal primary origin progressed after immunotherapy or targeted therapy. Dose escalation had been completed without dose-limiting toxicity. Common adverse events included hypertension, hand-foot syndrome, proteinuria, neutropenia, nausea, and fatigue. All adverse events were grade 1 or 2, while the maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Up to January 2018, 1 patient achieved partial response, 9 experienced stable disease, and 2 exhibited progressive disease. The objective response rate and disease control rate were 8.3% and 83%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, apatinib combined with temozolomide was well tolerated and has demonstrated efficacy in advanced melanoma patients.     

Phase II Open-Label Study to Assess Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide in Combination with Cetuximab in KRAS-Mutant Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

This study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of combination treatment with lenalidomide and cetuximab in KRAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer patients. This was a phase II multicenter, open-label trial comprising a safety lead-in phase (phase IIa) to determine the maximum tolerated dose, and a randomized proof of concept phase (phase IIb) to determine the response rate of lenalidomide plus cetuximab combination therapy. Phase IIa treatment comprised oral lenalidomide (starting dose 25 mg/day) and intravenous cetuximab (400 mg/m² followed by weekly 250 mg/m²) in 28-day cycles. In phase IIb patients were randomized to either the phase IIa treatment schedule of lenalidomide plus cetuximab combination therapy or lenalidomide 25 mg/day monotherapy. Eight patients were enrolled into phase IIa. One patient developed a dose-limiting toxicity and the maximum tolerated dose of lenalidomide was determined at 25 mg/day. Forty-three patients were enrolled into phase IIb proof of concept. Best response was stable disease in 9 patients and study enrollment was terminated prematurely due to lack of efficacy in both treatment arms and failure to achieve the planned response objective. The majority of adverse events were grade 1 and 2. In both phases, the adverse events most commonly attributed to any study drugs were fatigue, rash and other skin disorders, diarrhea, nausea, and stomatitis. Thirty-nine deaths occurred; none was related to study drug. The combination of lenalidomide and cetuximab appeared to be well tolerated but did not have clinically meaningful activity in KRAS-mutant metastatic colorectal cancer patients.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials.gov {"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT01032291","term_id":"NCT01032291"}}NCT01032291     

A phase I trial of recombinant tumor necrosis factor (rTNF) administered by continuous intravenous infusion in patients with disseminated malignancy

rTNF was administered to 28 patients with advanced metastatic cancers by continuous intra venous infusion for 5 consecutive days every 2 weeks. The dose levels were 30, 40, 70, 110, 180 and 290 µg/M²/day. Groups of 3 patients were started at each successive dose level and then on subsequent courses treated with the next dose level through 4 escalations as tolerated. Tumor types were: colon cancer 14; adenocarcinoma of unknown primary, 2; renal cancer, 2; leiomyosarcoma, 2; lung cancer, 1; prostate cancer, 1; thymona, 1; bladder cancer; 1; parotid, 1; Kaposi's sarcoma 2; ovarian 1. Toxicities included fever and chills (usually within the first 8 hours of infusion), fatigue, headache, decreased performance status, hypotension and CNS. All patients experienced leukopenia and thrombocytopenia within 24 hours or less after start of infusion with return of baseline by 72 hours after rTNF was stopped. The fall in these counts averaged 50% and was not dose related. No major changes in liver or renal function, coagulation or blood lipids were seen. Major dose limiting toxicities were fatigue, confusion, thrombocytopenia, seizures, hypotension and decreased performance status. NK cell activity measured against K562 target cells was augmented from about 30% target cell lysis to about 70% target cell lysis over the first 7 days of treatment. Two patients, both with metastatic colon cancer showed transient, objective tumor regression which did not qualify as a partial response. One patient with ovarian cancer had a stable partial response but progressed after 13 courses of treatment. Continuous infusion of TNF can be safely administered to patients with a maximum tolerated dose of only between 30 and 40 µg/M²/day. In addition, the MTD with continuous infusion seems to be highly variable and unpredictable from patient to patient. These data suggest that continuous infusion will not be an optimal way to administer TNF.