Pharmacotherapeutic group: Antidotes, ATC code: V03AB06
Mechanism of action
The mechanism of sodium thiosulfate protection against ototoxicity is not fully understood, but may include increasing levels of endogenous antioxidants, inhibition of intracellular oxidative stress, and direct interaction between cisplatin and the thiol group in sodium thiosulfate to produce inactive platinum species.
Concurrent incubation of sodium thiosulfate with cisplatin decreased the in vitro cytotoxicity of cisplatin to tumour cells; delaying the addition of sodium thiosulfate to these cultures prevented the protective effect.
Pharmacodynamic effects
The is no clinical pharmacodynamic information available beyond that given within the mechanism of action section.
Clinical efficacy and safety
The efficacy of sodium thiosulfate (STS) in preventing cisplatin (CIS)-induced ototoxicity was studied in two multicentre studies in which 112 paediatric patients with various solid tumour types were treated with STS following each administration of CIS. Safety has been established using 1 to 5 doses of sodium thiosulfate per chemotherapy cycle, with regimens varying from 1 dose of CIS+STS per cycle to 5 doses of CIS+STS per cycle.
Study 1 (SIOPEL 6) – pivotal study
Study 1 was a multicentre, randomised, controlled, open-label study to assess the efficacy and safety of STS in reducing ototoxicity in children receiving CIS chemotherapy for standard risk hepatoblastoma (SR-HB). Children between 1 month and 18 years of age with histologically confirmed newly diagnosed HB were eligible. Children were randomised 1:1 to receive STS after each CIS dose (CIS+STS arm) or to receive CIS alone.
CIS was administered as a 6-hour intravenous infusion. Four courses of CIS were given pre-surgery and 2 additional courses were given post-surgery.
In the CIS+STS arm, the STS intravenous infusion was administered over 15 minutes, beginning 6 hours after completion of each CIS infusion. Doses of STS were dependent on the child's weight as follows: children > 10 kg received an equivalent of 12.8 g/m2 STS, children ≥ 5 to ≤ 10 kg received an equivalent of 9.6 g/m2 STS, and children < 5 kg received an equivalent of 6.4 g/m2 STS.
A total of 129 children were registered and 114 children were randomised in the study (61 patients in the CIS+STS arm and 53 patients in the CIS Alone arm). Of the 114 patients randomised, 5 patients withdrew prior to treatment: 2 patients due to withdrawal of parental consent, 2 patients due to reclassification as high risk HB, and 1 due to ineligibility.
Hearing loss was defined as a Brock Grade ≥ 1 measured using audiologic evaluations after the end of study treatment or at an age of at least 3.5 years when a reliable result could be obtained, whichever was later. The proportion of children in the CIS+STS arm with hearing loss at age ≥ 3.5 years (20 children [35.1%]) was approximately one half compared with the CIS Alone arm (35 children [67.3%] (Table 3). Event free survival and OS were also evaluated.
| Table 3: Summary of patient population and hearing loss in study 1 |
| | CIS alone | CIS + STS |
| Patient population |
| N (intent to treat population) | 52 | 57 |
| Age (years), median (min, max) | 1.1 (0.3, 5.9) | 1.1 (0.1, 8.2) |
| Weight (kg) (mean, SD) | 10.25 (3.26) | 10.23 (3.76) |
| N (treated population) | 56 | 53 |
| Number of CIS cycles (mean, SD) | 5.8 (1.0) | 5.9 (0.6) |
| Cumulative CIS dose (mg/m2) (mean, SD) | 362.851 (98.871) | 363.860 (96.607) |
| Cumulative STS dose (g/m2) (mean, SD) | -- | 85.149 (24.390) |
| Patients who experienced hearing loss |
| N (intent to treat population) | 52 | 57 |
| Yes, n (%) | 35 (67.3) | 20 (35.1) |
| No, n (%) | 17 (32.7) | 37 (64.9) |
| Relative Risk (95% CI) | | 0.521 (0.349, 0.778) |
| p-value | | <0.001 |
The risk of having hearing loss was statistically significantly lower in the CIS+STS arm compared with the CIS Alone arm, corresponding to a clinically meaningful 48% lower risk after STS treatment.
At a median of 4.27 years of follow up, the hazard ratio between the treatment arms in Event-free survival (EFS) was ([CIS+STS vs CIS Alone]: 0.96; 95% CI: 0.42, 2.23) and in overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio: 0.48; 95% CI: 0.09, 2.61).
Study 2 (COG ACCL0431) – supportive study
Study 2 was a multicentre, randomised, controlled, open label study to assess the efficacy and safety of STS in preventing hearing loss in children receiving CIS chemotherapy for the treatment of newly diagnosed germ cell tumour (25.6%), hepatoblastoma (5.6%), medulloblastoma (20.8%), neuroblastoma (20.8%), osteosarcoma (23.2%), atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumour (1.6%), choroid plexus carcinoma (0.8%), and anaplastic astrocytoma (0.8%); or any other malignancy treated with CIS; 7.5% had prior cranial radiation. Children between 1 year and 18 years of age and scheduled to receive a chemotherapy regimen that included a cumulative CIS dose of ≥ 200 mg/m2, with individual CIS doses to be infused over ≤ 6 hours, were eligible. Children were randomised 1:1 to receive either STS 6 hours after each CIS dose (CIS+STS) or chemotherapy that included CIS, without subsequent STS (CIS alone).
CIS was administered according to the sites' disease-specific cancer treatment protocols in use at the time. When multiple daily doses of CIS were scheduled, the protocol stipulated at least a 10-hour delay between any STS infusion and the beginning of the next day's CIS infusion.
In the CIS+STS arm, 10.2 g/m2 STS was administered by intravenous infusion over 15 minutes, beginning 6 hours after the completion of each CIS infusion. A dose reduction was included for children whose therapeutic protocol administered CIS on a per kg basis due to young age or low body weight, which was 341 mg/kg STS.
The primary endpoint was the proportional incidence of hearing loss between the CIS+STS arm and the CIS Alone arm, as defined by comparison of American Speech-language-Hearing Association (ASHA) criteria assessed at baseline and 4-weeks after the final course of cisplatin. EFS, i.e. presence or absence of tumour progression or recurrence or development of subsequent malignant neoplasm, and OS were also evaluated.
A total of 131 children were registered and 125 children were randomised in the study (61 patients in the CIS+STS arm and 64 patients in the CIS Alone arm). Of the 125 patients randomised, 2 patients withdrew prior to treatment: 1 patient due to withdrawal of parental consent, and 1 due to investigator decision.
In the 104 patients who had both baseline and 4-week follow-up hearing assessments, the proportion of children in the CIS+STS arm with hearing loss (14 patients [28.6%]) was approximately one-half of the proportion in the CIS Alone arm (31 patients [56.4%]) (Table 4).
| Table 4: Summary of patient population and hearing loss in study 2 |
| | CIS alone | CIS + STS |
| Patient population |
| N (intent to treat population) | 64 | 61 |
| Age (years), median (min, max) | 8.3 (1, 18) | 10.7 (1, 18) |
| N (intent to treat population) | 64 | 59 |
| Weight (kg) (mean, SD) | 37.3 (24.9) | 39.1 (28.3) |
| N (safety population) | 64 | 59 |
| Number of CIS cycles (mean, SD) | 3.8 (1.5) | 3.1 (1.4) |
| Cumulative CIS dose (mg/m2) (mean, SD) | 391.47 (98.40) | 337.57 (118.33) |
| Cumulative STS dose (g/m2) (mean, SD) | -- | 108.23 (80.24) |
| Patients who experienced hearing loss |
| N (efficacy population) | 55 | 49 |
| Yes, n (%) | 31 (56.4) | 14 (28.6) |
| No, n (%) | 24 (43.6) | 35 (71.4) |
| Relative Risk (95% CI) | | 0.516 (0.318, 0.839) |
| p-value | | 0.0040 |
The risk of having hearing loss was statistically significantly lower in the CIS+STS arm compared with the CIS Alone arm, corresponding to a clinically meaningful 48% lower risk after STS treatment.
At a median of 5.33 years of follow up, the hazard ratio in EFS between arms was ([CIS+STS vs CIS Alone]: 1.27; 95% CI: 0.73, 2.18). A disparity in OS was observed (hazard ratio: 1.79; 95% CI: 0.86, 3.72). In patients categorised post-hoc with localised disease, the hazard ratio between arms in EFS was (hazard ratio: 1.02; 95% CI: 0.49, 2.15) and in OS (hazard ratio: 1.23; 95% CI: 0.41, 3.66).