4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Efficacy of RAD001 (everolimus) and octreotide LAR in advanced low- to intermediate-grade neuroendocrine tumors: Results of a phase II study

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 26, 期 26, 页码 4311-4318

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2008.16.7858

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [R01 CA112199] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose Evaluate the activity of everolimus (RAD001) in combination with octreotide long-acting repeatable (LAR) in patients with advanced low- to intermediate-grade neuroendocrine tumors. Methods Treatment consisted of RAD001 5 mg/d (30 patients) or 10 mg/d (30 patients) and octreotide LAR 30 mg every 28 days. Thirty carcinoid and 30 islet cell patients were enrolled. Results Intent-to-treat response rate was 20%. Per protocol, there were 13 with partial responses (22%), 42 with stable disease (SD; 70%), and five patients with progressive disease (8%). Overall median progression-free survival (PFS) was 60 weeks. Median PFS for patients with known SD at entry was longer than for those who had progressive disease (74 v 50 weeks; P = .01). Median overall survival has not been reached. One-, 2-, and 3-year survival rates were 83%, 81%, and 78%, respectively. Among 37 patients with elevated chromogranin A, 26 (70%) achieved normalization or more than 50% reduction. Most common toxicity was mild aphthous ulceration. Grade 3/4 toxicities occurring in >= 10% of patients included hypophosphatemia (11%), fatigue (11%), and diarrhea (11%). Treatment was associated with a dose-dependent rise in lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Those with lower than 109 U/L rise in LDH at week 4 had shorter PFS (38 v 69 weeks; P = .01). Treatment was also associated with a decrease in proliferation marker Ki-67 among patients who underwent optional paired pre- and post-treatment biopsy (P = .04). Conclusion RAD001 at 5 or 10 mg/d was well tolerated in combination with octreotide LAR, with promising antitumor activity. Confirmatory studies are ongoing.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据