4.6 Article

A Multicenter Phase I/II Study of Obatoclax Mesylate Administered as a 3-or 24-Hour Infusion in Older Patients with Previously Untreated Acute Myeloid Leukemia

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 9, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0108694

关键词

-

资金

  1. Gemin X Pharmaceuticals, Inc
  2. Cephalon, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: An open-label phase I/II study of single-agent obatoclax determined a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and schedule, safety, and efficacy in older patients (>= 70 yr) with untreated acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Experimental Design: Phase I evaluated the safety of obatoclax infused for 3 hours on 3 consecutive days (3 hx3 d) in 2-week cycles. Initial obatoclax dose was 30 mg/day (3 hx3 d; n = 3). Obatoclax was increased to 45 mg/day (3 hx3 d) if <= 1 patient had a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and decreased to 20 mg/day (3 hx3 d) if DLT occurred in >= 2 patients. In the phase II study, 12 patients were randomized to receive obatoclax at the dose identified during phase I (3 hx3 d) or 60 mg/day administered by continuous infusion over 24 hours for 3 days (24 hx3 d) to determine the morphologic complete response rate. Results: In phase I, two of three patients receiving obatoclax 30 mg/day (3 hx3 d) experienced grade 3 neurologic DLTs (confusion, ataxia, and somnolence). Obatoclax was decreased to 20 mg/day (3 hx3 d). In phase II, no clinically relevant safety differences were observed between the 20 mg/day (3 hx3 d; n = 7) and 60 mg/day (24 hx3 d; n = 5) arms. Neurologic and psychiatric adverse events were most common and were generally transient and reversible. Complete response was not achieved in any patient. Conclusions: Obatoclax 20 mg/day was the MTD (3 hx3 d) in older patients with AML. In the schedules tested, single-agent obatoclax was not associated with an objective response. Evaluation in additional subgroups or in combination with other chemotherapy modalities may be considered for future study.

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

4.6
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