4.7 Article

The Pharmacokinetic-Pharmacodynamic (PKPD) Relationships of AZD3229, a Novel and Selective Inhibitor of KIT, in a Range of Mouse Xenograft Models of GIST

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 26, 期 14, 页码 3751-3759

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-19-2848

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. AstraZeneca

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: The emergence of secondary mutations is a cause of resistance to current KIT inhibitors used in the treatment of patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). AZD3229 is a selective inhibitor of wild-type KIT and a wide spectrum of primary and secondary mutations seen in patients with GIST. The objective of this analysis is to establish the pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic (PKPD) relationship of AZD3229 in a range of mouse GIST tumor models harboring primary and secondary KIT mutations, and to benchmark AZD3229 against other KIT inhibitors. Experimental Design: A PKPD model was developed for AZD3229 linking plasma concentrations to inhibition of phosphorylated KIT using data generated from several in vivo preclinical tumor models, and in vitro data generated in a panel of Ba/F3 cell lines. Results: AZD3229 drives inhibition of phosphorylated KIT in an exposure-dependent manner, and optimal efficacy is observed when >90% inhibition of KIT phosphorylation is sustained over the dosing interval. Integrating the predicted human pharmacokinetics into the mouse PKPD model predicts that an oral twice daily human dose greater than 34 mg is required to ensure adequate coverage across the mutations investigated. Benchmarking shows that compared with standard-of-care KIT inhibitors, AZD3229 has the potential to deliver the required target coverage across a wider spectrum of primary or secondary mutations. Conclusions: We demonstrate that AZD3229 warrants clinical investigation as a new treatment for patients with GIST based on its ability to inhibit both ATP-binding and A-loop mutations of KIT at clinically relevant exposures.

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