4.1 Article

Does the Poly (ADP-Ribose) Polymerase Inhibitor Veliparib Merit Further Study for Cancer-Associated Weight Loss? Observations and Conclusions from 60 Prospectively Treated Patients

期刊

JOURNAL OF PALLIATIVE MEDICINE
卷 21, 期 9, 页码 1334-1338

出版社

MARY ANN LIEBERT, INC
DOI: 10.1089/jpm.2018.0023

关键词

cachexia; cancer; veliparib; weight loss

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health/National Cancer Institute [R01CA195473]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: More than 80% of patients with advanced cancer develop weight loss. Because preclinical data suggest poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors can treat this weight loss, this study was undertaken to explore the PARP inhibitor veliparib for this indication. Objective: The current study was undertaken to analyze prospectively gathered data on weight in cancer patients on PARP inhibitors. Design/Setting: The current study relied on a previously published, prospectively conducted phase 1 single institution trial that combined veliparib and topotecan (NCT01012817) as antineoplastic therapy for advanced cancer patients. Serial weight data and, when available and clinically relevant, computerized tomography scans were also examined. Measurements: The primary endpoint was 10% or greater weight gain from trial enrollment. Results: Nearly all 60 patients lost weight over time. Only one patient manifested a 10% or greater gain in weight. However, review of computerized tomography L3 images showed this weight gain was a manifestation of ascites. Four other patients gained 5% of their baseline weight. However, findings in two patients with available radiographs showed no evidence of muscle augmentation. Conclusions: The addition of the PARP inhibitor veliparib to chemotherapy does not appear to result in notable weight gain or in weight maintenance in patients with advanced cancer. Interventions other than PARP inhibitors should be considered for the palliation/treatment of cancer-associated weight loss.

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

4.1
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