4.5 Article Proceedings Paper

Dose-escalation study of ICA-17043 in patients with sickle cell disease

期刊

PHARMACOTHERAPY
卷 26, 期 11, 页码 1557-1564

出版社

PHARMACOTHERAPY PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1592/phco.26.11.1557

关键词

ICA-17043; sickle cell disease; pharmacokinetics

资金

  1. NCRR NIH HHS [RR00046] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Study Objective. To determine the dose tolerance, safety, and pharmacokinetics of a single oral dose of ICA-17043 in patients with sickle cell disease. Design. Phase I, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, single-dose, dose-escalation study. Setting. Four university medical centers. Patients. Twenty-eight patients with sickle cell disease, aged 18-60 years, who were otherwise healthy and in a noncrisis state. Intervention. Patients in three separate dose cohorts-50 mg, 100 mg, and 150 mg-received single doses of ICA-17043 or placebo. Measurements and Main Results. The mean area under the concentration-time curve from time zero extrapolated to infinity (AUC(0-infinity)) for ICA-17043 increased in a dose-related manner (11,827, 19,697, and 30,676 ng(.)hr/ml for 50, 100, and 150 mg, respectively). Overall mean half-life was 12.8 days. Mean peak plasma concentrations rose between the 50- and 100-mg dose levels but plateaued at 150 mg (59.1, 108.7, and 109.1 ng/ml, respectively). Weekly pharmacokinetic and safety assessments were conducted in each patient during the follow-up phase for 56 days. No dose-limiting adverse events were noted in any of the patients. Conclusion. Total systemic exposure of ICA-17043 after a single oral dose, as measured by AUC(0-infinity), increased nearly proportionally with the dose. The rate of absorption, however, appeared to be delayed at doses greater than 100 mg. With the long half-life of ICA-17043 demonstrated in this study, once-daily dosing is probably adequate to maintain steady-state plasma concentrations. In addition, single doses of ICA-17043 were well tolerated.

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

4.5
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