4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Targeted inhibition of farnesyltransferase in locally advanced breast cancer: A phase I and II trial of tipifarnib plus dose-dense doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide

期刊

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
卷 24, 期 19, 页码 3013-3018

出版社

AMER SOC CLINICAL ONCOLOGY
DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2005.04.9114

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [N01 CM-17103, R01CA98473] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose To determine the recommended phase II dose (RPTD) of the farnesyltransferase (FTase) inhibitor tipifarnib when combined with doxorubicin and cyclophosphamide (AC) in patients with advanced breast cancer, the pathologic complete response (pCR) rate after preoperative treatment with four cycles of the combination in locally advanced breast cancer (LABC), and the effect of tipifarnib on primary tumor FTase enzyme activity in vivo. Patients and Methods Thirty-two patients with metastatic breast cancer (n = 11) or LABC (n = 21) received AC (doxorubicin 60 mg/m(2) and cyclophosphamide 600 mg/m(2)) administered intravenously on day 1 plus tipifarnib (100, 200, or 300 mg bid for 6 to 14 days) without (n = 2) or with (n = 30) granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) for up to four cycles. Patients with LABC underwent surgery after up to four cycles of the combination. Results When combined with AC every 2 weeks plus G-CSF, the RPTD of tipifarnib was 200 mg bid administered on days 2 to 7. Seven (33%) of 21 patients (95% CI, 15% to 55%) with LABC treated with up to four cycles of the combination at the RPTD had a pCR in the breast at surgery. The five patients had serial biopsies that demonstrated at least 50% FTase enzyme inhibition in the primary tumor (median, 100%; range, 55% to 100%) after tipifarnib. Conclusion Tipifarnib may be safely combined with dose-dense AC using a dose and schedule that significantly inhibits FTase enzyme activity in human breast cancer in vivo and may enhance the pCR rate after four cycles of preoperative dose-dense AC.

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