4.7 Article

Fenretinide activity in retinoid-resistant oral leukoplakia

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 12, 期 10, 页码 3109-3114

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-2636

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P01 CA052051, P30 CA016672] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To test the hypothesis that the retinamide N- (4-hydroxyphenyl)retinamide (fenretinide) would be clinically active potentially via receptor-independent apoptosis and receptor-dependent effects in natural retinoid-resistant oral leukoplakia patients-the first test of this hypothesis in any in vivo setting. Experimental Design: A phase II trial of fenretinide (200 mg/d for 3 months) in oral leukoplakia patients who had not responded (de novo resistance) or who had responded and then relapsed (acquired resistance) to previous treatment with natural retinoids. We analyzed apoptosis via the terminal deoxynucleotidyl transferase - mediated nick end labeling in situ DNA fragmentation assay. Results: We accrued 35 evaluable patients with retinoid-resistant oral leukoplakia, 12 (34.3%) had partial responses to fenretinide (95% confidence interval, 19.2-52.4%), and response was associated with acquired resistance to natural retinoids (P = 0.015, Fisher's exact test). Nine responders progressed within 9 months of stopping fenretinide. Toxicity was minimal and compliance was excellent. Mean apoptosis values (SE) increased from 0.35% (0.25%) at baseline to 1.18% (0.64%) at 3 months (P = 0.001, sign test); this increase did not correlate with clinical response. The increases in 3-month mean serum concentrations of fenretinide (0.23 mu mol/L) and N- (4-methoxyphenyl)retinamide (0.57 mu mol/L) correlated with decreased retinol concentrations [Spearman correlation coefficient of -0.57 (P = 0.001) and -0.43 (P = 0.01), respectively]. Conclusions: Low-dose fenretinide was clinically active and produced a small increase in apoptosis in retinoid-resistant oral leukoplakia.

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