4.7 Article

Preclinical efficacy of the camptothecin-polymer conjugate IT-101 in multiple cancer models

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 12, 期 5, 页码 1606-1614

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-05-1566

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Preclinical efficacy of i.v. IT-101, a nanoparticulate conjugate of 20(S) -camptothecin and a cyclodextrin-based polymer, was investigated in several mouse xenografts. The effects of different multiple dosing schedules on tumor growth of LS174T colon carcinoma xenografts are elucidated. All multiple dosing schedules administered over 15 to 19 days resulted in enhanced efficacy compared with untreated or single-dose groups. Further improvements in antitumor efficacy were not observed when the dosing frequency was increased from three weekly doses to five doses at 4-day intervals or 5 days of daily dosing followed by 2 days without dosing repeated in three cycles using similar cumulative doses. This observation was attributed to the extended release characteristics of camptothecin from the polymer. Antitumor efficacy was further evaluated in mice bearing six different s.c. xenografts (LS174T and HT29 colorectal cancer, H1299 non small-cell lung cancer, H69 small-cell lung cancer, Panc-1 pancreatic cancer, and MDA-MB-231 breast cancer) and one disseminated xenograft (TC71-luc Ewing's sarcoma). In all cases, a single treatment cycle of three weekly doses of IT-101 resulted in a significant antitumor effect. Complete tumor regression was observed in all animals bearing H1299 tumors and in the majority of animals with disseminated Ewing's sarcoma tumors. Importantly, IT-101 is effective in a number of tumors that are resistant to treatment with irinotecan (MDA-MB-231, Panc-1, and HT29), consistent with the hypothesis that polymeric drug conjugates may be able to overcome certain kinds of multidrug resistance. Taken together, these results indicate that IT-101 has good tolerability and antitumor activity against a wide range of tumors.

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