4.7 Article

A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled phase II trial of recombinant human leukemia inhibitory factor (rhuLIF, emfilermin, AN1424) to prevent chemotherapy induced peripheral neuropathy

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 11, 期 5, 页码 1890-1898

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-04-1655

关键词

-

类别

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: To determine whether recombinant human leukemia inhibitory factor (rhuLIF, AM424, emfllermin) can prevent or ameliorate the development of chemotherapyinduced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) after treatment with carboplatin (AUC 6) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2) over 3 hours). Experimental Design: Randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase 11 clinical trial. Eligible patients had solid tumors for which treatment with carboplatin/paclitaxel was appropriate. The primary end point was a standardized composite peripheral nerve electrophysiology (CPNE) score, based on nerve velocities and amplitudes, measured at baseline and after four cycles of chemotherapy. Secondary efficacy end points included CPNE score at last cycle and at exit evaluation, vibration perception threshold, H-reflex latency, symptom scores, and quantitative assessment of neurologic signs. Study drug was given s.c. daily for 7 days starting the day before chemotherapy. Patients were randomized to receive low-dose rhuLIF (2 mug/kg), high-dose rhuLIF (4 [mug/kg), or placebo. Results: Patients (n = 117) were randomized across seven neurology test centers. Thirty-six patients received low dose rhuLlF (2 mug/kg), 39 received high dose rhuLIF (4 mug/kg) and 42 received placebo. rhuLIF was well tolerated with 95% compliance and no adverse effects on quality of life. No differences between groups in CPNE or any of the individual neurologic testing variables were observed between baseline and cycle 4 or by the secondary efficacy variables. Conclusions: rhuLIF is not effective in preventing CIPN caused by carboplatin and paclitaxel. CPNE is a reliable and valid tool that was sensitive to the onset and progression of CIPN.

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