4.7 Article

Targeted at particle immunotherapy for myeloid leukemia

期刊

BLOOD
卷 100, 期 4, 页码 1233-1239

出版社

AMER SOC HEMATOLOGY
DOI: 10.1182/blood.V100.4.1233.h81602001233_1233_1239

关键词

-

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P01 CA33049] Funding Source: Medline
  2. ODCDC CDC HHS [R01 CCA55349] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Unlike beta particle-emitting isotopes, alpha emitters can selectively kill individual cancer cells with a single atomic decay. HuM195, a humanized anti-CD33 monoclonal antibody, specifically targets myeloid leukemia cells and has activity against minimal disease. When labeled with the beta-emitters I-131 and Y-90, HuM195 can eliminate large leukemic burdens in patients, but it produces prolonged myelosuppression requiring hematopoietic stem cell transplantation at high doses.' To enhance the potency of native HuM195 yet avoid the nonspecific cytotoxicity of beta-emitting constructs, the alpha-emitting iso-tope Bi-213 was conjugated to HuM195. Eighteen patients with relapsed and refractory acute myelogenous leukemia or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia were treated with 10.36 to 37.0 MBq/kg Bi-213-HuM195. No significant extramedullary toxicity was seen. All 17 evaluable patients developed myelosuppression, with a median time to recovery of 22 days. Nearly all the Bi-213-HuM195 rapidly localized to and was retained in areas of leukemic involvement, including the bone marrow, liver, and spleen. Absorbed dose ratios between these sites and the whole body were 1000-fold greater than those seen with beta-emitting constructs in this antigen system and patient population. Fourteen (93%) of 15 evaluable patients had reductions in circulating blasts, and 14 (78%) of 18 patients had reductions in the percentage of bone marrow blasts. This study demonstrates the safety, feasibility, and antileukemic effects of Bi-213-HuM195, and it is the first proof-of-concept for systemic targeted a particle immunotherapy in humans. (C) 2002 by The American Society of Hematology.

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