4.5 Article

Oral paricalcitol (19-nor-1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D2) in women receiving chemotherapy for metastatic breast cancer A feasibility trial

期刊

CANCER BIOLOGY & THERAPY
卷 14, 期 6, 页码 476-480

出版社

LANDES BIOSCIENCE
DOI: 10.4161/cbt.24350

关键词

vitamin D; metastatic breast cancer; paricalcitol; cancer treatment

类别

资金

  1. NCI NIH HHS [P30 CA012197] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The vitamin D hormone, [1,25(OH)(2)D, calcitriol], inhibits proliferation and angiogenesis in breast cancer but its therapeutic use is limited by hypercalcemia. Synthetic analogs of 1,25(OH)(2)D that are less calcemic, such as paricalcitol (19-nor-1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D-2), are used to treat hyperparathyroidism associated with chronic kidney disease. We sought to determine the safety and feasibility of taking oral paricalcitol with taxane-based chemotherapy in women with metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Oral paricalcitol was considered safe if it did not result in excessive toxicity, defined as grade 3 or higher serum calcium levels. It was considered feasible if the majority of women could take eight weeks of continuous therapy in the first three months. Serum calcium was monitored weekly and the paricalcitol dose was adjusted based on its calcemic effect. Intact parathyroid hormone (iPTH) was monitored as a marker of paricalcitol activity. Twenty-four women with MBC were enrolled. Twenty women (83%) received eight weeks of continuous therapy. Paricalcitol was well-tolerated with no instances of hypercalcemia grade 2 or greater. Fourteen women (54%) were able to escalate the dose. The dose range of paricalcitol in the first 3 mo was 2-7 ug/day. Serum iPTH levels at baseline were significantly higher in women with serum 25-Hydroxyvitamin D (25-OHD) levels less than 30 ng/ml (96.4 +/- 40.9 pg/ml) vs. 46.2 +/- 20.3 pg/ml (p = 0 0.001) (iPTH reference 12-72 pg/ml). We conclude that paricalcitol is safe and feasible in women with MBC who are receiving chemotherapy.

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

4.5
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