4.7 Article

An Open-Label, Phase I Study of the Polo-like Kinase-1 Inhibitor, BI 2536, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 16, 期 18, 页码 4666-4674

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-0318

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Boehringer Ingelheim

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: This phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study investigated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of BI 2536, a small-molecule polo-like kinase (Plk)-1 inhibitor, in two treatment schedules in patients with advanced solid tumors. Secondary objectives included evaluation of safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics. Experimental Design: Patients received a single i.v. dose of BI 2536 as a 1-hour infusion on days 1 and 8 or a single 24-hour infusion on day 1 of each 21-day treatment course. MTD determination was based on dose-limiting toxicities. Results: Forty-four and 26 patients received each treatment schedule, respectively. The MTD of BI 2536 in the day 1 and 8 schedule was 100 mg per administration (200 mg per course). The MTD for the second dosing schedule was not determined; a 225-mg dose was well tolerated. The most frequently reported treatment-related nonhematologic adverse events were gastrointestinal events and fatigue. Hematotoxicity as the most relevant side effect was similar in both schedules; neutropenia grades 3 and 4 were observed in 16 patients (36.4%) of the day 1 and 8 schedule and 13 patients (50%) of the 24-hour infusion. Fourteen patients (32%) treated in the day 1 and 8 dosing schedule had a best overall response of stable disease. Plasma concentrations of BI 2536 increased dose proportionally, with no relevant accumulation of exposure in the day 1 and 8 dosing schedule. The average terminal half-life was 50 hours. Conclusions: BI 2536 administered in either treatment schedule has adequate safety in patients with advanced solid tumors, warranting further clinical investigation of polo-like kinase-1 inhibitors. Clin Cancer Res; 16(18); 4666-74. (c) 2010 AACR.

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