4.7 Article

A Phase I, Pharmacokinetic, and Pharmacodynamic Study of Two Schedules of Vorinostat in Combination with 5-Fluorouracil and Leucovorin in Patients with Refractory Solid Tumors

期刊

CLINICAL CANCER RESEARCH
卷 16, 期 14, 页码 3786-3794

出版社

AMER ASSOC CANCER RESEARCH
DOI: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-10-0547

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute [N01-CO-124001, 25XS115-Task Order 2, P30 CA47904]
  2. Institutional Cancer Center [CA16056]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose: We conducted a phase I clinical trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of daily or twice daily vorinostat x 3 days when combined with fixed doses of 5-fluorouracil (FU) and leucovorin every 2 weeks. Experimental Design: Vorinostat doses were escalated in a standard 3 x 3 phase I design. FU/leucovorin was started on day 2 of vorinostat and consisted of leucovorin 400 mg/m(2) i.v. over 2 hours followed by FU 400 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus and 2,400 mg/m(2) over 46 hours (sLV5FU2). Results: Forty-three patients were enrolled. Grade 3 fatigue, and hand and foot syndrome were the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) at the 2,000 mg vorinostat once-daily dose level. Grade 3 fatigue and mucositis were DLTs at the 800 mg vorinostat twice-daily dose level. None of six patients at the 1,700 mg once daily or six patients at the 600 mg twice daily dose levels had a DLT; those dose levels represent the MTD. Twenty-one of 38 patients with FU-refractory colorectal cancer had stable disease, and one had a partial response. Vorinostat maximum serum concentrations at the MTD exceeded concentrations associated with thymidylate synthase downregulation in vitro. No pharmacokinetic interactions were noted between vorinostat and FU. Conclusions: The MTD of vorinostat in combination with sLV5FU2 is 1,700 mg orally once daily x 3 or 600 mg orally twice daily x 3 days every 2 weeks. Clinical activity in refractory colorectal cancer supports further clinical development of this combination. Clin Cancer Res; 16(14); 3786-94. ((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