PURPOSE: Vorinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, enhances cell death by the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib in vitro. We sought to test the combination clinically. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A phase I trial evaluated sequential dose escalation of bortezomib at 1 to 1.3 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 and vorinostat at 100 to 500 mg orally daily for 8 days of each 21-day cycle in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients. Vorinostat pharmacokinetics and dynamics were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were treated. Patients had received a median of 7 prior regimens (range, 3-13), including autologous transplantation in 20, thalidomide in all 23, lenalidomide in 17, and bortezomib in 19, 9 of whom were bortezomib-refractory. Two patients receiving 500 mg vorinostat had prolonged QT interval and fatigue as dose-limiting toxicities. The most common grade >3 toxicities were myelo-suppression (n = 13), fatigue (n = 11), and diarrhea (n = 5). There were no drug-related deaths. Overall response rate was 42%, including three partial responses among nine bortezomib refractory patients. Vorinostat pharmacokinetics were nonlinear. Serum Cmax reached a plateau above 400 mg. Pharmacodynamic changes in CD-138+ bone marrow cells before and on day 11 showed no correlation between protein levels of NF-kappaB, IkappaB, acetylated tubulin, and p21CIP1 and clinical response. CONCLUSIONS: The maximum tolerated dose of vorinostat in our study was 400 mg daily for 8 days every 21 days, with bortezomib administered at a dose of 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11. The promising antimyeloma activity of the regimen in refractory patients merits further evaluation.
PURPOSE:Vorinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, enhances cell death by the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib in vitro. We sought to test the combination clinically. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A phase I trial evaluated sequential dose escalation of bortezomib at 1 to 1.3 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 and vorinostat at 100 to 500 mg orally daily for 8 days of each 21-day cycle in relapsed/refractory multiple myelomapatients. Vorinostat pharmacokinetics and dynamics were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were treated. Patients had received a median of 7 prior regimens (range, 3-13), including autologous transplantation in 20, thalidomide in all 23, lenalidomide in 17, and bortezomib in 19, 9 of whom were bortezomib-refractory. Two patients receiving 500 mg vorinostat had prolonged QT interval and fatigue as dose-limiting toxicities. The most common grade >3 toxicities were myelo-suppression (n = 13), fatigue (n = 11), and diarrhea (n = 5). There were no drug-related deaths. Overall response rate was 42%, including three partial responses among nine bortezomib refractory patients. Vorinostat pharmacokinetics were nonlinear. Serum Cmax reached a plateau above 400 mg. Pharmacodynamic changes in CD-138+ bone marrow cells before and on day 11 showed no correlation between protein levels of NF-kappaB, IkappaB, acetylated tubulin, and p21CIP1 and clinical response. CONCLUSIONS: The maximum tolerated dose of vorinostat in our study was 400 mg daily for 8 days every 21 days, with bortezomib administered at a dose of 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11. The promising antimyeloma activity of the regimen in refractory patients merits further evaluation.
Authors: Nicholas Mitsiades; Constantine S Mitsiades; Paul G Richardson; Ciaran McMullan; Vassiliki Poulaki; Galinos Fanourakis; Robert Schlossman; Dharminder Chauhan; Nikhil C Munshi; Teru Hideshima; Victoria M Richon; Paul A Marks; Kenneth C Anderson Journal: Blood Date: 2003-01-16 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Constantine S Mitsiades; Nicholas Mitsiades; Vassiliki Poulaki; Robert Schlossman; Masaharu Akiyama; Dharminder Chauhan; Teru Hideshima; Steven P Treon; Nikhil C Munshi; Paul G Richardson; Kenneth C Anderson Journal: Oncogene Date: 2002-08-22 Impact factor: 9.867
Authors: Laurence Catley; Ellen Weisberg; Yu-Tzu Tai; Peter Atadja; Stacy Remiszewski; Teru Hideshima; Nicholas Mitsiades; Reshma Shringarpure; Richard LeBlanc; Dharminder Chauhan; Nikhil C Munshi; Robert Schlossman; Paul Richardson; James Griffin; Kenneth C Anderson Journal: Blood Date: 2003-06-19 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Paul G Richardson; Bart Barlogie; James Berenson; Seema Singhal; Sundar Jagannath; David Irwin; S Vincent Rajkumar; Gordan Srkalovic; Melissa Alsina; Raymond Alexanian; David Siegel; Robert Z Orlowski; David Kuter; Steven A Limentani; Stephanie Lee; Teru Hideshima; Dixie-Lee Esseltine; Michael Kauffman; Julian Adams; David P Schenkein; Kenneth C Anderson Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2003-06-26 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Teru Hideshima; Constantine Mitsiades; Masaharu Akiyama; Toshiaki Hayashi; Dharminder Chauhan; Paul Richardson; Robert Schlossman; Klaus Podar; Nikhil C Munshi; Nicholas Mitsiades; Kenneth C Anderson Journal: Blood Date: 2002-09-26 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Steffan T Nawrocki; Jennifer S Carew; Kirsteen H Maclean; James F Courage; Peng Huang; Janet A Houghton; John L Cleveland; Francis J Giles; David J McConkey Journal: Blood Date: 2008-07-18 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Loredana Santo; Teru Hideshima; Andrew L Kung; Jen-Chieh Tseng; David Tamang; Min Yang; Matthew Jarpe; John H van Duzer; Ralph Mazitschek; Walter C Ogier; Diana Cirstea; Scott Rodig; Homare Eda; Tyler Scullen; Miriam Canavese; James Bradner; Kenneth C Anderson; Simon S Jones; Noopur Raje Journal: Blood Date: 2012-01-19 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Girija Dasmahapatra; Dmitry Lembersky; Minkyeong P Son; Elisa Attkisson; Paul Dent; Richard I Fisher; Jonathan W Friedberg; Steven Grant Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2011-07-12 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Holly A F Stessman; Linda B Baughn; Aaron Sarver; Tian Xia; Raamesh Deshpande; Aatif Mansoor; Susan A Walsh; John J Sunderland; Nathan G Dolloff; Michael A Linden; Fenghuang Zhan; Siegfried Janz; Chad L Myers; Brian G Van Ness Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2013-03-27 Impact factor: 6.261