PURPOSE: Vorinostat is the first US Food and Drug Administration-approved histone deacetylase inhibitor and is indicated for the treatment of refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. We conducted a phase I study to determine the maximum-tolerated dose and pharmacokinetics of vorinostat in patients with hepatic dysfunction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had solid malignancies and acceptable bone marrow and renal function. Hepatic dysfunction was categorized as mild, moderate, or severe by the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group criteria. Fifteen patients with normal liver function were enrolled as controls. All patients received a single 400-mg dose of vorinostat for pharmacokinetic studies. One week later, daily vorinostat dosing was begun and continued until toxicity or disease progression occurred. The daily vorinostat dose was escalated within each hepatic dysfunction category. Vorinostat plasma concentrations were quantitated by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay and modeled noncompartmentally. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were enrolled (median age, 59 years; females, n = 24); 42 patients had hepatic dysfunction (16 mild, 15 moderate, and 11 severe). Eight of nine patients with dose-limiting toxicity had grade 4 thrombocytopenia. The recommended vorinostat doses in mild, moderate, and severe hepatic dysfunction were 300, 200, and 100 mg, respectively, on the daily continuous schedule. There were no significant differences in vorinostat pharmacokinetic parameters among the normal or hepatic dysfunction categories. Disease stabilization was noted in 12 patients. Of five patients with adenoid cystic carcinoma, one patient had a partial response, and four patients had stable disease. A patient with papillary thyroid carcinoma had stable disease for more than 2 years. CONCLUSION: Patients with varying degrees of hepatic dysfunction require appropriate dose reduction even though vorinostat pharmacokinetics are unaltered.
PURPOSE:Vorinostat is the first US Food and Drug Administration-approved histone deacetylase inhibitor and is indicated for the treatment of refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. We conducted a phase I study to determine the maximum-tolerated dose and pharmacokinetics of vorinostat in patients with hepatic dysfunction. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients had solid malignancies and acceptable bone marrow and renal function. Hepatic dysfunction was categorized as mild, moderate, or severe by the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group criteria. Fifteen patients with normal liver function were enrolled as controls. All patients received a single 400-mg dose of vorinostat for pharmacokinetic studies. One week later, daily vorinostat dosing was begun and continued until toxicity or disease progression occurred. The daily vorinostat dose was escalated within each hepatic dysfunction category. Vorinostat plasma concentrations were quantitated by a validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay and modeled noncompartmentally. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were enrolled (median age, 59 years; females, n = 24); 42 patients had hepatic dysfunction (16 mild, 15 moderate, and 11 severe). Eight of nine patients with dose-limiting toxicity had grade 4 thrombocytopenia. The recommended vorinostat doses in mild, moderate, and severe hepatic dysfunction were 300, 200, and 100 mg, respectively, on the daily continuous schedule. There were no significant differences in vorinostat pharmacokinetic parameters among the normal or hepatic dysfunction categories. Disease stabilization was noted in 12 patients. Of five patients with adenoid cystic carcinoma, one patient had a partial response, and four patients had stable disease. A patient with papillary thyroid carcinoma had stable disease for more than 2 years. CONCLUSION:Patients with varying degrees of hepatic dysfunction require appropriate dose reduction even though vorinostat pharmacokinetics are unaltered.
Authors: Madeleine Duvic; Rakshandra Talpur; Xiao Ni; Chunlei Zhang; Parul Hazarika; Cecilia Kelly; Judy H Chiao; John F Reilly; Justin L Ricker; Victoria M Richon; Stanley R Frankel Journal: Blood Date: 2006-09-07 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: Thehang H Luu; Robert J Morgan; Lucille Leong; Dean Lim; Mark McNamara; Jana Portnow; Paul Frankel; David D Smith; James H Doroshow; Carol Wong; Ana Aparicio; David R Gandara; George Somlo Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2008-11-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Marwan G Fakih; Lakshmi Pendyala; Gerald Fetterly; Karoli Toth; James A Zwiebel; Igor Espinoza-Delgado; Alan Litwin; Youcef M Rustum; Mary Ellen Ross; Julianne L Holleran; Merrill J Egorin Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-04-21 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Ramesh K Ramanathan; Merrill J Egorin; Chris H M Takimoto; Scot C Remick; James H Doroshow; Patricia A LoRusso; Daniel L Mulkerin; Jean L Grem; Anne Hamilton; Anthony J Murgo; Douglas M Potter; Chandra P Belani; Michael J Hayes; Bin Peng; S Percy Ivy Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joseph Gibbons; Merrill J Egorin; Ramesh K Ramanathan; Pingfu Fu; Daniel L Mulkerin; Stephen Shibata; Chris H M Takimoto; Sridhar Mani; Patricia A LoRusso; Jean L Grem; Anna Pavlick; Heinz-Josef Lenz; Susan M Flick; Sherrie Reynolds; Theodore F Lagattuta; Robert A Parise; Yanfeng Wang; Anthony J Murgo; S Percy Ivy; Scot C Remick Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: George R Blumenschein; Merrill S Kies; Vassiliki A Papadimitrakopoulou; Charles Lu; Ashok J Kumar; Justin L Ricker; Judy H Chiao; Cong Chen; Stanley R Frankel Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2007-10-25 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Anne M Traynor; Sarita Dubey; Jens C Eickhoff; Jill M Kolesar; Kathleen Schell; Michael S Huie; David L Groteluschen; Sarah M Marcotte; Courtney M Hallahan; Hilary R Weeks; George Wilding; Igor Espinoza-Delgado; Joan H Schiller Journal: J Thorac Oncol Date: 2009-04 Impact factor: 15.609
Authors: Suresh S Ramalingam; Robert A Parise; Ramesh K Ramanathan; Ramesh K Ramananthan; Theodore F Lagattuta; Lori A Musguire; Ronald G Stoller; Douglas M Potter; Athanassios E Argiris; James A Zwiebel; Merrill J Egorin; Chandra P Belani Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-05-17 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Antonius A Miller; Daryl J Murry; Kouros Owzar; Donna R Hollis; Erin B Kennedy; Ghassan Abou-Alfa; Apurva Desai; Jimmy Hwang; Miguel A Villalona-Calero; E Claire Dees; Lionel D Lewis; Marwan G Fakih; Martin J Edelman; Fred Millard; Richard C Frank; Raymond J Hohl; Mark J Ratain Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-03-02 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Elham A Mohamed; Yunqi Zhao; Mahasen M Meshali; Connie M Remsberg; Thanaa M Borg; Abdel Monem M Foda; Jody K Takemoto; Casey L Sayre; Stephanie E Martinez; Neal M Davies; M Laird Forrest Journal: J Pharm Sci Date: 2012-07-17 Impact factor: 3.534
Authors: Patricia M LoRusso; Karthik Venkatakrishnan; Ramesh K Ramanathan; John Sarantopoulos; Daniel Mulkerin; Stephen I Shibata; Anne Hamilton; Afshin Dowlati; Sridhar Mani; Michelle A Rudek; Chris H Takimoto; Rachel Neuwirth; Dixie-Lee Esseltine; Percy Ivy Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-03-06 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Aksana K Jones; Kevin J Freise; Suresh K Agarwal; Rod A Humerickhouse; Shekman L Wong; Ahmed Hamed Salem Journal: AAPS J Date: 2016-05-27 Impact factor: 4.009
Authors: Anne M Noonan; Robin A Eisch; David J Liewehr; Tristan M Sissung; David J Venzon; Thomas P Flagg; Mark C Haigney; Seth M Steinberg; William D Figg; Richard L Piekarz; Susan E Bates Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-04-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Aaron S Mansfield; Michelle A Rudek; Diana Vulih; Gary L Smith; Pamela Jo Harris; S Percy Ivy Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-05-17 Impact factor: 12.531