PURPOSE: To determine the toxicities, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and maximum tolerated dose of bortezomib in patients with renal impairment and to develop dosing guidelines for such a patient population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-two adult cancer patients received intravenous bortezomib at 0.7-1.5 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 every 3 weeks. Patients were stratified by 24-h creatinine clearance (CrCl) normalized to body surface area (BSA) 1.73 m(2) into five cohorts: normal renal function (≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); mild dysfunction (40-59 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); moderate dysfunction (20-39 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); severe dysfunction (<20 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); and dialysis. Dose escalation was planned for the four cohorts with renal dysfunction. Plasma bortezomib concentrations and blood 20S proteasome inhibition were assayed. RESULTS: Bortezomib escalation to the standard 1.3 mg/m(2) dose was well tolerated in all patients with CrCl ≥ 20 ml/min/1.73 m(2); 0.7 mg/m(2) was tolerated in three patients with severe renal dysfunction (<20 ml/min/1.73 m(2)). Bortezomib dose escalation was well tolerated in nine dialysis patients, including to 1.3 mg/m(2) in four patients. Decreased CrCl did not affect bortezomib pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics. Bortezomib-related side-effects were neither more common nor severe in patients with renal dysfunction versus those with normal renal function. CONCLUSION: Bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) is well tolerated, and dose reductions are not necessary in patients with renal dysfunction. Extrapolation from clinical and pharmacologic data suggests patients with severe renal dysfunction, including dialysis patients, can receive bortezomib at the full dose established to be clinically effective in the general patient population.
PURPOSE: To determine the toxicities, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and maximum tolerated dose of bortezomib in patients with renal impairment and to develop dosing guidelines for such a patient population. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Sixty-two adult cancerpatients received intravenous bortezomib at 0.7-1.5 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 every 3 weeks. Patients were stratified by 24-h creatinine clearance (CrCl) normalized to body surface area (BSA) 1.73 m(2) into five cohorts: normal renal function (≥ 60 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); mild dysfunction (40-59 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); moderate dysfunction (20-39 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); severe dysfunction (<20 ml/min/1.73 m(2)); and dialysis. Dose escalation was planned for the four cohorts with renal dysfunction. Plasma bortezomib concentrations and blood 20S proteasome inhibition were assayed. RESULTS:Bortezomib escalation to the standard 1.3 mg/m(2) dose was well tolerated in all patients with CrCl ≥ 20 ml/min/1.73 m(2); 0.7 mg/m(2) was tolerated in three patients with severe renal dysfunction (<20 ml/min/1.73 m(2)). Bortezomib dose escalation was well tolerated in nine dialysis patients, including to 1.3 mg/m(2) in four patients. Decreased CrCl did not affect bortezomib pharmacokinetics or pharmacodynamics. Bortezomib-related side-effects were neither more common nor severe in patients with renal dysfunction versus those with normal renal function. CONCLUSION:Bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) is well tolerated, and dose reductions are not necessary in patients with renal dysfunction. Extrapolation from clinical and pharmacologic data suggests patients with severe renal dysfunction, including dialysis patients, can receive bortezomib at the full dose established to be clinically effective in the general patient population.
Authors: B D Cheson; S J Horning; B Coiffier; M A Shipp; R I Fisher; J M Connors; T A Lister; J Vose; A Grillo-López; A Hagenbeek; F Cabanillas; D Klippensten; W Hiddemann; R Castellino; N L Harris; J O Armitage; W Carter; R Hoppe; G P Canellos Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 1999-04 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: F Léger; S Séronie-Vivien; J Makdessi; I Lochon; J P Delord; C Sarda; P Canal; E Chatelut Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2002-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: T Hideshima; P Richardson; D Chauhan; V J Palombella; P J Elliott; J Adams; K C Anderson Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2001-04-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: A Goy; S H Bernstein; B S Kahl; B Djulbegovic; M J Robertson; S de Vos; E Epner; A Krishnan; J P Leonard; S Lonial; S Nasta; O A O'Connor; H Shi; A L Boral; R I Fisher Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2008-12-12 Impact factor: 32.976
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: Shing M Lee; Daniel Backenroth; Ying Kuen Ken Cheung; Dawn L Hershman; Diana Vulih; Barry Anderson; Percy Ivy; Lori Minasian Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2016-02-29 Impact factor: 44.544
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: Philippe Moreau; Ievgenii I Karamanesht; Natalia Domnikova; Maryna Y Kyselyova; Kateryna V Vilchevska; Vadim A Doronin; Alexander Schmidt; Cyrille Hulin; Xavier Leleu; Dixie-Lee Esseltine; Karthik Venkatakrishnan; Donna Skee; Huaibao Feng; Suzette Girgis; Andrew Cakana; Helgi van de Velde; William Deraedt; Thierry Facon Journal: Clin Pharmacokinet Date: 2012-12 Impact factor: 6.447