PURPOSE: The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib undergoes oxidative hepatic metabolism. This study (NCI-6432; NCT00091117) was conducted to evaluate bortezomib pharmacokinetics and safety in patients with varying degrees of hepatic impairment, to inform dosing recommendations in these special populations. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients received bortezomib on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of 21-day cycles. Patients were assigned to four hepatic function groups based on the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group classification. Those with normal function received bortezomib at the 1.3 mg/m(2) standard dose. Patients with severe, moderate, and mild impairment received escalating doses from 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 mg/m(2), respectively, up to a 1.3 mg/m(2) maximum. Serial blood samples were collected for 24 hours postdose on days 1 and 8, cycle 1, for bortezomib plasma concentration measurements. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were treated, including 14 with normal hepatic function and 17, 12, and 18 with mild, moderate, and severe impairment, respectively. Mild hepatic impairment did not alter dose-normalized bortezomib exposure (AUC(0-tlast)) or C(max) compared with patients with normal function. Mean dose-normalized AUC(0-tlast) was increased by approximately 60% on day 8 in patients with moderate or severe impairment. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with mild hepatic impairment do not require a starting dose adjustment of bortezomib. Patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment should be started at a reduced dose of 0.7 mg/m(2).
PURPOSE: The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib undergoes oxidative hepatic metabolism. This study (NCI-6432; NCT00091117) was conducted to evaluate bortezomib pharmacokinetics and safety in patients with varying degrees of hepatic impairment, to inform dosing recommendations in these special populations. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:Patients received bortezomib on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of 21-day cycles. Patients were assigned to four hepatic function groups based on the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group classification. Those with normal function received bortezomib at the 1.3 mg/m(2) standard dose. Patients with severe, moderate, and mild impairment received escalating doses from 0.5, 0.7, and 1.0 mg/m(2), respectively, up to a 1.3 mg/m(2) maximum. Serial blood samples were collected for 24 hours postdose on days 1 and 8, cycle 1, for bortezomib plasma concentration measurements. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were treated, including 14 with normal hepatic function and 17, 12, and 18 with mild, moderate, and severe impairment, respectively. Mild hepatic impairment did not alter dose-normalized bortezomib exposure (AUC(0-tlast)) or C(max) compared with patients with normal function. Mean dose-normalized AUC(0-tlast) was increased by approximately 60% on day 8 in patients with moderate or severe impairment. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with mild hepatic impairment do not require a starting dose adjustment of bortezomib. Patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment should be started at a reduced dose of 0.7 mg/m(2).
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: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Teresa Pekol; J Scott Daniels; Jason Labutti; Ian Parsons; Darrell Nix; Elizabeth Baronas; Frank Hsieh; Liang-Shang Gan; Gerald Miwa Journal: Drug Metab Dispos Date: 2005-03-11 Impact factor: 3.922
Authors: Suresh S Ramalingam; Shivaani Kummar; John Sarantopoulos; Stephen Shibata; Patricia LoRusso; Mara Yerk; Julianne Holleran; Yan Lin; Jan H Beumer; R Donald Harvey; S Percy Ivy; Chandra P Belani; Merrill J Egorin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-09-13 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Jason Labutti; Ian Parsons; Ron Huang; Gerald Miwa; Liang-Shang Gan; J Scott Daniels Journal: Chem Res Toxicol Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 3.739
Authors: Timothy W Synold; Chris H Takimoto; James H Doroshow; David Gandara; Sridhar Mani; Scot C Remick; Daniel L Mulkerin; Anne Hamilton; Sunil Sharma; Ramesh K Ramanathan; Heinz Josef Lenz; Martin Graham; Jeffrey Longmate; Bennett M Kaufman; Percy Ivy Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2007-06-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Michael P Fanucchi; Frank V Fossella; Robert Belt; Ronald Natale; Panos Fidias; David P Carbone; Ramaswamy Govindan; Luis E Raez; Francisco Robert; Maria Ribeiro; Wallace Akerley; Karen Kelly; Steven A Limentani; Jeffrey Crawford; Hans-Joachim Reimers; Rita Axelrod; Oscar Kashala; Shihong Sheng; Joan H Schiller Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2006-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nicholas Di Bella; Raymond Taetle; Kathryn Kolibaba; Thomas Boyd; Robert Raju; David Barrera; Ernest W Cochran; Philip Y Dien; Roger Lyons; Peter J Schlegel; Svetislava J Vukelja; Julie Boston; Kristi A Boehm; Yunfei Wang; Lina Asmar Journal: Blood Date: 2009-11-19 Impact factor: 22.113
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: 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: Alison R Walker; Rebecca Klisovic; Jeffrey S Johnston; Yao Jiang; Susan Geyer; Cheryl Kefauver; Philip Binkley; John C Byrd; Michael R Grever; Ramiro Garzon; Mitch A Phelps; Guido Marcucci; Kristie A Blum; William Blum Journal: Leuk Lymphoma Date: 2013-01-24