PURPOSE: Panobinostat, a pan-deacetylase inhibitor, is a promising anti-cancer agent that increases acetylation of proteins associated with growth and survival pathways of malignant cells. The primary objective of this phase I dose-escalation study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of intravenous (i.v.) panobinostat administered on different dosing schedules in patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma. Secondary objective was to characterize safety and tolerability, pharmacokinetic profiles, and activities of the i.v. formulation. METHODS: i.v. panobinostat was administered at escalating doses on a daily (days 1-3 and 8-10 of a 21-day cycle; days 1-3 and 15-17 of a 28-day cycle) or weekly (days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle; days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) schedule, and safety and tolerability were monitored. Serial blood samples were collected following dosing for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses. RESULTS: The MTD for the daily administration schedule was 7.2 g/m(2), whereas the MTD for the weekly schedule was 20.0 mg/m(2). In addition to fatigue and cardiac arrhythmias, including prolonged QTcF, DLTs associated with the study drug were principally due to myelosuppressive effects. Maximum concentrations and bioavailability of i.v. panobinostat increased dose-proportionally across all doses evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this study and others, the i.v. formulation of panobinostat was well tolerated in many patients, but concerns remain regarding its potential suitability outside the study setting due to potential electrocardiogram abnormalities. Therefore, further development will focus on the panobinostat oral formulation.
PURPOSE:Panobinostat, a pan-deacetylase inhibitor, is a promising anti-cancer agent that increases acetylation of proteins associated with growth and survival pathways of malignant cells. The primary objective of this phase I dose-escalation study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of intravenous (i.v.) panobinostat administered on different dosing schedules in patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma. Secondary objective was to characterize safety and tolerability, pharmacokinetic profiles, and activities of the i.v. formulation. METHODS: i.v. panobinostat was administered at escalating doses on a daily (days 1-3 and 8-10 of a 21-day cycle; days 1-3 and 15-17 of a 28-day cycle) or weekly (days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle; days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle) schedule, and safety and tolerability were monitored. Serial blood samples were collected following dosing for pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses. RESULTS: The MTD for the daily administration schedule was 7.2 g/m(2), whereas the MTD for the weekly schedule was 20.0 mg/m(2). In addition to fatigue and cardiac arrhythmias, including prolonged QTcF, DLTs associated with the study drug were principally due to myelosuppressive effects. Maximum concentrations and bioavailability of i.v. panobinostat increased dose-proportionally across all doses evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the results of this study and others, the i.v. formulation of panobinostat was well tolerated in many patients, but concerns remain regarding its potential suitability outside the study setting due to potential electrocardiogram abnormalities. Therefore, further development will focus on the panobinostat oral formulation.
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: Patricia Maiso; Xonia Carvajal-Vergara; Enrique M Ocio; Ricardo López-Pérez; Gema Mateo; Norma Gutiérrez; Peter Atadja; Atanasio Pandiella; Jesús F San Miguel Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2006-06-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Elise A Olsen; Youn H Kim; Timothy M Kuzel; Theresa R Pacheco; Francine M Foss; Sareeta Parker; Stanley R Frankel; Cong Chen; Justin L Ricker; Jean Marie Arduino; Madeleine Duvic Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-06-18 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Yi-Shan Lee; Kian-Huat Lim; Xing Guo; Yoshiharu Kawaguchi; Yasheng Gao; Tomasa Barrientos; Peter Ordentlich; Xiao-Fan Wang; Christopher M Counter; Tso-Pang Yao Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2008-09-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Yonghua Yang; Rehka Rao; Jie Shen; Yun Tang; Warren Fiskus; John Nechtman; Peter Atadja; Kapil Bhalla Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2008-06-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Jesus G Berdeja; Lowell L Hart; Joseph R Mace; Edward R Arrowsmith; James H Essell; Rami S Owera; John D Hainsworth; Ian W Flinn Journal: Haematologica Date: 2015-02-20 Impact factor: 9.941
Authors: Ivan Kopljar; David J Gallacher; An De Bondt; Laure Cougnaud; Eddy Vlaminckx; Ilse Van den Wyngaert; Hua Rong Lu Journal: Stem Cells Transl Med Date: 2016-03-31 Impact factor: 6.940
Authors: Ivan Kopljar; An De Bondt; Petra Vinken; Ard Teisman; Bruce Damiano; Nick Goeminne; Ilse Van den Wyngaert; David J Gallacher; Hua Rong Lu Journal: Br J Pharmacol Date: 2017-02-08 Impact factor: 8.739