PURPOSE: To investigate the safety, optimal dosing, pharmacokinetics and clinical activity of a regimen of navitoclax (ABT-263) combined with gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with solid tumors for which gemcitabine was deemed an appropriate therapy were enrolled into one of two different dosing schedules (21-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administered orally on days 1-3 and 8-10,; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8; 28-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administrated orally on days 1-3, 8-10, and 15-17; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15). Navitoclax doses were escalated from 150 to 425 mg. An expanded safety cohort was conducted for the 21-day dosing schedule at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of navitoclax. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were enrolled at three U.S. centers. The most common adverse events included: hematologic abnormalities (thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia), liver enzyme elevations (ALT and AST), and gastrointestinal disturbances (diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed in cycle 1 were grade 4 thrombocytopenia (2 patients), grade 4 neutropenia (1 patient), and grade 3 AST elevation (2 patients). The MTD of navitoclax was 325 mg co-administered with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) for the 21-day schedule. No clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions were observed. There were no objective responses. Stable disease, reported at the end of cycle 2, was the best response in 54 % of evaluable patients (n = 39). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of navitoclax 325 mg with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) was generally well tolerated and exhibited a favorable safety profile in patients with advanced solid tumors.
PURPOSE: To investigate the safety, optimal dosing, pharmacokinetics and clinical activity of a regimen of navitoclax (ABT-263) combined with gemcitabine in patients with solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN:Patients with solid tumors for which gemcitabine was deemed an appropriate therapy were enrolled into one of two different dosing schedules (21-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administered orally on days 1-3 and 8-10,; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8; 28-day dosing schedule: navitoclax administrated orally on days 1-3, 8-10, and 15-17; and gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15). Navitoclax doses were escalated from 150 to 425 mg. An expanded safety cohort was conducted for the 21-day dosing schedule at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of navitoclax. RESULTS: Forty-six patients were enrolled at three U.S. centers. The most common adverse events included: hematologic abnormalities (thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia), liver enzyme elevations (ALT and AST), and gastrointestinal disturbances (diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting). Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) observed in cycle 1 were grade 4 thrombocytopenia (2 patients), grade 4 neutropenia (1 patient), and grade 3 AST elevation (2 patients). The MTD of navitoclax was 325 mg co-administered with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) for the 21-day schedule. No clinically significant pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions were observed. There were no objective responses. Stable disease, reported at the end of cycle 2, was the best response in 54 % of evaluable patients (n = 39). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of navitoclax 325 mg with gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m(2) was generally well tolerated and exhibited a favorable safety profile in patients with advanced solid tumors.
Authors: Leena Gandhi; D Ross Camidge; Moacyr Ribeiro de Oliveira; Philip Bonomi; David Gandara; Divis Khaira; Christine L Hann; Evelyn M McKeegan; Elizabeth Litvinovich; Philip M Hemken; Caroline Dive; Sari H Enschede; Cathy Nolan; Yi-Lin Chiu; Todd Busman; Hao Xiong; Andrew P Krivoshik; Rod Humerickhouse; Geoffrey I Shapiro; Charles M Rudin Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-01-31 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Stephen K Tahir; Xiufen Yang; Mark G Anderson; Susan E Morgan-Lappe; Aparna V Sarthy; Jun Chen; Robert B Warner; Shi-Chung Ng; Stephen W Fesik; Steve W Elmore; Saul H Rosenberg; Christin Tse Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2007-02-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Christin Tse; Alexander R Shoemaker; Jessica Adickes; Mark G Anderson; Jun Chen; Sha Jin; Eric F Johnson; Kennan C Marsh; Michael J Mitten; Paul Nimmer; Lisa Roberts; Stephen K Tahir; Yu Xiao; Xiufen Yang; Haichao Zhang; Stephen Fesik; Saul H Rosenberg; Steven W Elmore Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2008-05-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Charles M Rudin; Christine L Hann; Edward B Garon; Moacyr Ribeiro de Oliveira; Philip D Bonomi; D Ross Camidge; Quincy Chu; Giuseppe Giaccone; Divis Khaira; Suresh S Ramalingam; Malcolm R Ranson; Caroline Dive; Evelyn M McKeegan; Brenda J Chyla; Barry L Dowell; Arunava Chakravartty; Cathy E Nolan; Niki Rudersdorf; Todd A Busman; Mack H Mabry; Andrew P Krivoshik; Rod A Humerickhouse; Geoffrey I Shapiro; Leena Gandhi Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2012-04-11 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Bodo Schniewind; Matthias Christgen; Roland Kurdow; Sieglinde Haye; Bernd Kremer; Holger Kalthoff; Hendrik Ungefroren Journal: Int J Cancer Date: 2004-03-20 Impact factor: 7.396
Authors: Paul J Derry; Muralidhar L Hegde; George R Jackson; Rakez Kayed; James M Tour; Ah-Lim Tsai; Thomas A Kent Journal: Prog Neurobiol Date: 2019-10-08 Impact factor: 11.685
Authors: Thomas J Ow; Cory D Fulcher; Carlos Thomas; Pilib Ó Broin; Andrea López; Denis E Reyna; Richard V Smith; Catherine Sarta; Michael B Prystowsky; Nicolas F Schlecht; Bradley A Schiff; Gregory Rosenblatt; Thomas J Belbin; Thomas M Harris; Geoffrey C Childs; Nicole Kawachi; Chandan Guha; Evripidis Gavathiotis Journal: Oncotarget Date: 2019-01-11
Authors: Nicolas Malaquin; Arthur Vancayseele; Sophie Gilbert; Laureen Antenor-Habazac; Marc-Alexandre Olivier; Zakia Ait Ali Brahem; Fred Saad; Guila Delouya; Francis Rodier Journal: Cells Date: 2020-07-01 Impact factor: 6.600