| Literature DB >> 28261641 |
Avineesh Singh1, Vijay K Patel1, Deepak K Jain1, Preeti Patel1, Harish Rajak1.
Abstract
The histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors have been demonstrated as an emerging class of anticancer drugs. HDACs are involved in regulation of gene expression and in chromatin remodeling, thus indicating valid targets for different types of cancer therapeutics. The pan-deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat (Farydac®, LBH589) was developed by Novartis Pharmaceuticals and has been recently approved by the US Food and Drug Administraion (FDA) as a drug to treat multiple myeloma. It is under clinical investigation for a range of haematological and solid tumors worldwide in both oral and intravenous formulations. Panobinostat inhibits tumor cell growth by interacting with acetylation of histones and non-histone proteins as well as various apoptotic, autophagy-mediated targets and various tumorogenesis pathways involved in development of tumors. The optimal combination regimen for pancreatic cancer remains to be fully elucidated with various combination regimens, and should be investigated in clinical trials. This article summarizes the current preclinical and clinical status of panobinostat in pancreatic cancer. Preclinical data suggests that panobinostat has potential inhibitory activity in pancreatic cancer cells by targeting various pathways and factors involved in the development of cancer. Herein, we reviewed the status of mono and combination therapy and the rationale behind the combination therapy undergoing trials, as well as possible future prospective use in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.Entities:
Keywords: HDAC inhibitors; Histone deacetylase inhibitors; Pan-deacetylase inhibitor; Pancreatic cancer; Panobinostat
Year: 2016 PMID: 28261641 PMCID: PMC5315073 DOI: 10.1007/s40487-016-0023-1
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncol Ther ISSN: 2366-1089
Fig. 1Role and effects of HDACi in pancreatic cancer with their corresponding targets. HIF-1α hypoxia-inducible factor-1 alpha, TRAIL tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand, VEGF vascular endothelial growth factor, HSP90 heat shock protein 90, CDK cyclin-dependent kinase, up arrow symbol upregulation, down arrow symbol downregulation
Preclinical and clinical prospective of panobinostat in pancreatic cancer
| Study | Dose | Model(s) | Result | Adverse effects | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Preclinical | PAN 25 mg/kg IP BIW for 4 weeks | Xenograft mouse | PAN reduced the tumor growth as efficient as gemcitabine | – | [ |
| Phase I | Arm I: PAN 20-30 mg O BIW and GEM 800–1000 mg/m2 IV on 1, 8, 15 days (28 days) Arm II: PAN 10 mg O TIW and GEM 1000 mg/m2 IV on 1, 8, 15 days (28 days) Arm III: PAN 10 mg O TIW × 2 weeks and GEM 800–1000 mg/m2 IV on 1, 8 days (21 days) | 17 patients (three pancreatic patients) | A dose escalation study. Dose-dependent combination of PAN and gemcitabine was limited by myelosuppression | Dose-dependent grade 1–4 toxicities | [ |
| Phase II | PAN 20 mg O TIW × 2 weeks every 21 days + Bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 IV BIW × 2 weeks every 21 days | Seven patients | Terminated due to lack of treatment responses and unacceptable toxicity | Grade 3 thrombocytopenia (57%) Grade 4 diarrhea (29%) | [ |
| Preclinical | PAN 10 mg/kg IP TIW, BEZ235 25 mg/kg po, combination of PAN 10 mg/kg + BEZ235 25 mg/kg | Nude mice model | Significant differences in the mean tumor volumes after three weeks of treatment | – | [ |
| Preclinical | PAN 10 mg/kg IP BIW once daily, MK-1775 20 mg/kg O BIW twice daily, Combination PAN 10 mg/kg IP once + MK-1775 20 mg/kg O twice BIW (on day 1 and 3 for 3 weeks) | Xenograft mouse model | Delay in tumor growth 30.9% with MK-1775 and 37.8% with PAN alone therapy on day 20 but 58.7% with combination therapy | – | [ |
BIW twice weekly, d days, GEM gemcitabine, IP intraperitoneal, IV intravenous, PAN panobinostat, O orally, po per oral, TIW three times weekly