Xiaoyu Li1, Meng Qiu2, Li Zheng3, ShengJun Wang1, Hong Zhu2, Bi Feng4. 1. Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, GCP Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Guoxuexiang 37#, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. 2. Department of Abdominal Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Guoxuexiang 37#, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. 3. Institute of Clinical Pharmacology, GCP Center, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Guoxuexiang 37#, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. lzheng2005618@163.com. 4. Department of Abdominal Oncology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Guoxuexiang 37#, Chengdu, 610041, Sichuan, China. bifeng@csco.org.cn.
Abstract
PURPOSE: This Phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability, food effects, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics of donafenib in patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Eligible patients received a single dose of donafenib (50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, 300 mg, or 400 mg) and were then observed over a 7-day period; thereafter, each patient received the corresponding dose of donafenib twice daily for at least 4 weeks. Safety assessment and pharmacokinetic sampling were performed for all patients at the given time points; preliminary tumour response was also assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled in this study. Gastrointestinal reactions were the most common treatment-related adverse event, followed by skin toxicity. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 300 mg bid. The dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were grade 3 diarrhoea and fatigue at 300 mg bid and grade 3 skin toxicity at 400 mg bid. In the dose range of 100 ~ 400 mg, T1/2 and AUC0-t after multiple doses were 26.9 ~ 30.2 h and 189 ~ 356 h*μg/mL, respectively. Food did not have a significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of donafenib. Twenty-one patients were assessed for efficacy, and two patients achieved a partial response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), with a disease control rate of 57.1%. CONCLUSION: Oral donafenib was generally well tolerated and appeared to provide some clinical benefits; adverse events were manageable. Based on the results of this study, oral donafenib at 200 mg ~ 300 mg twice daily is recommended for further studies.
PURPOSE: This Phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability, food effects, pharmacodynamics, and pharmacokinetics of donafenib in patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Eligible patients received a single dose of donafenib (50 mg, 100 mg, 200 mg, 300 mg, or 400 mg) and were then observed over a 7-day period; thereafter, each patient received the corresponding dose of donafenib twice daily for at least 4 weeks. Safety assessment and pharmacokinetic sampling were performed for all patients at the given time points; preliminary tumour response was also assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled in this study. Gastrointestinal reactions were the most common treatment-related adverse event, followed by skin toxicity. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 300 mg bid. The dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were grade 3 diarrhoea and fatigue at 300 mg bid and grade 3 skin toxicity at 400 mg bid. In the dose range of 100 ~ 400 mg, T1/2 and AUC0-t after multiple doses were 26.9 ~ 30.2 h and 189 ~ 356 h*μg/mL, respectively. Food did not have a significant effect on the pharmacokinetics of donafenib. Twenty-one patients were assessed for efficacy, and two patients achieved a partial response according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), with a disease control rate of 57.1%. CONCLUSION:Oral donafenib was generally well tolerated and appeared to provide some clinical benefits; adverse events were manageable. Based on the results of this study, oral donafenib at 200 mg ~ 300 mg twice daily is recommended for further studies.
Authors: Bernard Escudier; Tim Eisen; Walter M Stadler; Cezary Szczylik; Stéphane Oudard; Michael Siebels; Sylvie Negrier; Christine Chevreau; Ewa Solska; Apurva A Desai; Frédéric Rolland; Tomasz Demkow; Thomas E Hutson; Martin Gore; Scott Freeman; Brian Schwartz; Minghua Shan; Ronit Simantov; Ronald M Bukowski Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2007-01-11 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Neehar D Parikh; Vincent D Marshall; Amit G Singal; Hari Nathan; Anna S Lok; Rajesh Balkrishnan; Vahakn Shahinian Journal: Hepatology Date: 2016-11-25 Impact factor: 17.425
Authors: A E Mutlib; R J Gerson; P C Meunier; P J Haley; H Chen; L S Gan; M H Davies; B Gemzik; D D Christ; D F Krahn; J A Markwalder; S P Seitz; R T Robertson; G T Miwa Journal: Toxicol Appl Pharmacol Date: 2000-11-15 Impact factor: 4.219
Authors: Josep M Llovet; Sergio Ricci; Vincenzo Mazzaferro; Philip Hilgard; Edward Gane; Jean-Frédéric Blanc; Andre Cosme de Oliveira; Armando Santoro; Jean-Luc Raoul; Alejandro Forner; Myron Schwartz; Camillo Porta; Stefan Zeuzem; Luigi Bolondi; Tim F Greten; Peter R Galle; Jean-François Seitz; Ivan Borbath; Dieter Häussinger; Tom Giannaris; Minghua Shan; Marius Moscovici; Dimitris Voliotis; Jordi Bruix Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-07-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Monica A Kamal; Yasmine M Mandour; Mostafa K Abd El-Aziz; Ulrike Stein; Hend M El Tayebi Journal: Molecules Date: 2022-08-28 Impact factor: 4.927