...
首页> 外文期刊>Cancer: A Journal of the American Cancer Society >Stage i of a phase 2 study assessing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of barasertib (AZD1152) versus low-dose cytosine arabinoside in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia
【24h】

Stage i of a phase 2 study assessing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of barasertib (AZD1152) versus low-dose cytosine arabinoside in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia

机译:评估Barasertib(AZD1152)与低剂量胞嘧啶阿拉伯糖苷在老年急性髓样白血病患者中的疗效,安全性和耐受性的第二阶段研究的第一阶段

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND In this phase 2 study, the authors evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the Aurora B kinase inhibitor barasertib compared with low-dose cytosine arabinoside (LDAC) in patients aged ≥60 years with acute myeloid leukemia (AML). METHODS Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either open-label barasertib 1200 mg (as a 7-day intravenous infusion) or LDAC 20 mg (subcutaneously twice daily for 10 days) in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was the objective complete response rate (OCRR) (complete responses [CR] plus confirmed CRs with incomplete recovery of neutrophils or platelets [CRi] according to Cheson criteria [also requiring reconfirmation of CRi ≥21 days after the first appearance and associated with partial recovery of platelets and neutrophils]). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS In total, 74 patients (barasertib, n = 48; LDAC, n = 26) completed ≥1 cycle of treatment. A significant improvement in the OCRR was observed with barasertib (35.4% vs 11.5%; difference, 23.9%; 95% confidence interval, 2.7%-39.9%; P <.05). Although the study was not formally sized to compare OS data, the median OS with barasertib was 8.2 months versus 4.5 months with LDAC (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-1.58; P =.663). Stomatitis and febrile neutropenia were the most common adverse events with barasertib versus LDAC (71% vs 15% and 67% vs 19%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS Barasertib produced a significant improvement in the OCRR versus LDAC and had a more toxic but manageable safety profile, consistent with previous studies.
机译:背景在这项2期研究中,作者评估了Aurora B激酶抑制剂Barasertib与低剂量胞嘧啶阿拉伯糖苷(LDAC)在60岁以上的急性髓细胞性白血病(AML)患者中的疗效,安全性和耐受性。方法患者在28天的周期中按2:1的比例随机接受开放标签的Barasertib 1200 mg(作为7天静脉输注)或20 mg LDAC(每天皮下注射两次,共10天)。主要终点是客观完全缓解率(OCRR)(完全缓解[CR]加上确诊的CR,中性粒细胞或血小板恢复不完全[CRi]根据Cheson标准[也需要在首次出现后再确认CRi≥21天并与之相关部分恢复血小板和中性粒细胞])。次要终点包括总体生存期(OS)和安全性。结果总共有74例患者(barasertib,n = 48; LDAC,n = 26)完成了≥1个疗程。巴拉塞替尼观察到OCRR显着改善(35.4%比11.5%;差异23.9%; 95%置信区间2.7%-39.9%; P <.05)。尽管该研究尚未正式确定比较OS数据的规模,但使用Barasertib的OS的中位数为8.2个月,而使用LDAC的OS的中位数为4.5个月(危险比,0.88; 95%置信区间,0.49-1.58; P = .663)。 Barasertib与LDAC相比,口腔炎和发热性中性粒细胞减少是最常见的不良事件(分别为71%,15%和67%,19%)。结论Barasertib与LDAC相比在OCRR方面有显着改善,并且毒性更高,但可控的安全性与以前的研究一致。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号