Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Mais filtros










Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Lancet Oncol ; 18(4): 435-445, 2017 04.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28284557

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: There are no established therapies specific for NRAS-mutant melanoma despite the emergence of immunotherapy. We aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of the MEK inhibitor binimetinib versus that of dacarbazine in patients with advanced NRAS-mutant melanoma. METHODS: NEMO is an ongoing, randomised, open-label phase 3 study done at 118 hospitals in 26 countries. Patients with advanced, unresectable, American Joint Committee on Cancer stage IIIC or stage IV NRAS-mutant melanoma who were previously untreated or had progressed on or after previous immunotherapy were randomised (2:1) to receive either binimetinib 45 mg orally twice daily or dacarbazine 1000 mg/m2 intravenously every 3 weeks. Randomisation was stratified by stage, performance status, and previous immunotherapy. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival assessed by blinded central review in the intention-to-treat population. Safety analyses were done in the safety population, consisting of all patients who received at least one study drug dose and one post-baseline safety assessment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01763164 and with EudraCT, number 2012-003593-51. FINDINGS: Between Aug 19, 2013, and April 28, 2015, 402 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned, 269 to binimetinib and 133 to dacarbazine. Median follow-up was 1·7 months (IQR 1·4-4·1). Median progression-free survival was 2·8 months (95% CI 2·8-3·6) in the binimetinib group and 1·5 months (1·5-1·7) in the dacarbazine group (hazard ratio 0·62 [95% CI 0·47-0·80]; one-sided p<0·001). Grade 3-4 adverse events seen in at least 5% of patients the safety population in either group were increased creatine phosphokinase (52 [19%] of 269 patients in the binimetinib group vs none of 114 in the dacarbazine group), hypertension (20 [7%] vs two [2%]), anaemia (five [2%] vs six [5%]), and neutropenia (two [1%] vs ten [9%]). Serious adverse events (all grades) occurred in 91 (34%) patients in the binimetinib group and 25 (22%) patients in the dacarbazine group. INTERPRETATION: Binimetinib improved progression-free survival compared with dacarbazine and was tolerable. Binimetinib might represent a new treatment option for patients with NRAS-mutant melanoma after failure of immunotherapy. FUNDING: Array BioPharma and Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.


Assuntos
Protocolos de Quimioterapia Combinada Antineoplásica/uso terapêutico , GTP Fosfo-Hidrolases/genética , Melanoma/tratamento farmacológico , Proteínas de Membrana/genética , Mutação/genética , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Benzimidazóis/administração & dosagem , Dacarbazina/administração & dosagem , Feminino , Seguimentos , Humanos , Masculino , Melanoma/genética , Melanoma/patologia , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estadiamento de Neoplasias , Prognóstico , Taxa de Sobrevida
2.
Am J Hematol ; 92(5): 420-428, 2017 May.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28142202

RESUMO

Once-daily deferasirox dispersible tablets (DT) have a well-defined safety and efficacy profile and, compared with parenteral deferoxamine, provide greater patient adherence, satisfaction, and quality of life. However, barriers still exist to optimal adherence, including gastrointestinal tolerability and palatability, leading to development of a new film-coated tablet (FCT) formulation that can be swallowed with a light meal, without the need to disperse into a suspension prior to consumption. The randomized, open-label, phase II ECLIPSE study evaluated the safety of deferasirox DT and FCT formulations over 24 weeks in chelation-naïve or pre-treated patients aged ≥10 years, with transfusion-dependent thalassemia or IPSS-R very-low-, low-, or intermediate-risk myelodysplastic syndromes. One hundred seventy-three patients were randomized 1:1 to DT (n = 86) or FCT (n = 87). Adverse events (overall), consistent with the known deferasirox safety profile, were reported in similar proportions of patients for each formulation (DT 89.5%; FCT 89.7%), with a lower frequency of severe events observed in patients receiving FCT (19.5% vs. 25.6% DT). Laboratory parameters (serum creatinine, creatinine clearance, alanine aminotransferase, aspartate aminotransferase and urine protein/creatinine ratio) generally remained stable throughout the study. Patient-reported outcomes showed greater adherence and satisfaction, better palatability and fewer concerns with FCT than DT. Treatment compliance by pill count was higher with FCT (92.9%) than with DT (85.3%). This analysis suggests deferasirox FCT offers an improved formulation with enhanced patient satisfaction, which may improve adherence, thereby reducing frequency and severity of iron overload-related complications.


Assuntos
Benzoatos/administração & dosagem , Síndromes Mielodisplásicas/tratamento farmacológico , Talassemia/tratamento farmacológico , Triazóis/administração & dosagem , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Química Farmacêutica/métodos , Criança , Deferasirox , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Cooperação do Paciente , Qualidade de Vida , Comprimidos com Revestimento Entérico/administração & dosagem , Comprimidos com Revestimento Entérico/efeitos adversos , Comprimidos com Revestimento Entérico/química , Adulto Jovem
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...