التفاصيل البيبلوغرافية
| العنوان: |
Oral paclitaxel with encequidar compared to intravenous paclitaxel in patients with advanced cancer: A randomised crossover pharmacokinetic study. |
| المؤلفون: |
Jackson, Christopher G. C. A., Hung, Tak, Segelov, Eva, Barlow, Paula, Prenen, Hans, McLaren, Blair, Hung, Noelyn Anne, Clarke, Katriona, Chao, Tsu‐Yi, Dai, Ming‐Shen, Yeh, Hsien‐Tang, Cutler, David L., Kramer, Douglas, He, Jimmy, Zhi, Jay, Chan, Wing‐Kai, Kwan, Rudolf, Deva, Sanjeev |
| المصدر: |
British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology; Dec2021, Vol. 87 Issue 12, p4670-4680, 11p |
| مصطلحات موضوعية: |
PACLITAXEL, CANCER patients, ANTINEOPLASTIC agents, PHARMACOKINETICS, INTRAVENOUS therapy |
| مستخلص: |
Aims: Paclitaxel is a widely used anti‐neoplastic agent but has low oral bioavailability due to gut extrusion by P‐glycoprotein (P‐gp). Oral paclitaxel could be more convenient, less resource intensive, and more tolerable than intravenous administration. Encequidar (HM30181A) is a novel, minimally absorbed gut‐specific P‐gp inhibitor. We tested whether administration of oral paclitaxel with encequidar (oPac+E) achieved comparable AUC to intravenous paclitaxel (IVP) 80 mg/m2. Methods: We conducted a multi‐centre randomised crossover study with two treatment periods. Patients (pts) with advanced cancer received either oral paclitaxel 615 mg/m2 divided over 3 days and encequidar 15 mg orally 1 hour prior, followed by IVP 80 mg/m2, or the reverse sequence. PK blood samples were taken up to Day 9 for oPac+E and Day 5 for IVP. Results: Forty‐two patients were enrolled; 35 completed both treatment periods. AUC0‐∞was 5033.5 ± 1401.1 ng.h/mL for oPac+E and 5595.9 ± 1264.1 ng.h/mL with IVP. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) for AUC was 89.50% (90% CI 83.89–95.50). Mean absolute bioavailability of oPac+E was 12% (CV% = 23%). PK parameters did not change meaningfully after 4 weeks administration of oPac+E in an extension study. G3 treatment‐emergent adverse events occurred in seven (18%) pts with oPac+E and two (5%) with IVP. Seventy‐five per cent of patients preferred oPac+E over IVP. Conclusions: GMR for AUC was within the predefined acceptable range of 80–125% for demonstrating equivalence. oPac+E is tolerable and there is no evidence of P‐gp induction with repeat administration. With further study, oPac+E could be an alternative to IVP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR] |
|
Copyright of British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.) |
| قاعدة البيانات: |
Complementary Index |
Full Text Finder