MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2141787758 · doi:10.1158/1535-7163.targ-09-b54

Abstract B54: A phase 1 study to assess the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of the ErbB-family inhibitor ARRY-334543 in patients with advanced solid tumors

2009· article· en· W2141787758 on OpenAlexaff
Sebastién J. Hotte, Hal W. Hirte, Sandra Turner, D. Jonker, Catherine Fortin, Emma Barrett, Burgess B. Freeman, Carrie L Kass, Katherine Zacharias, Laura QM Chow

Bibliographic record

VenueMolecular Cancer Therapeutics · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsOttawa Regional Cancer FoundationJuravinski Cancer Centre
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPharmacokineticsMedicineDosingTolerabilityCmaxCapsuleAdverse effectPharmacologyInternal medicineGastroenterology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Background: ARRY-334543 is an oral, potent, ATP-competitive, selective, reversible ErbB family inhibitor. ARRY-334543 has evolved from a ditosylate salt in capsule to a smaller freebase tablet which eases swallowing. This study (ARRAY-543-103) was initiated to assess the safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the ARRY-334543 tablet. Effect of food on plasma pharmacokinetics (PK) of ARRY-334543 and intrapatient exposure with the capsule and tablet also were assessed. Methods: Sequential cohorts of patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled. Doses were escalated with a 3+3 design. For Cycle 1 only: to evaluate potential food effects, patients received single doses of the tablet on Day 1 (fasting) and Day 8 (with high-fat meal); to explore intrapatient exposure between capsule and tablet formulations, 6 additional patients were enrolled at the 300 mg dose only and received a single dose of the capsule on Day 1 and a single dose of the tablet on Day 8 after high-fat meals. In both scenarios, PK was assessed on Days 1 and 8 and starting on Day 10, all patients began twice-daily (BID) dosing regardless of food. All subsequent cycles were BID dosing for 28 days regardless of food. Additional PK assessments were performed on Day 24 at steady state. Preliminary Results: To date, 29 patients (16 females/13 males) have been treated at 4 dose levels ranging from 300 to 600 mg BID. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurred in 3 of 10 patients in the 300 mg cohort (1 patient had a Grade 4 AST/Grade 3 ALT increase, 2 patients had Grade 3 fatigue). No DLTs were observed in the 400 mg cohort. Two of 4 patients in the 600 mg cohort had DLTs (1 patient: Grade 3 thrombosis and a Grade 3 AST/ALT increase; 1 patient: Grade 3 anorexia) so a 500 mg cohort was opened. One DLT has been observed at 500 mg BID (1 patient had Grade 3 weakness and Grade 4 ALT/Grade 3 AST) and expansion at this dose level is ongoing. Frequent drug-related adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (65%), diarrhea (35%), rash (35%) and anorexia (31%) with most AEs being Grade 1 or 2. Three patients at doses = 300 mg BID have had stable disease for ≥ 6 cycles. One patient with cervical cancer and 1 patient with squamous cell carcinoma of the skin remain on study after 11+ and 6.8 months, respectively. Mean Cmax and AUC estimates were 1.5 and 2-fold higher, respectively, when tablets were administered with a high-fat meal. In the fed state, mean Cmax and AUC values associated with capsules were 2.6-fold higher than tablets. Steady state mean AUC values for tablets at 300 mg BID were similar to capsules at 400 mg BID in a previous Phase 1 study. Conclusions: ARRY-334543 tablets demonstrated acceptable safety; determination of the MTD is ongoing. Preliminary PK data for tablets indicate a modest food effect and a steady state exposure similar to that obtained with capsules. Based on these results, future studies of ARRY-334543 will be conducted with tablets. Citation Information: Mol Cancer Ther 2009;8(12 Suppl):B54.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.002

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.336 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMolecular Cancer TherapeuticsSame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207