MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Pharmacokinetics of Dasatinib as a First Line Therapy In Newly Diagnosed CML Patients (OPTIM dasatinib trial): Correlation with Safety and Response.

2010· article· en· W2550077017 on OpenAlexaff
Philippe Rousselot, Stéphane Boucher, Gabriel Étienne, Franck E. Nicolini, Emmanuelle Chauzit, Pascale Cony Makhoul, Valérie Coiteux, Agnès Guerci, Martine Gardembas, Laurence Legros, Lydia Roy, Caroline Dartigeas, Maud Janvier, Christian Berthou, Lambert Busque, Mathiéu Molimard, Joëlle Guilhot, Luigina Mollica, François‐Xavier Mahon

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicChronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments
Canadian institutionsUniversité de MontréalHôpital Maisonneuve-Rosemont
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDasatinibCminMedicineCmaxInternal medicinePharmacokineticsAdverse effectDosingTyrosine-kinase inhibitorGastroenterologyPharmacologyOncologyTyrosine kinaseCancerReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Abstract 3432 Introduction. Dasatinib 100 mg QD is now validated as a first line option in patients with chronic myelogenous leukaemia in chronic phase (CML in CP). Our hypothesis was that significant adverse events observed with dasatinib including fluid retention, pleural effusions and grade 3–4 cytopenias, may be driven by the level of the residual dosage of dasatinib (Cmin). We initiated an optimization study based on the monitoring of dasatinib plasma levels (Cmin and Cmax) in patients with CML in chronic phase newly diagnosed and treated with dasatinib as front line therapy. Patients and methods. Patients aged 18 years old or more were eligible if they were diagnosed with CML in CP for less than 3 months without having being exposed to tyrosine kinase inhibitors. Dasatinib was initiated at the daily dose of 100 mg QD. Dasatinib daily dose adaptation was randomized in patients with a Cmin over 3nM. For all other patients, dasatinib was given at the dose of 100 mg QD. The pharmacokinetic (PK) evaluation (Cmin and Cmax measurements) was performed after 7 to 10 days of therapy and then every 15 days in the treatment adaptation arm (until a level of Cmin under 3nM) and every 3 months therafter as in the non-adapted arm. Cmax was assessed 2 hours after dasatinib intake. Results. The results of the first 78 patients included in the trial from May 2009 to May 2010 are reported. Median age was 47 years (19 – 77) with a sex ratio M/F of 1.85. The Sokal score distribution was 51.9%, 30.7% and 17.4% for Low, intermediate and high risk respectively. Median Cmin and Cmax values were 2.1 nM (range 0.2–18.7) and 107.6 nM (range 20.5–353) at first PK analysis. The median Cmin value was significantly lower in patients with age <47y compared to patients >47y (1.6 nM versus 2.8 nM, p=0.0028). By contrast, the median Cmax value was comparable in both age groups. Efficacy analysis was performed on the 53 patients with a 3 months follow-up and on the 36 patients with a 6 months follow-up. The complete cytogenetic response (CCR) rates at 3 and 6 months were 83.3% and 90.9% respectively. At 3 and 6 months, the major molecular response (MMR) rates were 15.1% and 69.4%. All patients in cytogenetic failure had high Sokal score values (p=0.023). Median PK values at months 3 and 6 were not statistically different compared to initial PK values, suggesting a stable exposure to the treatment with time. With a median follow-up of 7.2 months, the rate of significant adverse events was 11.5%. Fluid retention (n=2) and pleural effusion (n=1) were observed in patients with high Cmin values (mean 3.7 nM). A trend was observed between the Cmax and response at month 3 (CCR, p=0.05 and MMR, p=0.08). Patients with lymphocytosis may have a higher MMR rate (p=0.07). Conclusion. Dasatinib 100 mg QD as first line therapy in CP CML provided a high rate of MMR and CCR rates. Pharmacokinetic parameters of dasatinib were different in aged patients. A trend was observed first between Cmax and responses and second between Cmin and fluid retention or pleural effusion. A complete analysis with correlation to response and safety will be presented on more patients with 6 and 12 months follow-up. Disclosures: Rousselot: Bristol Myers Squibb: Research Funding. Off Label Use: Dasatinib as first line therapy for CML.

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)0.002
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.007

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.273
Teacher spread0.261 · 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

Citations8
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBlood→Same topicChronic Myeloid Leukemia Treatments→French-language works237,207→