MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Phase I/II Study of the Oral Isotype-Selective Histone Deacetylase (HDAC) Inhibitor MGCD0103 in Combination with Azacitidine in Patients (pts) with High-Risk Myelodysplastic Syndrome (MDS) or Acute Myelogenous Leukemia (AML).

2006· article· en· W2583383492 on OpenAlexaff
Guillermo Garcia‐Manero, Allen S. Yang, Francis J. Giles, Stefan Faderl, Farhad Ravandi, Jörge E. Cortes, Willie Newsome, Jean‐Pierre J. Issa, Tracy-Ann Patterson, Marja Dubay, Zuomei Li, Hagop M. Kantarjian, Robert E. Martell

Bibliographic record

VenueBlood · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicHistone Deacetylase Inhibitors Research
Canadian institutionsPyrogenesis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAzacitidineMedicineInternal medicineMyelodysplastic syndromesLeukemiaGastroenterologyOncologyPharmacologyBone marrowDNA methylationBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Aberrant DNA methylation and histone code alterations are common in leukemia. The oral isotype-selective HDAC inhibitor MGCD0103 and the DNA methyltransferase inhibitor azacitidine have been shown to have synergistic antileukemia activity in preclinical models. Both agents have single-agent clinical activity in MDS and AML (Garcia-Manero, ASCO, 2006 & Silverman, JCO, 2002). Based on this, we have developed a Phase I/II study of the combination in leukemia. Patients with relapsed/refractory MDS (10% or more marrow blasts) or AML, or untreated older patients with AML are eligible. Adequate performance status, renal and hepatic functions are required. Azacitidine is administered at its approved dose/schedule: 75 mg/m2 SC daily x 7 every 28 days. MGCD0103 was started on day 5 of azacitidine and was given as an oral dose 3 times a week without adjusting for body weight, without interruption. The phase I portion of the study design followed a classic “3+3” model and only MGCD0103 was dose escalated. Three dose levels of MGCD0103 have been studied so far: 35, 60 and 90 mg. Twelve patients have been registered in this study. The median age is 61 (range 45–85). All, but 1 patient with MDS, had AML. All patients had relapsed or refractory disease. A total of 24 cycles have been administered, mean = 2.0 (range 1–4). Only 1 patient has experienced dose limiting toxicity: grade 3 vomiting at a dose of 90 mg of MGCD0103. Otherwise, the combination has been very well tolerated and the MTD has not yet been defined, with dosing currently ongoing at the approximate MTD of single agent MGCD0103: 110 mg orally three times a week without interruption. Preliminary PK data indicate that the t1/2 for azacitidine is less than 2 h, and does not appear to be affected by MGCD0103. Likewise, MGCD0103 pharmacokinetic characteristics do not appear to be affected by azacitidine. The majority of patients exhibited substantial reduction in HDAC activity during treatment with the combination. Analysis of DNA methylation is ongoing. Two patients have achieved response: 1 complete remission after 4 courses of therapy (in an older patient in first relapsed AML with an initial CR duration of 11 months and multiple cytogenetic abnormalities). A second older patient with refractory AML achieved a complete marrow CR (marrow blasts less than 5%) but died from pneumonia (not drug-related) after the second course of therapy on day 28 before peripheral count recovery. In conclusion, the combination of azacitidine with MGCD0103 is safe in patients with advanced AML/MDS. The combination has encouraging safety, PK, and clinical activity profiles. The study continues at the MTD of single agent MGCD013 in combination with azacitidine. Once the MTD of the combination is documented, the study will continue as a phase II study in this patient population.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.235
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations16
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBloodSame topicHistone Deacetylase Inhibitors ResearchFrench-language works237,207