First-in-Human Phase I Study of an Oral HSP90 Inhibitor, TAS-116, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract HSP90 is involved in stability and function of cancer-related proteins. This study was conducted to define the MTD, safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary antitumor efficacy of TAS-116, a novel class, orally available, highly selective inhibitor of HSP90. Patients with advanced solid tumors received TAS-116 orally once daily (QD, step 1) or every other day (QOD, step 2) in 21-day cycles. Each step comprised a dose escalation phase to determine MTD and an expansion phase at the MTD. In the dose escalation phase, an accelerated dose-titration design and a “3+3” design were used. Sixty-one patients were enrolled in Japan and the United Kingdom. MTD was determined to be 107.5 mg/m2/day for QD, and 210.7 mg/m2/day for QOD. In the expansion phase of step 1, TAS-116 was administered 5 days on/2 days off per week (QD × 5). The most common treatment-related adverse events included gastrointestinal disorders, creatinine increases, AST increases, ALT increases, and eye disorders. Eye disorders have been reported with HSP90 inhibitors; however, those observed with TAS-116 in the expansion phases were limited to grade 1. The systemic exposure of TAS-116 increased dose-proportionally with QD and QOD regimens. Two patients with non–small cell lung cancer and one patient with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) achieved a confirmed partial response. TAS-116 had an acceptable safety profile with some antitumor activity, supporting further development of this HSP90 inhibitor. This is a result from a first-in-human study, in which the HSP90 inhibitor TAS-116 demonstrated preliminary antitumor efficacy in patients with advanced solid tumors, including those with heavily pretreated GIST.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".