Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Cancer Invest ; 39(10): 871-879, 2021 11.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34643126

ABSTRACT

Novel therapeutics are needed for patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL). Everolimus is an mTOR pathway inhibitor with synergistic anti-tumor activity when combined with histone deacetylase inhibitors, such as panobinostat, in preclinical lymphoma models. In this Phase II study, we evaluated overall response rate to single and combination everolimus and panobinostat in R/R DLBCL. Fifteen patients were enrolled to single-agent and 18 to combination. One patient responded to everolimus, while none responded to panobinostat. Though 25% of patients responded to combination therapy, responses were not durable with significant toxicity. We demonstrated minimal single-agent activity and prohibitive toxicity with combination therapy.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy Protocols/therapeutic use , Everolimus/therapeutic use , Lymphoma, Large B-Cell, Diffuse/drug therapy , Panobinostat/therapeutic use , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Everolimus/administration & dosage , Everolimus/adverse effects , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Panobinostat/administration & dosage , Panobinostat/adverse effects , Prospective Studies , Recurrence
2.
Leuk Res ; 37(1): 28-31, 2013 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23046833

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: The decision to re-induce patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) based on results of the day 14 bone marrow (BM) biopsy is variable and lacks evidence based data. The aim of our review was to evaluate the accuracy of a day 14 BM biopsy in determining the need for re-induction chemotherapy. METHODS: Seventy-four patients with newly diagnosed de novo AML treated with induction chemotherapy were retrospectively reviewed for the purpose of evaluating treatment decisions and outcomes based on their day 14 BM biopsy. Response to therapy in this analysis was based on morphology alone. RESULTS: Of the 74 patients undergoing standard induction, 45 patients (61%) had no evidence of leukemia on their day 14 BM biopsy. Eighteen patients (24%) had definitive residual disease (RD), and 11 patient's (15%) were classified as indeterminate response (IR). Fifteen patients with RD and one with IR underwent re-induction chemotherapy. However, thirteen patients (3 RD and 10 IR) were observed until count recovery without any re-induction therapy. Eleven of these 13 patients who were observed eventually attained a morphologic complete remission (CR), including two patients with RD. CONCLUSIONS: A day 14 BM biopsy may have suboptimal sensitivity for the detection of residual leukemia. Some patients with an IR on day 14 may not require re-induction chemotherapy, but instead, may benefit from careful observation until count recovery to avoid the mortality and morbidity associated with re-induction chemotherapy.


Subject(s)
Bone Marrow/pathology , Induction Chemotherapy , Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute/drug therapy , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Biopsy , Humans , Leukemia, Myeloid, Acute/pathology , Middle Aged , Retrospective Studies
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...