ArticleInvestigational new drugs2013
Phase I trial of dasatinib and ixabepilone in patients with solid tumors.
Article in Investigational new drugs, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- Incidence, Diagnosis, and Management of QT Prolongation Induced by Cancer Therapies: A Systematic Review.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2017Pooled it
- Targeting Senescence as a Therapeutic Opportunity for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.Molecular cancer therapeutics · 2023Review
- QT Interval Prolongation Associated With Cytotoxic and Targeted Cancer Therapeutics.Current treatment options in oncology · 2019Review
- Dasatinib (BMS-35482) interacts synergistically with docetaxel, gemcitabine, topotecan, and doxorubicin in ovarian cancer cells with high SRC pathway activation and protein expression.International journal of gynecological cancer : official journal of the International Gynecological Cancer Society · 2014Article
- Profile and potential of ixabepilone in the treatment of pancreatic cancer.Drug design, development and therapy · 2014Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDasatinib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) of BCR-ABL and SRC family and ixabepilone is an epothilone B analog. Synergistic activity has been reported when combining dasatinib with chemotherapy. This study was conducted to determine the dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and the maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) for this combination. PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with metastatic solid tumors who progressed on standard therapy received dasatinib orally daily and ixabepilone IV every 3 weeks at escalating doses using 3 + 3 design. An expansion cohort was studied after reaching the MTD. Pharmacokinetic studies were performed.
resultsNineteen patients were enrolled. No DLTs were observed at dose level (DL) 1 (dasatinib 100 mg and ixabepilone 30 mg/m(2)). At DL 2 (dasatinib 100 mg and ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2)), one patient had multiple DLTs. At DL 3 (dasatinib 150 mg and ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2)), the first patient developed grade 3 AE during cycle 2, the second patient had a DLT and a grade 3 AE during cycle 2. The accrual to DL 3 was halted without reaching the maximally administered dose (MAD) and MTDs were determined to be dasatinib 100 mg and ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2) (DL 2). One patient had a partial response and 12 patients stable disease as their best response. Fourteen patients came off study due to toxicities.
conclusionThe combination of dasatinib and ixabepilone showed modest clinical activity with doses 100 mg orally daily and 40 mg/m(2) IV every 3 weeks, respectively. Treatment related toxicities were seen frequently.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.