Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24736581›Full record

Trial reportBritish journal of cancer2014

Pharmacokinetically guided sunitinib dosing: a feasibility study in patients with advanced solid tumours.

N A G Lankheet, J S L Kloth, C G M Gadellaa-van Hooijdonk, G A Cirkel, R H J Mathijssen, M P J K Lolkema, J H M Schellens, E E Voest, S Sleijfer, M J A de Jonge and 4 more

Abstract readClinical TrialMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in British journal of cancer, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Sunitinib as Second-Line Treatment in Advanced Intrahepatic Cholangiocarcinoma: Results From the SUN-CK GERCOR Phase II Trial.Liver international : official journal of the International Association for the Study of the Liver · 2025
    Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Are novel oral oncolytics underdosed in obese patients?Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology · 2024
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

14 authors.

N A G LankheetDepartment of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, Slotervaart Hospital, Louwesweg 6, 1066 EC Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J S L KlothDepartment of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Groene Hilledijk 301, 3075 EA Rotterdam, The Netherlands.
C G M Gadellaa-van Hooijdonk1] Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands [2] Center for Personalised Cancer Treatment, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
G A Cirkel1] Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands [2] Center for Personalised Cancer Treatment, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
R H J Mathijssen1] Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Groene Hilledijk 301, 3075 EA Rotterdam, The Netherlands [2] Center for Personalised Cancer Treatment, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
M P J K Lolkema1] Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands [2] Center for Personalised Cancer Treatment, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J H M Schellens1] Center for Personalised Cancer Treatment, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands [2] Department of Medical Oncology and Clinical Pharmacology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 12, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
E E Voest1] Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Utrecht, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands [2] Center for Personalised Cancer Treatment, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
S Sleijfer1] Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Groene Hilledijk 301, 3075 EA Rotterdam, The Netherlands [2] Center for Personalised Cancer Treatment, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
M J A de Jonge1] Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus MC Cancer Institute, Groene Hilledijk 301, 3075 EA Rotterdam, The Netherlands [2] Center for Personalised Cancer Treatment, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands.
J B A G HaanenDepartment of Medical Oncology and Clinical Pharmacology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 12, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
J H BeijnenDepartment of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, Slotervaart Hospital, Louwesweg 6, 1066 EC Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
A D R HuitemaDepartment of Pharmacy and Pharmacology, Slotervaart Hospital, Louwesweg 6, 1066 EC Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
N Steeghs1] Center for Personalised Cancer Treatment, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands [2] Department of Medical Oncology and Clinical Pharmacology, The Netherlands Cancer Institute-Antoni van Leeuwenhoek, Plesmanlaan 12, 1066 CX Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPlasma exposure of sunitinib shows large inter-individual variation. Therefore, a pharmacokinetic (PK) study was performed to determine safety and feasibility of sunitinib dosing based on PK levels.

methodsPatients were treated with sunitinib 37.5 mg once daily. At days 15 and 29 of treatment, plasma trough levels of sunitinib and N-desethyl sunitinib were measured. If the total trough level (TTL) was <50 ng ml(-1) and the patient did not show any grade ⩾3 toxicity, the daily sunitinib dose was increased by 12.5 mg. If the patient suffered from grade ⩾3 toxicity, the sunitinib dose was lowered by 12.5 mg.

resultsTwenty-nine out of 43 patients were evaluable for PK assessments. Grade ⩾3 adverse events were experienced in seven patients (24%) at the starting dose and in nine patients (31%) after dose escalation. TTLs were below target in 15 patients (52%) at the starting dose. Of these, five patients (17%) reached target TTL after dose escalation without additional toxicity.

conclusionsIn a third of the patients that were below target TTL at standard dose, the sunitinib dose could be increased without additional toxicities. This could be the basis for future studies and the implementation of a PK-guided dosing strategy in clinical practice.

Indexed as

Salvage TherapyAdultAgedAntineoplastic AgentsDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleDrug MonitoringFatigueFeasibility StudiesFemaleGastrointestinal DiseasesHematologic DiseasesHumansIndolesMaleMiddle AgedAntineoplastic AgentsIndolesProtein Kinase InhibitorsPyrrolesSU 12662Sunitinib

Identifiers

PMID24736581
PMCPMC4021528

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.