Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25183650›Full record

ArticleCancer chemotherapy and pharmacology2014

A phase I and pharmacokinetic study of oral perifosine with different loading schedules in patients with refractory neoplasms.

William D Figg, Manish Monga, Donna Headlee, Avni Shah, Cindy H Chau, Cody Peer, Richard Messman, Yusri A Elsayed, Anthony J Murgo, Giovanni Melillo and 6 more

Open access · greenAbstract readClinical Trial, Phase I
In one paragraph

Article in Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
1.4field-weighted citation impact, top 19% of its field
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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Trial
  2. Review
  3. Phase I clinical trial of temsirolimus and perifosine for recurrent glioblastoma.Annals of clinical and translational neurology · 2020
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

16 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.

William D FiggMedical Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute, Bldg 10/Room 5A01, 9000 Rockville Pike, Bethesda, MD, 20892, USA, figgw@helix.nih.gov.
Manish Monga
Donna Headlee
Avni Shah
Cindy H Chau
Cody Peer
Richard Messman
Yusri A Elsayed
Anthony J Murgo
Giovanni Melillo
Qin C Ryan
Mikhail Kalnitskiy
Adrian M Senderowicz
Melinda Hollingshead
Susan G Arbuck
Edward A Sausville
National Cancer Institute · USNational Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research · USScience Applications International Corporation (United States) · USUniversity of Maryland, College Park · US

Funding

Using Clinical Pharmacology Principles to Develop New Anticancer TherapiesZICSC006537 · NCI · DIVISION OF CLINICAL SCIENCES - NCI · PI FIGG, WILLIAM DOUGLAS · 2009 to 2025
$14.4M
Intramural NIH HHS ZIC SC006537
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of perifosine (NSC 639966), an alkylphospholipid modulator of signal transduction, using different oral loading and maintenance regimens in an effort to avoid gastrointestinal toxicity while seeking maximal sustained plasma concentrations.

methodsThirty-one patients with advanced neoplasms were treated with monthly cycles of perifosine loading doses of 300, 600, 900, 1,200 and 1,500 mg (dose levels 1 through 5, respectively) on days 1-2 depending on the actual dose of the initial cycle. For subsequent cycles, perifosine loading doses were reduced to 100, 200, 300, 400 and 1,000 mg at the respective corresponding dose levels. Daily perifosine "maintenance" doses of 50, 100, 150, 200 and 250 mg for levels 1 through 5, respectively, commenced on days 2 or 3 and continued for a total of 21 days. No treatment was given for days 22-27. The pharmacokinetics of perifosine with these schedules was characterized.

resultsDose-limiting diarrhea developed at or above dose level 4. The MTD and recommended phase II dose was dose level 3B, with a loading dose of 900 mg on day 1 divided into two doses of 450 mg administered 6 h apart and a maintenance dose of 150 mg on day 2 through 21. On subsequent cycles, the loading dose was reduced to 300 mg. Non-gastrointestinal toxicities included three episodes of gout or gout-like syndromes observed at doses above the MTD. The median peak plasma concentration of perifosine achieved at the MTD was approximately 8.3 µg/mL. Four patients had stable disease ranging from 167 to 735 days.

conclusionsPerifosine given according to a loading and maintenance schedule can safely sustain concentrations of drug, approaching concentrations achieved in preclinical models with evidence of anti-tumor effect.

Indexed as

Administration, OralAdultAgedAged, 80 and overAnorexiaArea Under CurveDiarrheaDisease ProgressionDose-Response Relationship, DrugDrug Administration ScheduleFatigueFemaleHumansMaleMetabolic Clearance RateMiddle AgedperifosinePhosphorylcholine

Identifiers

PMID25183650
PMCPMC6361129
OpenAlexW2024902882

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.