Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27115568›Full record

ArticleBritish journal of cancer2016

Mipsagargin, a novel thapsigargin-based PSMA-activated prodrug: results of a first-in-man phase I clinical trial in patients with refractory, advanced or metastatic solid tumours.

D Mahalingam, G Wilding, S Denmeade, J Sarantopoulas, D Cosgrove, J Cetnar, N Azad, J Bruce, M Kurman, V E Allgood and 1 more

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

Article in British journal of cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 86 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
86citing papers in PubMed
7.6field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

86 citing papers in PubMed, 146 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Monitoring ER CaMethods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  11. Review
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. The 3q OncogeneInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2023
    Article
  19. The unfolded protein response (UPR) pathway: the unsung hero in breast cancer management.Apoptosis : an international journal on programmed cell death · 2023
    Review
  20. Article

26 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

11 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

D MahalingamUniversity of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, Cancer Therapy and Research Center, 7979 Wurzbach Road, U639, Mail Code 8232, San Antonio, TX 78229, USA.
G WildingUniversity of Wisconsin Comprehensive Cancer Center, Madison, WI, USA.
S DenmeadeJohns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
J SarantopoulasUniversity of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio, Cancer Therapy and Research Center, 7979 Wurzbach Road, U639, Mail Code 8232, San Antonio, TX 78229, USA.
D CosgroveJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Bunting/Blaustein Building, 1650 Orleans Street, Baltimore, MD 21231-1000, USA.
J CetnarUniversity of Wisconsin Comprehensive Cancer Center, Madison, WI, USA.
N AzadJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Bunting/Blaustein Building, 1650 Orleans Street, Baltimore, MD 21231-1000, USA.
J BruceDepartment of Oncology, University of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center, 7057 Wisconsin Institutes for Medical Research, 1111 Highland Avenue, Madison, WI 53705, USA.
M KurmanGenspera Inc., Medical Monitor, 2511 North Loop 1604 W, Suite 204, San Antonio, TX 78258, USA.
V E AllgoodGenspera Inc., Medical Monitor, 2511 North Loop 1604 W, Suite 204, San Antonio, TX 78258, USA.
M CarducciJohns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Sidney Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center, Bunting/Blaustein Building, 1650 Orleans Street, Baltimore, MD 21231-1000, USA.
Johns Hopkins University · USCohera Medical (United States) · USThe University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio · USUniversity of Wisconsin Carbone Cancer Center · US

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMipsagargin (G-202; (8-O-(12-aminododecanoyl)-8-O-debutanoyl thapsigargin)-Asp-γ-Glu-γ-Glu-γ-GluGluOH)) is a novel thapsigargin-based targeted prodrug that is activated by PSMA-mediated cleavage of an inert masking peptide. The active moiety is an inhibitor of the sarcoplasmic/endoplasmic reticulum calcium adenosine triphosphatase (SERCA) pump protein that is necessary for cellular viability. We evaluated the safety of mipsagargin in patients with advanced solid tumours and established a recommended phase II dosing (RP2D) regimen.

methodsPatients with advanced solid tumours received mipsagargin by intravenous infusion on days 1, 2 and 3 of 28-day cycles and were allowed to continue participation in the absence of disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The dosing began at 1.2 mg m(-2) and was escalated using a modified Fibonacci schema to determine maximally tolerated dose (MTD) with an expansion cohort at the RP2D. Plasma was analysed for mipsagargin pharmacokinetics and response was assessed using RECIST criteria.

resultsA total of 44 patients were treated at doses ranging from 1.2 to 88 mg m(-2), including 28 patients in the dose escalation phase and 16 patients in an expansion cohort. One dose-limiting toxicity (DLT; Grade 3 rash) was observed in the dose escalation portion of the study. At 88 mg m(-2), observations of Grade 2 infusion-related reaction (IRR, 2 patients) and Grade 2 creatinine elevation (1 patient) led to declaration of 66.8 mg m(-2) as the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Across the study, the most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were fatigue, rash, nausea, pyrexia and IRR. Two patients developed treatment-related Grade 3 acute renal failure that was reversible during the treatment-free portion of the cycle. To help ameliorate the IRR and creatinine elevations, a RP2D of 40 mg m(-2) on day 1 and 66.8 mg m(-2) on days 2 and 3 with prophylactic premedications and hydration on each day of infusion was established. Clinical response was not observed, but prolonged disease stabilisation was observed in a subset of patients.

conclusionsMipsagargin demonstrated an acceptable tolerability and favourable pharmacokinetic profile in patients with solid tumours.

Indexed as

AgedAged, 80 and overEnzyme InhibitorsHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsProdrugsThapsigarginEnzyme InhibitorsProdrugsThapsigargin

Identifiers

PMID27115568
PMCPMC4984914
OpenAlexW2345027487

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.