ArticleESMO open2018
Phase I, open-label study of pasireotide in patients with
Article in ESMO open, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neuroendocrine Factors in Melanoma Pathogenesis.Cancers · 2021Review
- Merkel Cell Carcinoma: An Immunotherapy Fairy-Tale?Frontiers in oncology · 2021Review
- How I treat cancer special issue.ESMO open · 2019Article
- How I treat metastatic melanoma.ESMO open · 2019Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionSomatostatin analogues exert antitumour activity via direct and indirect mechanisms. The present study was designed to assess the safety and efficacy of pasireotide in patients with PATIENTS AND
methodsPatients with unresectable and/or metastatic melanoma or Merkel cell carcinoma were eligible. Pasireotide was administered at different doses for ≤8 weeks in dose-escalation phase, followed by long-acting pasireotide 80 mg or lower dose in case of toxicity in follow-up phase up to six additional months. Primary endpoint was safety in the first 8 weeks of dose-escalation phase.
resultsThe study was terminated early due to slow recruitment. Of the 10 patients with metastatic melanoma enrolled, only four reached the high dose level: two patients reached 3600 µg in dose-escalation and follow-up phases and two patients reached 3600 µg in dose-escalation and long-acting pasireotide 80 mg in follow-up phases and were stable for >5 months. Most common adverse events (AEs) during dose-escalation phase in ≥2 patients (20%) were: diarrhoea (50%), nausea (50%), fatigue (20%), hyperglycaemia (20%), hypophosphatemia (20%), chills (20%) and tumour pain (20%). Grade 3 or 4 study drug-related AEs were diarrhoea and nausea, reported in one patient. Partial response was documented in one patient and stable disease in another.
conclusionsPasireotide was well tolerated, and safety results were similar to those previously reported in other indications. Further studies are needed to evaluate its antitumour activity alone and in combination with other drugs in melanoma.
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.