Trial reportBlood advances2019
BST-236, a novel cytarabine prodrug for patients with acute leukemia unfit for standard induction: a phase 1/2a study.
Trial report in Blood advances, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02544438 (a Phase i/Iia, Open Label, Uncontrolled Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Astarabine), which is not on this 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.
a Phase i/Iia, Open Label, Uncontrolled Study to Evaluate the Safety and Efficacy of Astarabine (BST-236) as Single Agent in Patients With Refractory or Relapsed Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML) or Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia (ALL) Disease
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Aspacytarabine for the treatment of patients with AML unfit for intensive chemotherapy: a phase 2 study.Blood advances · 2023Trial
- A novel mesenchymal stem cell-based regimen for acute myeloid leukemia differentiation therapy.Acta pharmaceutica Sinica. B · 2023Article
- Cytarabine induces cachexia with lipid malabsorption via zippering the junctions of lacteal in murine small intestine.Journal of lipid research · 2023Article
- A systematic literature review of disease burden and clinical efficacy for patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukemia.American journal of blood research · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 7 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-dose cytarabine is the backbone of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) treatment. Nevertheless, its use in older patients is considerably limited due to increased toxicity. BST-236 (INN aspacytarabine) is a novel cytarabine prodrug designed to deliver high-dose cytarabine to target cells with reduced systemic exposure to free cytarabine. This phase 1/2a dose-escalation study was designed to evaluate BST-236 safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy in older or unfit-for-intensive-therapy patients with acute leukemia. Twenty-six patients, unfit for standard therapy, who were either relapsed/refractory or newly diagnosed, received BST-236 in 6 dose-escalating cohorts (range 0.3 to 6 g/m2 per day). BST-236 was administered intravenously once daily over 60 minutes for 6 consecutive days. The median age was 76.5 (26 to 90), with 84.6% of patients ≥70 years. BST-236 was safe and well tolerated. The maximal tolerated dose was 6 g/m2 per day. Overall response rate was 29.6%. A subgroup analysis of newly diagnosed patients with AML, de novo or secondary to myelodysplastic syndrome, unfit for standard induction (median age 78), demonstrated overall response of 45.5%. The median overall survival was 6.5 months and was not reached in patients achieving complete remission. The findings of this phase 1/2 study suggest that BST-236 safely delivers high and efficacious cytarabine doses to older patients who are unfit for standard induction and lays the foundation for further studies of BST-236 in AML. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02544438.
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.