ArticleThe oncologist2021
Safety, Efficacy, and Pharmacokinetics of Metatinib Tromethamine Tablet in Patients with Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors: A Phase I Clinical Trial.
Article in The oncologist, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
lessons learnedMET overexpression is uncommon, and positive MET immunohistochemistry (1+/2+) was an independent positive prognostic factor for response rate and progression-free survival. Whether MET overexpression can be considered a potential predictive biomarker and be used as an inclusion criterion is worth investigating in a future study.
backgroundMetatinib tromethamine tablet (metatinib) is a small molecule receptor kinase inhibitor targeting both c-MET and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2. This phase I trial aimed to determine the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy of metatinib in patients with advanced solid tumors.
methodsEligible patients received a single dose of metatinib in a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design with dose levels of 25-800 mg/day, after a single dose on day 1, then 2 days off, and then a multidose schedule of once-daily doses for 25 consecutive days (days 4-28). Primary endpoints were MTD and safety; secondary and exploratory endpoints included pharmacokinetics (PK), efficacy, and biomarkers.
resultsEighteen patients (including nine patients with hepatocellular carcinoma [HCC]) received at least one dose of study drug (one patient quit the study without continuous multiple-dose administration after receiving a single dose of metatinib). Hand-foot skin reaction, diarrhea, and liver dysfunction were the DLTs, and 200 mg/day was the MTD. The most common treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were skin toxicity (50%), diarrhea (33.3%), and liver dysfunction (27.8%). Three patients (only one of six in the 200 mg/day cohort; the other two in the 300 mg/day cohort) experienced severe TRAEs: one patient with severe liver dysfunction and two patients with severe liver dysfunction and skin toxicity, respectively. Pharmacokinetics assessment indicated that metatinib was rapidly absorbed and metabolized to the formation of reactive metabolite, SCR-1510, after single-dose administration. The mean time taken to achieve maximum concentration and terminal elimination half-life of SCR-1510 was approximately 2.0-3.0 hours and ranged from 8 to 14 hours. Two patients had partial responses. The objective response rate and disease control rate (DCR) were 11.1% and 61.1%, respectively. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.75 months.
conclusionMetatinib administration of 200 mg/day was well tolerated, safe, and effective. The MTD was 200 mg/day, which should be recommended in further investigations.
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.