ArticleCancer chemotherapy and pharmacology2024
Comparable efficacy of oral bendamustine versus intravenous administration in treating hematologic malignancies.
Article in Cancer chemotherapy and pharmacology, 2024. 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.
- Article
Corrections and comments
- Update of
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeThe purpose of this study was to analyze potential differences in antitumor efficacy and pharmacokinetics between intravenous (IV) bendamustine and a novel orally administered (PO) bendamustine agent that is utilizing the beneficial properties of superstaturated solid dispersions formulated in nanoparticles.
methodsPharmacokinetics of IV versus PO bendamustine were determined by analysis of plasma samples collected from NSG mice treated with either IV or PO bendamustine. Plasma samples were analyzed using liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry following a liquid-liquid extraction to determine peak bendamustine concentration, area under the concentration-time curve, and the half-life in-vivo. In-vitro cytotoxicity of bendamustine against human non-Hodgkin Burkitt's Lymphoma (Raji), multiple myeloma (MM.1s), and B-cell acute lymphoblastic leukemia (RS4;11) cell lines was determined over time using MTS assays. Luciferase-tagged versions of the aforementioned cell lines were used to determine in-vivo bendamustine cytotoxicity of IV versus PO bendamustine at two different doses.
resultsBendamustine at a high dose in-vitro causes cell death. There was no significant difference in antitumor activity between IV and novel PO bendamustine at a physiologically relevant concentration in all three xenograft models. In-vivo pharmacokinetics showed the oral bioavailability of bendamustine in mice to be 51.4%.
conclusionsThe novel oral bendamustine agent tested exhibits good oral bioavailability and systemic exposure for in-vivo antitumor efficacy comparable to IV bendamustine. An oral bendamustine formulation offers exciting clinical potential as an additional method of administration for bendamustine and warrants further evaluation in clinical studies.
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.