Reference Detail

Contact

Missing content? – Request curation!

Request curation for specific Genes, variants, or PubMed publications.

Have questions, comments or suggestions? - Let us know!

Email us at : ckbsupport@jax.org

Ref Type Journal Article
PMID (23605952)
Authors Kantarjian HM, Martinelli G, Jabbour EJ, Quintás-Cardama A, Ando K, Bay JO, Wei A, Gröpper S, Papayannidis C, Owen K, Pike L, Schmitt N, Stockman PK, Giagounidis A, null null
Title Stage I of a phase 2 study assessing the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of barasertib (AZD1152) versus low-dose cytosine arabinoside in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia.
Journal Cancer
Vol 119
Issue 14
Date 2013 Jul 15
URL
Abstract Text In this phase 2 study, the authors evaluated the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of the Aurora B kinase inhibitor barasertib compared with low-dose cytosine arabinoside (LDAC) in patients aged ≥ 60 years with acute myeloid leukemia (AML).Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive either open-label barasertib 1200 mg (as a 7-day intravenous infusion) or LDAC 20 mg (subcutaneously twice daily for 10 days) in 28-day cycles. The primary endpoint was the objective complete response rate (OCRR) (complete responses [CR] plus confirmed CRs with incomplete recovery of neutrophils or platelets [CRi] according to Cheson criteria [also requiring reconfirmation of CRi ≥21 days after the first appearance and associated with partial recovery of platelets and neutrophils]). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety.In total, 74 patients (barasertib, n = 48; LDAC, n = 26) completed ≥1 cycle of treatment. A significant improvement in the OCRR was observed with barasertib (35.4% vs 11.5%; difference, 23.9%; 95% confidence interval, 2.7%-39.9%; P < .05). Although the study was not formally sized to compare OS data, the median OS with barasertib was 8.2 months versus 4.5 months with LDAC (hazard ratio, 0.88; 95% confidence interval, 0.49-1.58; P = .663). Stomatitis and febrile neutropenia were the most common adverse events with barasertib versus LDAC (71% vs 15% and 67% vs 19%, respectively).Barasertib produced a significant improvement in the OCRR versus LDAC and had a more toxic but manageable safety profile, consistent with previous studies.

Filtering

  • Case insensitive filtering will display rows where any text in any cell matches the filter term
  • Simple literal full or partial string matches
  • Separate multiple filter terms with a spaces, order doesn't matter (a b c and c b a are equivalent )
  • Filtering will only apply to rows that are already loaded on the page, filtering has no impact on query parameters
  • Use quotes to match a longer phrase which contains spaces "mtor c1483f"

Sorting

  • Generally, the default sort order for tables is set to be first column ascending, however, specific tables may set a different default sort order.
  • Click on any column header arrows to sort by that column
  • Hold down the Shift key and click multiple columns to sort by more than one column, be sure to set ascending or descending order for a given column, before moving on to the next column.

Molecular Profile Treatment Approach
Gene Name Source Synonyms Protein Domains Gene Description Gene Role
Therapy Name Drugs Efficacy Evidence Clinical Trials
Drug Name Trade Name Synonyms Drug Classes Drug Description
Gene Variant Impact Protein Effect Variant Description Associated with drug Resistance
Molecular Profile Indication/Tumor Type Response Type Therapy Name Approval Status Evidence Type Efficacy Evidence References
Unknown unknown acute myeloid leukemia not applicable Barasertib Phase II Actionable In a Phase II trial, Barasertib (AZD1152) treatment resulted in significantly improved objective complete response rate (35.4%, n=48, vs 11.5%, n=26), and median overall survival (8.2 vs 4.5 months, HR=0.88) compared to low dose cytosine arabinoside in elderly patients with acute myeloid leukemia (PMID: 23605952). 23605952