4.5 Article

Phase I dose-finding study of monotherapy with atezolizumab, an engineered immunoglobulin monoclonal antibody targeting PD-L1, in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumors

期刊

INVESTIGATIONAL NEW DRUGS
卷 34, 期 5, 页码 596-603

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10637-016-0371-6

关键词

Atezolizumab; Pharmacokinetics; Phase I; Solid tumors; Safety

资金

  1. Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Atezolizumab is an engineered immunoglobulin monoclonal antibody that targets the programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 pathway. Methods In this phase I dose-finding study, we assessed the safety, feasibility, pharmacokinetics (PK), and exploratory anti-tumor activity of atezolizumab monotherapy up to 20 mg/kg in Japanese patients with advanced solid tumors who had failed standard therapy or for whom there is no standard therapy. Results Six patients were enrolled and received intravenous atezolizumab every 3 weeks (q3w) at doses of 10 or 20 mg/kg. Tumor types were non-small cell lung cancer (n = 3), melanoma (n = 1), pancreatic cancer (n = 1), and thymic cancer (n = 1). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. All adverse events (AEs) were grade 1 or 2 in severity. No discontinuations or deaths due to AEs were observed. As of the data cutoff, no partial responses were observed; however, stable disease was observed in all six patients. The maximum mean serum atezolizumab concentration was 220 mu g/mL (SD +/- A 21.9), with 10-mg/kg dosing and 536 mu g/mL (SD +/- A 49.4) with 20-mg/kg dosing. Three patients were still on treatment, and three of the six had achieved a progression-free survival of > 12 months. Conclusions Atezolizumab was well tolerated in Japanese patients at doses up to 20 mg/kg q3w. The safety profile and Cycle 1 serum atezolizumab concentrations were similar to those previously observed in non-Japanese patients. These data support the participation of Japanese patients in ongoing pivotal global studies of atezolizumab.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据