2016
DOI: 10.1200/jco.2016.67.6346
|View full text |Cite|
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Phase IB Study of Selinexor, a First-in-Class Inhibitor of Nuclear Export, in Patients With Advanced Refractory Bone or Soft Tissue Sarcoma

Abstract: Purpose We evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PKs), pharmacodynamics, safety, and efficacy of selinexor, an oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export compound, in patients with advanced soft tissue or bone sarcoma with progressive disease. Patients and Methods Fifty-four patients were treated with oral selinexor twice per week (on days 1 and 3) at one of three doses (30 mg/m2, 50 mg/m2, or flat dose of 60 mg) either continuously or on a schedule of 3 weeks on, 1 week off. PK analysis was performed under fasting … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
2

Citation Types

2
123
1

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

3
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 143 publications
(126 citation statements)
references
References 40 publications
(17 reference statements)
2
123
1
Order By: Relevance
“…It is without doubt that treatment with selinexor in this phase 1 study, and other studies in solid tumors, does lead to an unfamiliar toxicity paradigm and constellation of symptoms for most oncologists. 37,38 Experience with managing patients treated with selinexor and aggressive use of supportive care tools can mitigate most nonhematologic toxicities. Grade 3 or 4 AEs were largely hematologic in nature, including thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia, and could be managed through drug holidays, dose reductions, and/or growth factor support, such as eltrombopag for thrombocytopenia and filgrastim for neutropenia.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…It is without doubt that treatment with selinexor in this phase 1 study, and other studies in solid tumors, does lead to an unfamiliar toxicity paradigm and constellation of symptoms for most oncologists. 37,38 Experience with managing patients treated with selinexor and aggressive use of supportive care tools can mitigate most nonhematologic toxicities. Grade 3 or 4 AEs were largely hematologic in nature, including thrombocytopenia, neutropenia, and anemia, and could be managed through drug holidays, dose reductions, and/or growth factor support, such as eltrombopag for thrombocytopenia and filgrastim for neutropenia.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Recently, a phase 1 clinical trial of selinexor in patients with advanced solid tumors including liposarcoma [36, 37] showed a favorable anti-tumor effect of selinexor in 78% (14 of 18) of the liposarcoma patients, with a well-tolerated dose of 35 mg/m 2 (approximately 60 mg flat dose) [37]. Taken together, these results strongly indicate that inhibition of XPO1 might be a valuable treatment approach for this disease.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Among the sarcoma cell lines we tested, liposarcoma (LS141) shows the greatest sensitivity to selinexor and this appears to be due to the induction of apoptosis as well as the downregulation of survivin protein expression, both in vitro and in vivo. Selinexor has completed phase I and phase 1b studies (41,42) and antitumor activity was noted in patients, among them patients with dedifferentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS), with 40% of the 15 patients showing reduction in target lesions and 47% showing stable disease for 4 months or longer (41). Based on these clinical results, a phase II randomized study of selinexor versus placebo in patients with advanced liposarcoma is under way (NCT02606461).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%