Dataset Information

Development of second-generation VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors: current status.

ABSTRACT: The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling pathway appears to be the dominant pathway involved in tumor angiogenesis, providing a rationale for targeting the VEGF receptors (VEGFR-1, -2, and -3) in the treatment of cancers. In particular, VEGF signaling is thought to be important in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) because of the deregulation of the pathway through nearly uniform loss of the von Hippel Lindau protein. The tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) sorafenib, sunitinib, and pazopanib are approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of advanced RCC; however, these multitargeted agents inhibit a wide range of kinase targets in addition to the VEGFRs, resulting in a range of adverse effects unrelated to efficient VEGF blockade. This article reviews recent advances in the development of the second-generation VEGFR TKIs, including the more selective VEGFR TKIs tivozanib and axitinib, and focuses on the potential benefits of novel inhibitors with improved potency and selectivity.

SUBMITTER: Bhargava P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC3047052 | biostudies-literature | 2011 Apr

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Development of second-generation VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors: current status.

Bhargava Pankaj P Robinson Murray O MO

Current oncology reports 20110401 2

The vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling pathway appears to be the dominant pathway involved in tumor angiogenesis, providing a rationale for targeting the VEGF receptors (VEGFR-1, -2, and -3) in the treatment of cancers. In particular, VEGF signaling is thought to be important in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) because of the deregulation of the pathway through nearly uniform loss of the von Hippel Lindau protein. The tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) sorafenib, sunitinib, and pazopan ...[more]

PMID: 21318618

Similar Datasets

Project description:ImportanceImatinib introduced a paradigm shift in the treatment of patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML), allowing a lifespan that is almost comparable to the general population. However, the health care expenditures associated with imatinib have increased steadily since its introduction in 2001. Since the generic market entry of imatinib on February 1, 2016, it became possible to determine the effect of generic entry on the health care expenditures associated with imatinib, along with the concurrent pricing trends of second-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs).ObjectiveTo compare health care expenditure related to imatinib treatment for patients with CML prior to its generic status with expenditures after, in a real-world setting.Design, setting, and participantsA retrospective cohort study using data from the Truven Health MarketScan Database was carried out including 1301 commercially insured patients or patients with Medicaid between the ages of 18 and 64 years with a CML diagnosis between September 1, 2014 and December 31, 2017. A single interrupted time series (ITS) method was used to evaluate monthly expenditures associated with imatinib for the health plan from September 1, 2014 to December 31, 2017, with imatinib switching to generic on February 1, 2016, as the interruption. The initial 6-month period postinterruption was excluded to allow for the new price structure to stabilize. Nilotinib and dasatinib were evaluated using a comparative ITS design. The analysis took place between September 1, 2014 to December 31, 2017.Main outcomes and measuresCommercial and Medicaid health plan expenditure and patient cost responsibility for 30-day blocks per patient for imatinib, dasatinib, and nilotinib were calculated from September 1, 2014 through December 31, 2017. Pricing was adjusted via 2017 consumer price index for medical services.ResultsThe sample included a total of 1301 patients (1102 commercially insured and 199 insured through Medicaid) with a median (range) age at diagnosis of 50 (18-62) years for commercially insured patients and 50 (47-52) years for patients with Medicaid. Of the 1301 patients, 704 (54.1%) were men. There was a significant pregeneric increase in expenditure (commercially insured: $143 per patient per month, P < .001; Medicaid: $152 per patient per month, P = .001). There was a significant reduction over the 6-month interruption period (February 2016 through August 2016) between the pregeneric and generic phase (commercial: $-3097 per patient, P < .001; Medicaid: $-2077 per patient, P = .002). Controlling for secular trends, this was followed by a small decline in expenditure during the generic phase (commercially insured: -$93 per patient per month; P = .03; Medicaid: -$182 per patient per month; P = .001). Nilotinib and dasatinib maintained an increasing trend in both the pregeneric and generic phase of imatinib, resulting in a significant difference-in-difference slope for commercially insured patients (nilotinib: -$186, P = .006; dasatinib: -$175, P = .007) and patients with Medicaid (nilotinib: -$299, P = .002; dasatinib: -$329, P < .001). There were no significant trends for patient cost responsibility.Conclusions and relevanceThe modest decline in expenditure associated with imatinib after generic entry accompanied by the increasing expenditure trends associated with the second-generation TKIs suggest a need for measures to facilitate cost reduction as well as standardization of CML treatment.

Project description:Regardless of line of therapy, treatment goals in chronic phase chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) are: avoid progression to accelerated phase or blast crisis CML such that patients achieve a life expectancy comparable with that of the general population; avoid adverse events (AEs); and restore and maintain quality of life. The most important prognostic factor for achieving these goals is response to tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) at key milestones. For patients failing a TKI, a treatment change is mandatory to limit the risk of progression and death. There is currently no precise guideline for patients that fail a second-generation TKI, and there is a paucity of data to guide clinical decision making in this setting. There is, therefore, an unmet need for practical and actionable guidance on how to manage patients who fail a second-generation TKI. Although the term 'failure' includes patients failing for resistance or intolerance, the focus of this paper is failure of a second-generation TKI because of resistance. CML patients who fail their first second-generation TKI for true resistance need a more potent therapy. In these patients, the key issues to consider are the relative appropriateness of early allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation or the use of a further TKI. Selection of the next line of treatment after second-generation TKI resistance should be individualized and must be based on patient-specific factors including cytogenetics, mutation profile, comorbidities, age, previous history of AEs with prior TKI therapy, and risk profile for AEs on specific TKIs. This expert opinion paper is not in conflict with existing recommendations, but instead represents an evolution of previous notions, based on new data, insights, and clinical experience. We review the treatment options for patients resistant to second-generation TKI therapy and provide our clinical opinions and guidance on key considerations for treatment decision making.

Dataset Information

Development of second-generation VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors: current status.

Publications

Development of second-generation VEGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors: current status.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets