Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Class |
|---|---|
| Celgene Corporation | INDUSTRY |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
GPI-04-0001 was a Phase II, non-randomized, open label, single arm study that was conducted at approximately 30 sites, primarily in the United States, Europe and Russia. It assessed the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of romidepsin as a treatment for cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). Study patients (pts) received romidepsin in a dose of 14 mg/m^2 intravenously over 4 hours on Days 1, 8 and 15 of each 28-day cycle. The duration of study treatment was 6 cycles although pts who showed an objective response or stable disease could continue to receive therapy, at the discretion of the investigator, until disease progression or another withdrawal criterion was met.
Responses were evaluated according to a composite assessment (Objective Primary Disease Response Evaluation Criteria [OPDREC]) that included cutaneous manifestations of disease, lymph node involvement, and circulating malignant T-cells (Sézary cells). Skin involvement was measured using a weighted body surface area skin assessment tool (WBSA/SWAT) or an erythroderma score, depending upon the pt's disease. Disease response was assessed by the Investigators and an Independent Response Review Committee (IRRC) with the IRRC assessment considered supportive of the Investigator's evaluations using the following criteria:
Complete Response (CR):
Clinical complete response (CCR):
- Same as CR but without skin biopsy
Partial Response (PR):
Stable Disease (SD):
SD90:
- SD90 was defined as documented evidence of SD for at least 90 Days Duration
Progressive Disease (PD):
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| romidepsin (depsipeptide, FK228) | Drug | Study patients received romidepsin at a dose of 14 mg/m^2 intravenously over 4 hours on Days 1, 8 and 15 of each 28-day cycle. The duration of study treatment was 6 cycles although patients who showed an objective response or stable disease could continue to receive therapy, at the discretion of the investigator, until disease progression or another withdrawal criterion was met. |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| The Percent of Patients (Pts) With Objective Disease Response | The percent of pts with confirmed Objective Disease Response (confirmed best responses of complete response [CR], clinical complete response [CCR], or partial response [PR]). Responses were evaluated according to a composite assessment (Objective Primary Disease Response Evaluation Criteria - OPDREC). | 6 months |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Duration of Objective Disease Response | Duration of Objective Response was defined as the number of months from the date of the first disease response (clinical complete response [CCR], or partial response [PR]) (later confirmed) until the date of progression and was determined using Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimates. In this analysis, pts who did not progress were censored as of their last evaluation with an OPDREC assessment. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria: Patients had to fulfill all of the following criteria to be eligible for study participation:
Exclusion Criteria: Patients were ineligible for entry if any of the following criteria were met:
ECOG Performance Status >1.
Patients who had not received at least 1 course of prior systemic therapy for CTCL.
Visceral involvement i.e. Stage 4B disease (lymphadenopathy was allowed).
Patients with known cardiac abnormalities such as:
Patients who had had a myocardial infarction within 12 months of study entry.
Patients who had a history of coronary artery disease (CAD) e.g. angina Canadian class II to IV. In any patient in whom there was doubt, the patient should have had a stress imaging study and exercise electrocardiogram (ECG) and, if abnormal, angiography to define whether or not CAD was present.
Patients with an ECG recorded at screening showing evidence of cardiac ischaemia (ST depression of >=2 mm). If in any doubt, the patient should have had a stress imaging study and exercise ECG and, if abnormal, angiography to define whether or not CAD is present.
Patients with congestive heart failure that met New York Heart Association class II to IV definitions and/or ejection fraction <40% by multiple gated acquisition (MUGA) scan or <50% by echocardiogram and/or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI)
Patients with a history of sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT), ventricular fibrillation (VF), Torsade de Pointes, or cardiac arrest, unless currently addressed with an automatic implantable cardioverter defibrillator (AICD).
Patients with hypertrophic cardiomegaly or restrictive cardiomyopathy from prior treatment or other causes (if in doubt, see ejection fraction criteria above).
Patients with uncontrolled hypertension, i.e. >=160/95 mmHg.
Concomitant use of any anti-cancer therapy.
Concomitant use of warfarin (due to a drug interaction).
Concomitant use of any investigational agent.
Use of any investigational agent within 4 weeks of study entry.
Concomitant use of drugs which may cause a prolongation of the QTc interval.
Patients with a potassium level of <3.5 mmol/L and a magnesium level of <0.8 mmol/L.
Clinically significant active infection.
Known infection with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), hepatitis B, or hepatitis C.
Inadequate bone marrow or other organ function, as evidenced by:
Coexistent second malignancy or history of prior malignancy within previous 5 years (excluding basal or squamous cell carcinoma of the skin or cervical epithelial neoplasm [CIN1, carcinoma in situ] that had been treated curatively).
Any significant medical or psychiatric condition that might have prevented the patient from complying with all study procedures.
Patients who were pregnant or breast-feeding. All women of child bearing potential were to use an effective method of contraception (either an intrauterine device or a double barrier method using condoms or a diaphragm plus spermicide) during the study and for at least one month after receiving the last dose of romidepsin. Male patients were to use a barrier method of contraception (condoms) during the treatment period and for at least 1 month thereafter. Hormonal methods of contraception such as the contraceptive pill or patch (particularly those containing ethinyl estradiol) were to be avoided due to a potential drug interaction.
Use of topical steroids in the previous 2 weeks or systemic steroids in the previous 4 weeks.
Having previously given consent to participate in this study.
Concomitant use of CYP3A4 inhibitors.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Jean Nichols, Ph.D. | Gloucester Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | Study Director |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| UCLA Jonsson Cancer Center | Los Angeles | California | 90095 | United States | ||
| Stanford Comprehensive Cancer Center |
| PubMed Identifier | Type | Citation | Retractions |
|---|---|---|---|
| 28853310 | Background | Duvic M, Bates SE, Piekarz R, Eisch R, Kim YH, Lerner A, Robak T, Samtsov A, Becker JC, McCulloch W, Waksman J, Whittaker S. Responses to romidepsin in patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma and prior treatment with systemic chemotherapy. Leuk Lymphoma. 2018 Apr;59(4):880-887. doi: 10.1080/10428194.2017.1361022. Epub 2017 Aug 30. | |
| 27637428 |
Not provided
Not provided
Eligible patients were required to have failed at least 1 prior systemic therapy, e.g., interferon, chemotherapy, Ontak® (denileukin diftitox), or Targretin® (bexarotene).
Patients were enrolled between January 2005 and July 2007. Patients were enrolled at academic centers in the US and Europe that had experience in treating CTCL patients
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | Romidepsin | Regimen was 14 mg/m2 IV over a 4-hour period on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The protocol included 6 cycles of treatment; responding patients and patients who achieved at least Stable Disease (SD) had the option of continuing treatment beyond 6 cycles at the discretion of the Investigator and based on local regulations. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Up to 10 months; median duration of follow up was 5.1 months |
| Time to Objective Disease Response | Time to Objective Response was defined as the time in months from first dose date to the first date of objective disease response (later confirmed) and time to CCR was defined as the time in months from first dose date to the first date of CCR (later confirmed). | Up to 10 months |
| Time to Disease Progression | Time To Progression was defined as the duration from the date of the first study drug dose to the date of progression (PD). In this analysis, pts who did not progress were censored at their last evaluation with an OPDREC assessment. | Up to 10 months; median duration of follow up was 6.1 months |
| Decrease in Pruritus Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score of ≥30 mm or a Score of 0 for at Least 2 Consecutive Cycles. | Pruritus was reported monthly by pts using a 0 (no itching) to 100 (unbearable itching) mm visual analog scale (VAS). Pts were considered to have significant pruritus if the baseline VAS score was ≥ 30 mm. Clinically meaningful reduction in pruritus was defined as a decrease in VAS score of ≥ 30 mm or a score of 0 for at least 2 consecutive cycles. | Up to 10 months |
| Duration of Objective Disease Control (ODC) | For pts with confirmed ODC (pts with CR, CCR, PR, SD90 [stable disease for 90 days]) based on OPDREC, duration of ODC was summarized with descriptive statistics, including number of censored observations, and 25th, 50th, 75th percentiles of distribution, based on Kaplan-Meier product limit estimates. For pts with confirmed progressive disease (PD), duration of ODC was calculated from first date of study drug to first date of diagnosis of confirmed PD. For pts without confirmed PD, duration of ODC was calculated from first date of study drug to date of the last visit with any OPDREC data. | Up to 10 months; median duration of follow up was 6.0 months |
| Percent of Pts With Objective Disease Control | The percent of pts with confirmed ODC (CR, CCR, PR and SD90) based on OPDREC was summarized. | Up to 10 months |
| Stanford |
| California |
| 94305 |
| United States |
| Boston Medical Center | Boston | Massachusetts | 02118 | United States |
| University of Pennsylvania Abrahamson Cancer Center | Philadelphia | Pennsylvania | 19104 | United States |
| Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center | Nashville | Tennessee | 37232 | United States |
| MD Anderson Cancer Center | Houston | Texas | 77030 | United States |
| Research Site | Multiple Locations | France |
| Research Site | Multiple Locations | Germany |
| Research Site | Multiple Locations | Poland |
| Research Site | Multiple Locations | Russia |
| Research Site | Multiple Locations | United Kingdom |
| Foss F, Duvic M, Lerner A, Waksman J, Whittaker S. Clinical Efficacy of Romidepsin in Tumor Stage and Folliculotropic Mycosis Fungoides. Clin Lymphoma Myeloma Leuk. 2016 Nov;16(11):637-643. doi: 10.1016/j.clml.2016.08.009. Epub 2016 Aug 10. |
| 25279222 | Background | Foss F, Coiffier B, Horwitz S, Pro B, Prince HM, Sokol L, Greenwood M, Lerner A, Caballero D, Baran E, Kim E, Nichols J, Balser B, Wolfson J, Whittaker S. Tolerability to romidepsin in patients with relapsed/refractory T-cell lymphoma. Biomark Res. 2014 Sep 8;2:16. doi: 10.1186/2050-7771-2-16. eCollection 2014. |
| Background | Demierre M, et al. Pooled analyses of two international, multicenter clinical studies of romidepsin in 167 patients with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma (CTCL). Presented at 2009 ASCO Annual Meeting, May 29-June 2, 2009, Orlando, FL. Abstract No: 8546. J Clin Oncol 27:15s, 2009 (suppl) |
| Background | Cabell C, et al. Systematic Assessment of Potential Cardiac Effects of the Novel Histone Deacetylase (HDAC) Inhibitor Romidepsin. Presented at 2009 ASCO Annual Meeting, May 29-June 2, 2009, Orlando, FL. Abstract No: e19533. C J Clin Oncol 2009;27(suppl) |
| Background | Kim YH, et al. Clinically Significant Responses Achieved with Romidepsin in 37 Patient with Cutaneous T-Cell Lymphoma (CTCL) with Blood Involvement. Presented at American Society of Hematology 2009, New Orleans, LA. Abstract No. 2683. |
| 20697094 | Result | Whittaker SJ, Demierre MF, Kim EJ, Rook AH, Lerner A, Duvic M, Scarisbrick J, Reddy S, Robak T, Becker JC, Samtsov A, McCulloch W, Kim YH. Final results from a multicenter, international, pivotal study of romidepsin in refractory cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Oct 10;28(29):4485-91. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2010.28.9066. Epub 2010 Aug 9. |
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | Romidepsin | Regimen was 14 mg/m2 IV over a 4-hour period on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The protocol included 6 cycles of treatment; responding patients and patients who achieved at least Stable Disease (SD) had the option of continuing treatment beyond 6 cycles at the discretion of the Investigator and based on local regulations. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | |||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Categorical | Count of Participants | Participants |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | years |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Region of Enrollment | Number | participants |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) Performance status | Number | Participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | ||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Primary | The Percent of Patients (Pts) With Objective Disease Response | The percent of pts with confirmed Objective Disease Response (confirmed best responses of complete response [CR], clinical complete response [CCR], or partial response [PR]). Responses were evaluated according to a composite assessment (Objective Primary Disease Response Evaluation Criteria - OPDREC). | Efficacy analysis based on interim analysis of data for as treated population | Posted | Number | Percent of participants | 6 months |
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Duration of Objective Disease Response | Duration of Objective Response was defined as the number of months from the date of the first disease response (clinical complete response [CCR], or partial response [PR]) (later confirmed) until the date of progression and was determined using Kaplan-Meier product-limit estimates. In this analysis, pts who did not progress were censored as of their last evaluation with an OPDREC assessment. | Efficacy analysis based on interim analysis of data for as treated population | Posted | Median | Full Range | Months | Up to 10 months; median duration of follow up was 5.1 months |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Time to Objective Disease Response | Time to Objective Response was defined as the time in months from first dose date to the first date of objective disease response (later confirmed) and time to CCR was defined as the time in months from first dose date to the first date of CCR (later confirmed). | Efficacy analysis based on interim analysis of data for as treated population | Posted | Median | Full Range | Months | Up to 10 months |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Time to Disease Progression | Time To Progression was defined as the duration from the date of the first study drug dose to the date of progression (PD). In this analysis, pts who did not progress were censored at their last evaluation with an OPDREC assessment. | Efficacy analysis based on interim analysis of data for as treated population | Posted | Median | Full Range | Months | Up to 10 months; median duration of follow up was 6.1 months |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Decrease in Pruritus Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) Score of ≥30 mm or a Score of 0 for at Least 2 Consecutive Cycles. | Pruritus was reported monthly by pts using a 0 (no itching) to 100 (unbearable itching) mm visual analog scale (VAS). Pts were considered to have significant pruritus if the baseline VAS score was ≥ 30 mm. Clinically meaningful reduction in pruritus was defined as a decrease in VAS score of ≥ 30 mm or a score of 0 for at least 2 consecutive cycles. | Patients meeting definition of moderate to severe pruritus on VAS (i.e., had a VAS of >=30 mm) | Posted | Number | participants | Up to 10 months |
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Duration of Objective Disease Control (ODC) | For pts with confirmed ODC (pts with CR, CCR, PR, SD90 [stable disease for 90 days]) based on OPDREC, duration of ODC was summarized with descriptive statistics, including number of censored observations, and 25th, 50th, 75th percentiles of distribution, based on Kaplan-Meier product limit estimates. For pts with confirmed progressive disease (PD), duration of ODC was calculated from first date of study drug to first date of diagnosis of confirmed PD. For pts without confirmed PD, duration of ODC was calculated from first date of study drug to date of the last visit with any OPDREC data. | Efficacy analysis based on interim analysis of data for as treated population | Posted | Median | Full Range | Months | Up to 10 months; median duration of follow up was 6.0 months |
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Percent of Pts With Objective Disease Control | The percent of pts with confirmed ODC (CR, CCR, PR and SD90) based on OPDREC was summarized. | Efficacy analysis based on interim analysis of data for as treated population | Posted | Number | Percent of participants | Up to 10 months |
|
|
Treatment emergent events were collected from first dose to last visit which occurred approximately 1 month after the last dose. Patients were to be treated for 6 cycles (approximately 6 months) or until progression.
Patients could remain on treatment after 6 months if they experienced a response to treatment.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | Romidepsin | Regimen was 14 mg/m2 IV over a 4-hour period on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. The protocol included 6 cycles of treatment; responding patients and patients who achieved at least Stable Disease (SD) had the option of continuing treatment beyond 6 cycles at the discretion of the Investigator and based on local regulations. | 23 | 102 | 99 | 102 |
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anaemia NOS | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Leukocytosis | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Neutropenia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Atrioventricular Block First Degree | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Atrioventricular Block Second Degree | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiac Failure NOS | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiopulmonary Failure | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Cardiac Tamponade | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Bradyarrhythmia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Supraventricular Tachycardia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ventricular Tachycardia | Cardiac disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Constipation | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Colonic Perforation | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Fatigue | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Malaise | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rigors | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyrexia | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Disease Progression NOS | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pain Exacerbated | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Oral Candidiasis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Oropharyngeal Candidiasis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Perineal Abscess | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Sepsis NOS | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Skin Bacterial Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Staphylococcal Bacteraemia | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pharnygitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Tonsillitis | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urinary Tract Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Electrocardiogram St Segment Depression | Investigations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Troponin I Increased | Investigations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Urine Output Decreased | Investigations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Anorexia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hyperglycaemia NOS | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Acidosis NOS | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypoalbuminaemia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Myositis | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Neoplasm Progression NOS | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Tumor Lysis Syndrome | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Syncope | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Depression | Psychiatric disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Renal Failure Acute | Renal and urinary disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Laryngeal Stenosis | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pleural Effusion | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pulmonary Embolism | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dermatitis Medicamentosa | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Haematoma NOS | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Thrombosis | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypotension NOS | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nausea | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Vomiting NOS | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Diarrhoea NOS | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Constipation | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dry Mouth | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Abdominal Pain NOS | Gastrointestinal disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Fatigue | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyrexia | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Asthenia | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Oedema Peripheral | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Lethargy | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rigors | General disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Skin Infection | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Upper Respiratory Tract Infection NOS | Infections and infestations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Blood Magnesium Decreased | Investigations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Haemoglobin Decreased | Investigations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Weight Decreased | Investigations | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Anorexia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypomagnesaemia | Metabolism and nutrition disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Headache | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dysgeusia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Ageusia | Nervous system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Thrombocytopenia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Anaemia NOS | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Neutropenia | Blood and lymphatic system disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pruritus | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Hypotension NOS | Vascular disorders | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
| |
| Neoplasm Progression NOS | Neoplasms benign, malignant and unspecified (incl cysts and polyps) | MedDRA 6.0 | Systematic Assessment |
|
Sponsor can review results at least 60 days prior to the date of submission for publication or public disclosure; sponsor will complete review within review period and will have authority to require institution/PI to delete confidential information other than the results.
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Elizabeth Faust, PhD, Vice President, Clinical Research Services | Celgene Corporation | 617/583-1300 | EFaust@Celgene.com |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D016410 | Lymphoma, T-Cell, Cutaneous |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D016399 | Lymphoma, T-Cell |
| D008228 | Lymphoma, Non-Hodgkin |
| D008223 | Lymphoma |
| D009370 | Neoplasms by Histologic Type |
| D009369 | Neoplasms |
| D008232 | Lymphoproliferative Disorders |
| D008206 | Lymphatic Diseases |
| D006425 | Hemic and Lymphatic Diseases |
| D007160 | Immunoproliferative Disorders |
| D007154 | Immune System Diseases |
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| C087123 | romidepsin |
| D047630 | Depsipeptides |
| ID | Term |
|---|---|
| D010456 | Peptides, Cyclic |
| D047028 | Macrocyclic Compounds |
| D011083 | Polycyclic Compounds |
| D010455 | Peptides |
| D000602 | Amino Acids, Peptides, and Proteins |
Not provided
Not provided
| Poland |
|
| Russian Federation |
|
| Germany |
|
| United Kingdom |
|
| Georgia |
|
| Ukraine |
|
| 2, Ambulatory and capable of all selfcare but unab |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|