Ali Khojasteh
Boston University
Network
Latest external collaboration on country level. Dive into details by clicking on the dots.
Publication
Featured researches published by Ali Khojasteh.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 2001
Gerald Batist; Gopal Ramakrishnan; Chandra Sekhar Rao; Aruna Chandrasekharan; John Gutheil; Troy H. Guthrie; Pankaj Shah; Ali Khojasteh; Madhavan Krishnan Nair; Karen Hoelzer; Katherine Tkaczuk; Youn C. Park; Lily W. Lee
PURPOSE To determine whether Myocet (liposome-encapsulated doxorubicin; The Liposome Company, Elan Corporation, Princeton, NJ) in combination with cyclophosphamide significantly reduces doxorubicin cardiotoxicity while providing comparable antitumor efficacy in first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Two hundred ninety-seven patients with MBC and no prior chemotherapy for metastatic disease were randomized to receive either 60 mg/m(2) of Myocet (M) or conventional doxorubicin (A), in combination with 600 mg/m(2) of cyclophosphamide (C), every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Cardiotoxicity was defined by reductions in left-ventricular ejection fraction, assessed by serial multigated radionuclide angiography scans, or congestive heart failure (CHF). Antitumor efficacy was assessed by objective tumor response rates (World Health Organization criteria), time to progression, and survival. RESULTS Six percent of MC patients versus 21% (including five cases of CHF) of AC patients developed cardiotoxicity (P =.0002). Median cumulative doxorubicin dose at onset was more than 2,220 mg/m(2) for MC versus 480 mg/m(2) for AC (P =.0001, hazard ratio, 5.04). MC patients also experienced less grade 4 neutropenia. Antitumor efficacy of MC versus AC was comparable: objective response rates, 43% versus 43%; median time to progression, 5.1% versus 5.5 months; median time to treatment failure, 4.6 versus 4.4 months; and median survival, 19 versus 16 months. CONCLUSION Myocet improves the therapeutic index of doxorubicin by significantly reducing cardiotoxicity and grade 4 neutropenia and provides comparable antitumor efficacy, when used in combination with cyclophosphamide as first-line therapy for MBC.
The New England Journal of Medicine | 1999
Rudolph M. Navari; Rick R. Reinhardt; Richard J. Gralla; Mark G. Kris; Paul J. Hesketh; Ali Khojasteh; Hedy L. Kindler; Thomas H. Grote; Kelly Pendergrass; Steven M. Grunberg; Alexandra D. Carides; Barry J. Gertz
BACKGROUND The localization of substance P in brain-stem regions associated with vomiting, and the results of studies in ferrets, led us to postulate that a neurokinin-1-receptor antagonist would be an antiemetic in patients receiving anticancer chemotherapy. METHODS In a multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving 159 patients who had not previously received cisplatin, we evaluated the prevention of acute emesis (occurring within 24 hours) and delayed emesis (on days 2 to 5) after a single dose of cisplatin therapy (70 mg or more per square meter of body-surface area). Before receiving cisplatin, all the patients received granisetron (10 microg per kilogram of body weight intravenously) and dexamethasone (20 mg orally). The patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatments in addition to granisetron and dexamethasone: 400 mg of an oral trisubstituted morpholine acetal (also known as L-754,030) before cisplatin and 300 mg on days 2 to 5 (group 1), 400 mg of L-754,030 before cisplatin and placebo on days 2 to 5 (group 2), or placebo before cisplatin and placebo on days 2 to 5 (group 3). Additional medication was available at any time to treat occurrences of vomiting or nausea. RESULTS In the acute-emesis phase, 93 percent of the patients in groups 1 and 2 combined and 67 percent of those in group 3 had no vomiting (P<0.001). In the delayed-emesis phase, 82 percent of the patients in group 1, 78 percent of those in group 2, and 33 percent of those in group 3 had no vomiting (P<0.001 for the comparison between group 1 or 2 and group 3). The median nausea score in the delayed-emesis phase was significantly lower in group 1 than in group 3 (P=0.003). No serious adverse events were attributed to L-754,030. CONCLUSIONS The neurokinin-1-receptor antagonist L-754,030 prevents delayed emesis after treatment with cisplatin. Moreover, combining L-754,030 with granisetron plus dexamethasone improves the prevention of acute emesis.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1991
John D. Hainsworth; W.H. Harvey; Kelly Pendergrass; B Kasimis; D Oblon; G.G. Monaghan; D Gandara; Paul J. Hesketh; Ali Khojasteh; Graydon Harker
Ondansetron (GR 38032F), a selective antagonist of serotonin subtype 3 receptors, is effective in the prevention of emesis associated with cisplatin as well as other chemotherapeutic agents. In this randomized, single-blind, multicenter, parallel group study, we compared the efficacy and safety of intravenous (IV) ondansetron with IV metoclopramide in the prevention of nausea and vomiting associated with high-dose (greater than or equal to 100 mg/m2) cisplatin chemotherapy. Three hundred seven patients receiving their first dose of cisplatin, either alone or in combination with other antineoplastic agents, were randomized to receive ondansetron 0.15 mg/kg IV every 4 hours for three doses or metoclopramide 2 mg/kg IV every 2 hours for three doses, then every 3 hours for three additional doses. The study prohibited the concurrent administration of other antiemetics or dexamethasone. Patients receiving ondansetron had a higher rate of complete protection from emesis (40% v 30%, P = .07), a higher complete plus major response rate (65% v 51%, P = .016), a lower rate of failure (21% v 36%, P = .007), and a lower median number of emetic episodes (one v two, P = .005) than did those receiving metoclopramide. The median time to the first emetic episode was longer on ondansetron (20.5 v 4.3 hours, P less than .001). Adverse events occurred in 48% of patients receiving ondansetron and 69% of those receiving metoclopramide (P less than .001). Akathisia and acute dystonic reactions occurred only on metoclopramide; headache (controlled with acetaminophen) was significantly more frequent with ondansetron. Ondansetron is more effective, produces fewer adverse events, and is easier to administer than metoclopramide for the prevention of emesis associated with high-dose cisplatin chemotherapy.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1989
Paul J. Hesketh; William K. Murphy; Eric P. Lester; David R. Gandara; Ali Khojasteh; Efstathios Tapazoglou; George P. Sartiano; Douglas R. White; Karen Werner; James M. Chubb
We evaluated, in a multi-center trial, the safety and efficacy of GR 38032F (GR-C507/75), a novel and selective serotonin antagonist, in preventing acute emesis in chemotherapy-naive patients receiving treatment with regimens containing high-dose cisplatin (greater than or equal to 100 mg/m2). Eighty-five patients were randomized to receive GR 38032F, 0.18 mg/kg, either every six or every eight hours for three doses, beginning 30 minutes before cisplatin. Patients were evaluated for emetic episodes (vomiting or retching) over a 24-hour period following cisplatin. All patients were evaluable for toxicity and 83 were evaluable for efficacy. The overall antiemetic response rate was 75% (55% complete response [CR], 20% major response). No difference in antiemetic control between the two administration schedules was noted. Patients with histories of heavy ethanol use had significantly better antiemetic control (74% CR) than modest or non-drinkers (33% CR). Toxicity of GR 38032F was modest and independent of administration schedule. The most common adverse events included mild hepatic transaminase elevations, self-limited diarrhea, dry mouth, headache, and mild sedation. Our data indicate that GR 38032F is a safe and effective agent in the control of acute cisplatin-induced nausea and vomiting. Additional trials exploring dosing, schedule, and comparison to standard antiemetic agents are indicated.
Cancer | 1989
William P. Patterson; Ali Khojasteh
Unexpected nephrotoxicity has been described in high‐dose, bolus ifosfamide (IFF) therapy. Renal injury is not thought to occur in patients receiving fractionated schedules, although microscopic hematuria from bladder irritation is not uncommon. IFF is undergoing trials in patients with malignant lymphomas, gynecologic malignancies, and advanced sarcomas and has shown promising results. This report describes renal abnormalities in four patients with malignant lymphoma receiving single‐agent, fractionated IFF and suggests a proximal tubular defect in two patients who were studied in greater detail. These findings suggest an unreported and unique toxicity of IFF when given in smaller, fractionated doses.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1987
Ali Khojasteh; Wendelin Evans; Ralph Duane Reynolds; G. Thomas; John J. Savarese
The bioavailability and clinical effects of an oral controlled-release morphine sulfate tablet, MS-contin (MSC; Purdue-Frederick, Norwalk, CT) in comparison to an immediate-release (IRMS) preparation were evaluated in normal subjects and cancer patients, respectively. The inherent slow-release character of MSC was confirmed by 2 1/2 X T1/2 absorption rate, one-half Cmax, and twice Tmax relative to IRMS. The T1/2 elimination of the two morphine preparations was similar, demonstrating insignificant risk of MSC accumulation. The difference in the mean number of side effects experienced by the control group per subject was significant (.70 for MSC and 1.26 for IRMS, P = .05) and was consistent with peak plasma morphine attenuation. The cancer patients were initially switched from their previous analgesic to four hourly IRMS and then to MSC at double the dose every eight hours. The majority had their MSC dosing interval lengthened to every 12 hours with a decrease in the total daily morphine requirement. While the mean duration on MSC was 20.5 days, many patients were followed poststudy for an extended period with no appreciable development of tolerance. Overall, MSC analgesia and side effects were perceived by the patients as superior compared with prestudy opioids. The advantage of less frequent dosing may lead to improvement of the quality of life of cancer patients.
Cancer | 1997
Edward B. Rubenstein; Richard J. Gralla; John D. Hainsworth; Paul J. Hesketh; Thomas H. Grote; Manuel R. Modiano; Ali Khojasteh; Leonard A. Kalman; Claude R. Benedict; William F. Hahne
This double blind parallel group study assessed the acute antiemetic efficacy of four oral doses of dolasetron mesylate in cancer patients receiving their first course of intravenous chemotherapy with doxorubicin and/or cyclophosphamide.
American Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1996
Allen Yeilding; Luigi Bertoli; Peter D. Eisenberg; Patricia M. Plezia; Manuel R. Modiano; David S. Alberts; Ali Khojasteh; Michael B. Cramer; William F. Hahne
This randomized, double-blind, parallel-group, multicenter study compared the antiemetic effectiveness, safety, and tolerability of two different intravenous (i.v.) doses of dolasetron mesylate (0.6 and 1.8 mg/kg) in cancer patients receiving their first course of high-dose cisplatin-containing chemotherapy (> or = 75 mg/m2). Efficacy was assessed by recording the timing, number, and severity of emetic episodes in the 24 h following high-dose cisplatin. Safety was evaluated by monitoring adverse events, vital signs, clinical laboratory parameters, and electrocardiograms. Of the 62 patients enrolled in the study, 29 received 0.6 mg/kg of dolasetron mesylate and 33 received 1.8 mg/kg. Patients who received dolasetron mesylate 1.8 mg/kg consistently experienced a greater degree of antiemetic control than those who received 0.6 mg/kg. Complete responses were achieved by 55% of patients who received 1.8 mg/kg compared with 31% for the 0.6-mg/kg group. The 1.8-mg/kg group achieved a significantly (p = 0.039) higher complete/ major response rate than the 0.6-mg/kg group (77% vs 55%, respectively) and a significantly (p = 0.004) longer time to the first emetic episode (> 24 h vs 13.5 h, respectively). More than 80% of patients were either satisfied or very satisfied with dolasetron treatment. The most common adverse events were mild to moderate in intensity, consistent with other studies, and included headache (24.1% of patients) and diarrhea (4.8%). These results demonstrated that a single 1.8-mg/kg i.v. dose of dolasetron mesylate provided effective antiemetic activity in a majority of patients given high-dose cisplatin for the first time and should be evaluated further in clinical trials.
American Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1991
John D. Hainsworth; George A. Omura; Ali Khojasteh; Judy C. Bryson; Andrew L. Finn
In a multicenter trial, we evaluated the antiemetic efficacy of ondansetron, a selective serotonin type 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonist, in 42 adult chemotherapy-naive patients receiving a multiple-day cisplatin regimen (20–40 mg/m2 per day for 4–5 days). Thirty-one patients received 3 daily doses of ondansetron (0.15 mg/kg) given intravenously every 6 hours (first dose 30 minutes prior to cisplatin administration); 11 additional patients received an identical dosage and schedule except that a fourth daily dose was added 17.5 hours after cisplatin administration. No other antiemetics were administered. Forty patients were evaluable for efficacy response. Thirteen patients (33%) had no vomiting at any time during the 5-day study. When emetic episodes were evaluated on a daily basis, complete protection (zero emetic episodes) ranged from 50–75%, and major protection (≤2 emetic episodes) ranged from 65–93%. The majority of therapy failures occurred on days 3 and 4. Side effects were minor and transient; no extrapyramidal side effects were observed. Ondansetron appears to be a safe and effective antiemetic when administered during a multiple-day cisplatin-containing chemotherapy regimen.
Journal of Clinical Oncology | 1996
Paul J. Hesketh; Rudolph M. Navari; Thomas H. Grote; Richard J. Gralla; John D. Hainsworth; M. G. Kris; L Anthony; Ali Khojasteh; E Tapazoglou; Claude R. Benedict; William F. Hahne
Collaboration
Dive into the Ali Khojasteh's collaboration.
University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio
View shared research outputsUniversity of Maryland Marlene and Stewart Greenebaum Cancer Center
View shared research outputs