ライフサイエンスコーパス: MTD

1 MTD improved diagnostic accuracy and timeliness and redu

2 MTD values of 303 +/- 4 mg.kg(-1) for female and 300 +/-

3 MTD was bendamustine 75 mg/m(2) (days 1 and 2), lenalido

4 MTD was defined as the SBRT dose at which the probabilit

5 MTD was defined at 0.8 mg/kg with 1 DLT observed (sepsis

6 MTD was not reached (maximum dose evaluated, 200 mg twic

7 MTDs containing basic residues alone fail to be targeted

8 The schedule 1 MTD (1.88 mg/kg once every 3 weeks) was associated with

9 te (ORR) was 2 of 6 (33%) for the schedule 2 MTD and 3 of 12 (25%) for the schedule 3 MTD.

10 e 2 MTD and 3 of 12 (25%) for the schedule 3 MTD.

11 es showed an excellent safety profile with a MTD (~30 mgDOX/kg) that is about 3 times as much as that

12 After MTD determination, patients were evaluated in an expansi

13 An MTD was identified at 63.25 Gy in 25 fractions.

14 No grade 3 pneumonitis was observed and an MTD for acute toxicity was not identified during patient

15 In the dose-escalation phase, an MTD was not reached at doses ranging from 50 to 650 mg p

16 Although our trial did not reach an MTD, a dose-dependent effect was demonstrated in the PK/

17 g alkyltransferase inhibition could reach an MTD.

18 us doses and schedules was feasible, with an MTD of 60 mug/m(2)/day.

19 /4 diarrhea) occurred at the 600-mg dose and MTD was 480 mg.

20 Here we characterized the effects of LDM and MTD capecitabine therapy on tumor and host cells using h

21 The safety profile and MTD was assessed for the safety population.

22 (PD) parameters, including HbF response and MTD after standardized dose escalation, and to evaluate

23 lues of 1.1-1.2 h (dose of 5 mg/kg i.v.) and MTDs of 60-80 mg/kg (i.p.).

24 awaii, Maryland, and Massachusetts to assess MTD use, effectiveness, health-system benefits, and cost

25 At MTD in the escalation phase, eight patients (47.1%) disc

26 ust and similar to previous cohorts; %HbF at MTD was best predicted by 5 variables, including baselin

27 , ixabepilone, paclitaxel, or vinorelbine at MTDs.

28 in a hydrophobic groove in the autoinhibited MTD.

29 The median of the ratio between MTD and SD was eight (range, four to 1,000).

30 ith intermittent maintenance therapy between MTD cycles and prevent tumor recurrence after completing

31 dian body mass index was lower in the IDA/CA/MTD group (46th percentile) versus the ODA groups (70th

32 Median FEV1 was worse in the IDA/CA/MTD group (72% predicted) versus the combined ODA groups

33 However, the 5- to 11-year-old IDA/CA/MTD group had more lobes of bronchiectasis (median, 5; P

34 otype groups, but worse in those with IDA/CA/MTD ultrastructural defects, most of whom had biallelic

35 ts, and microtubular disorganization (IDA/CA/MTD) (n = 41) were significantly younger at diagnosis an

36 ts with microtubular disorganization (IDA/CA/MTD; n = 40).

37 success of dosing strategies, we contrasted MTD strategies as compared with low-dose, high-density m

38 her probabilities in identifying the correct MTD, even when the sample size is matched.

39 The cytarabine MTD used in stage two was 800 mg/m(2), and R-BAC was wel

40 mg/m(2) IV on days 2 and 3), and cytarabine (MTD IV on days 2 to 4) every 28 days for four to six cyc

41 essments done at 10 weeks of age after daily MTD treatment since the fourth week of life.

42 equentially assigned to CUDC-907 once-daily (MTD 60 mg), 12 to twice-weekly (MTD 150 mg), 15 to three

43 ted (100-400 mg) in a 3 + 3 design to define MTD combined with standard-dose obinutuzumab.

44 DL 2 was the determined MTD.

45 pment of a microfluidic transduction device (MTD) that combines microfluidic spatial confinement with

46 Five patients experienced DLTs; MTD was 12.0 Gy/fx, which had a probability of a DLT of

47 Peripheral membrane-targeting domain (MTD) families, such as C1-, C2- and PH domains, play a k

48 ts conserved mitochondrial targeting domain (MTD), which, in unstressed conditions, is inhibited by i

49 rgeting (the mitochondrial targeting domain [MTD]).

50 Alternative membrane targeting domains (MTDs) containing multiple basic residues can efficiently

51 eveloped macromolecule transduction domains (MTDs).

52 ry end points were maximally tolerable dose (MTD) of LEN and progression-free survival (PFS).

53 To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose limiting toxicity (DLT) of irinotecan admi

54 imed to identify the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of irinotecan in p

55 end points included maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT).

56 ) study examined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and preliminary safety and activity of the regimen

57 The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D, primary outcome

58 was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose, assessed in patients

59 dose was deemed the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and RP2D.

60 oxicity in rats, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the no observed adverse effect level (NOAEL) we

61 imed to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the recommended phase 2 dose of the selective H

62 was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and to explore the clinical response to (177)Lu-DOT

63 The maximally tolerated dose (MTD) approach in conventional chemotherapy accompanies a

64 harmacokinetics, and maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) determination.

65 Dose allocation and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) estimation were guided by a modified Bayesian conti

66 was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab (200 mg intraveno

67 tiated at 50% of the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) for the intact tablet.

68 on cohorts after the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) has been reached to better characterize the toxicit

69 l to determine the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of 3K3A-APC in ischemic stroke patients.

70 At the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of 400 mug/d, the response rate was 70% (n = 7 of 1

71 was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of alisertib with irinotecan and temozolomide in th

72 le and establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of brentuximab vedotin in combination with ABVD and

73 nts to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of BV for SR-aGVHD treatment.

74 eme to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of carfilzomib.

75 atment to define the maximal tolerated dose (MTD) of carfilzomib.

76 study determined the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of EC145 administered as a bolus intravenous inject

77 was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of isatuximab with lenalidomide and dexamethasone.

78 imed to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of lenalidomide when combined with rituximab in a p

79 Finally, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of NSC23925b was determined.

80 was to describe the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of oral OA in patients with ET and assess the pharm

81 study determined the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of oral pomalidomide (4 dose levels) administered o

82 ght to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of panobinostat plus bortezomib in patients with re

83 ial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of pomalidomide and to explore its efficacy when co

84 ty and determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of single-agent, oral ixazomib given weekly for 3 o

85 s, which doubled the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of Taxol.

86 ous injection with a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the mGluR2/3 agonist LY379268 (20mg/kg) beginnin

87 The Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) of the particles was determined 10 days post-inject

88 ty and determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the regimen.

89 study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of venetoclax when given with obinutuzumab and its

90 ither Nexvax2 at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or placebo.

91 when compared with a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) regimen in treating platinum-resistant ovarian canc

92 gs administered at a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) remains the backbone for treating most cancers.

93 ure from the classic maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) strategy, which, given its goal of rapid eradicatio

94 Buparlisib's maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) was 100 mg/d.

95 ded until either the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) was achieved or, in the absence of MTD, until three

96 The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as 25 mg lenalidomide (days 1-21/28 day

97 all trials, but the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) was defined in only 13 studies (16%).

98 Once the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was established, 21 patients were treated with a 1-

99 rase activity, but a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was not reached.

100 The maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) with dose-escalated hypofractionation has not been

101 g toxicities (DLTs), maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), and preliminary antitumor activity were evaluated.

102 ned to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), efficacy, and toxicity of stereotactic body radiot

103 g dose escalation to maximum tolerated dose (MTD), followed by monthly phlebotomy.

104 2 study assessed the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic profiles, safe

105 mine its toxicities, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity.

106 ors to determine its maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and modulation of phosphorylated

107 study evaluated the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of carfilzo

108 se 1 study evaluated maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics (PD), efficacy,

109 We determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, safety, and preliminary efficacy

110 afety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase 2 dose, and hematologic and clin

111 ial to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), safety profile, and pharmacokinetics of hu14.18K32

112 al were to determine maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and pharm

113 udy to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of INO plus

114 n study assessed the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of

115 udy investigated the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), safety, preliminary activity, pharmacokinetics (PK

116 Rs) to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), the recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and the sche

117 s are given at their maximum tolerated dose (MTD), which compounds the toxicity risk and exposes tumo

118 tion to identify the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD).

119 Phase 1 established maximum tolerated dose (MTD).

120 y and after reaching maximum tolerated dose (MTD).

121 evels, including the maximum tolerated dose (MTD).

122 sed patients) at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD).

123 The maximum-tolerated doses (MTDs) were 40 mg/m(2) (schedule 1) and 105 mg/m(2) (sche

124 in identifying true maximum-tolerated doses (MTDs), although the sample size required by the 3 + 3 de

125 re, we show that microtubule-targeting drug (MTD) treatment impaired HIF-1alpha protein nuclear trans

126 c efficacies of mitochondria-targeted drugs (MTD) in combination with 2-deoxy-d-glucose (2-DG), a com

127 e development of multitarget-directed drugs (MTDs).

128 than paclitaxel or ixabepilone at equivalent MTD-based doses.

129 ase and to update or confirm the established MTD.

130 41 enrolled patients, 38 were evaluable for MTD determination.

131 Plasma from MTD capecitabine-treated mice induced a more tumorigenic

132 id-fast-bacilli-smear-positive specimens had MTD performed; MTD positive-predictive value (PPV) was 9

133 patients having smear-negative specimens had MTD; MTD PPV was 90% and NPV was 88%.

134 nts suspected of tuberculosis but not having MTD, smear PPV for lab-confirmed tuberculosis was 77% an

135 an, SKOV-3; breast, MDA-MB-468) and a higher MTD in mice (10mg/kg versus 5mg/kg).

136 nt, there is a 50% chance that a new, higher MTD will be recommended.

137 line was different from zero only in the IDA/MTD/CA group (mean [SE], -1.11 [0.48] percent predicted/

138 Participants with IDA/MTD/CA defects, which included individuals with CCDC39 o

139 decline over time were participants with IDA/MTD/CA defects.

140 a CRM model delivered improved efficiency in MTD assessment and provided additional flexibility.

141 se in NK and T cytotoxic cells were found in MTD-capecitabine-treated tumors compared with LDM-capeci

142 luding 5 within BCL11A, but none influencing MTD %HbF or dose.

143 Of interest, MTD-mediated mitochondrial targeting of Vms1 is negative

144 Compared with no MTD, MTD significantly decreased time to diagnosis in patient

145 nts having smear-negative specimens had MTD; MTD PPV was 90% and NPV was 88%.

146 While MTD generally cost more than no MTD, incremental cost savings occurred in patients with

147 Compared with no MTD, MTD significantly decreased time to diagnosis in pa

148 ose (MTD) was achieved or, in the absence of MTD, until three dose levels above full BTK occupancy by

149 disease, where the therapeutic advantage of MTD capecitabine was limited despite a substantial initi

150 ation ceased at 160 mg per day given lack of MTD and endoxifen concentrations > 1,900 ng/mL.

151 ccounting for the therapeutic limitations of MTD compared with LDM capecitabine.

152 HL function failed to restore the ability of MTDs to inhibit HIF-1alpha, suggesting that VHL does not

153 ion can be rescued by N-terminal addition of MTDs containing basic residues.

154 ufficient in computational identification of MTDs within families (yielding less than 65% accuracy ev

155 in tumor biology, and the widespread use of MTDs in clinical oncology.

156 esults show that LDM strategies outperformed MTD strategies in total tumor cell reduction.

157 -smear-positive specimens had MTD performed; MTD positive-predictive value (PPV) was 98% and negative

158 sion phase and 52.9% at the escalation phase MTD.

159 isolation for patients having smear-positive/MTD-negative/culture-negative specimens, decreased outpa

160 to diagnosis in patients with smear-positive/MTD-positive specimens, decreased respiratory isolation

161 tigating neurologic events at a prespecified MTD.

162 ) initiated hydroxyurea and 60 (90%) reached MTD at 26.2 +/- 4.9 mg/kg/d with 29.1% +/- 6.7% fetal he

163 inued to 12.5 mg/kg per day without reaching MTD.

164 30-fold lower than their previously-reported MTDs.

165 MTD is obtained 30% of the time (ie, revised MTD is exactly the true MTD), and moderate improvement i

166 is obtained 80% of the time when the revised MTD is within a level from true MTD.

167 to a change in the MTD, how far the revised MTD was from the true MTD, and the toxicity rates associ

168 We compare the accuracy of the revised MTD with the MTD obtained before expansion and with the

169 bicin, whereas 3 showed essentially the same MTD as doxorubicin.

170 0 mg), and seven to the 5/2 dosing schedule (MTD 60 mg).

171 -bearing mice and compared with the standard MTD protocol (100 mg/kg once a week for 4 weeks).

172 esponding to only a fraction of the systemic MTD of CBL0137.

173 after initiation of pazopanib at the tablet MTD.

174 s direct nucleic acid amplification testing (MTD) for pulmonary tuberculosis disease diagnosis in the

175 we present evidence supporting the idea that MTD may not always be the best approach and offer sugges

176 Moreover, we show that MTD transduction does not adversely affect cell viabilit

177 Specifically, we show that MTD treatment of RCC cells did not impair HIF-1alpha nuc

178 The MTD and RP2D of PF-00562271 is 125 mg twice per day with

179 The MTD for alisertib was 60 mg/m(2), with mandatory myeloid

180 The MTD for dual-dose O6-benzylguanine plus carmustine was a

181 The MTD for Nexvax2 was 150 mug because of transient, acute

182 The MTD for PF-04449913 was established to be 400 mg once da

183 The MTD for this study was 12.0 Gy/fx; it was associated wit

184 The MTD of EC145 was 2.5 mg when administered as either a bo

185 The MTD of INO in combination with rituximab (375 mg/m(2)) w

186 The MTD of panobinostat plus bortezomib was determined and d

187 The MTD of post-transplantation LEN, in combination with AZA

188 The MTD of SNPs was administered and toxicity evaluated over

189 The MTD of the regimen was dose level 1 (carfilzomib 20/27 m

190 The MTD of this combination regimen was 25 mg lenalidomide w

191 The MTD using (177)Lu-DOTA-rituximab was 1,665 MBq/m(2) of B

192 The MTD was 100 mg/d.

193 The MTD was 160 mg/m(2) once every 21 days.

194 The MTD was 20 mg lenalidomide.

195 The MTD was 20 mg of carmustine applied once in combination

196 The MTD was 450 mg/m(2) for tablet and 160 mg/m(2) for suspe

197 The MTD was 540 mug/kg for the PAR1 active cytoprotectant, 3

198 The MTD was 56 mg/m(2).

199 The MTD was 70 mg/m(2), and 104 patients (phase 1/2) receive

200 The MTD was AZA 300 mg on days 1 to 14 and ROMI 14 mg/m2 on

201 The MTD was defined as the maximum dose with </= 20% risk of

202 The MTD was determined to be 1.6 mg/m(2) bortezomib on days

203 The MTD was determined to be 2.97 mg/m(2).

204 The MTD was established as 225 mg twice per day orally over

205 The MTD was established as 36 mg/m(2).

206 The MTD was established at panobinostat 20 mg plus bortezomi

207 The MTD was studied using an open-label, single-ascending 3

208 The MTD was the highest-dose 3K3A-APC tested, 540 mug/kg, wi

209 The MTD, 125 mg daily, was determined on the basis of dose-l

210 The MTD, and recommended phase II dose, of hu14.18K322A is 6

211 In phase 1, the MTD of LEN was defined as 10 mg in cycles 2 through 6, a

212 evious reports, whereas all levels above the MTD had an average DLT rate of 36%.

213 f exposing patients to toxic doses above the MTD than the modified toxicity probability interval (mTP

214 Although the MTD was not formally determined, an 1,800-mg dose was se

215 ycle 1 of the dose-escalation phase, and the MTD was not reached up to the maximum planned dose of 20

216 , and 60 mug/m(2)/day was established as the MTD.

217 onse rate was 52% in patients treated at the MTD (n = 21).

218 on adverse events in patients treated at the MTD (n = 57) included hyperphosphatemia (82.5%), constip

219 At the MTD (n = 67 patients), the overall response rate was 67%

220 At the MTD for each genotype, dosing by genotype resulted in si

221 a under the curve from 0 to 72 hours) at the MTD for each schedule coincided with the exposure in mou

222 BKM120, at the MTD of 100 mg/d, is safe and well tolerated, with a favo

223 etween those who received the vaccine at the MTD on either schedule and those who received placebo.

224 patients also received either Nexvax2 at the MTD or placebo.

225 6 months) among all patients treated at the MTD was 31%, including two objective responses in the co

226 Treatment at the MTD yielded objective response rates of 87%, 74%, and 20

227 average, 39% of patients were treated at the MTD, and 74% were treated at either the MTD or an adjace

228 At the MTD, grade 3 to 4 toxicities included anemia (9%), throm

229 At the MTD, paired tumor biopsies were obtained at baseline and

230 During expansion at the MTD, patients with FGFR1-amplified squamous cell non-sma

231 0 efficacy-evaluable patients treated at the MTD, the ORR was 90%.

232 8%, with a 50% response rate observed at the MTD.

233 pansion cohort (12 patients) enrolled at the MTD.

234 the study, 44 patients were enrolled at the MTD.

235 utant solid tumors were also enrolled at the MTD.

236 f 30 (27%) evaluable patients treated at the MTD.

237 ther evaluate the efficacy and safety at the MTD.

238 hase 2 assessed overall response rate at the MTD.

239 ived carfilzomib on the same schedule at the MTD.

240 Conclusion BGJ398 at the MTD/RP2D had a tolerable and manageable safety profile a

241 ization to mitochondria, through binding the MTD in an interaction that is competitive with binding t

242 week-schedule of SAR3419 for six cycles, the MTD is 160 mg/m(2).

243 gative complete responses, at 400 mug/d, the MTD for this study.

244 A dose-escalation phase to determine the MTD of R-INO was followed by an expanded cohort to furth

245 ntinual reassessment method to determine the MTD using tiers of 120, 240, 360, and 540 mug/kg of 3K3A

246 the MTD, and 74% were treated at either the MTD or an adjacent level (one level above or below).

247 dose-de-escalation cohort, establishing the MTD and recommended phase II dose at lenvatinib 20 mg/d

248 on how to monitor safety and re-evaluate the MTD using data obtained from expansion cohorts of phase

249 To evaluate the MTD, we adjusted the dosage of the radiopharmaceutical a

250 In patients with the *28/*28 genotype, the MTD was 400 mg (one DLT per six patients), and 500 mg wa

251 In patients with the *1/*28 genotype, the MTD was 700 mg (five DLTs per 22 patients), and 850 mg w

252 In patients with the *1/*1 genotype, the MTD was 850 mg (four DLTs per 16 patients), and 1,000 mg

253 Among participants given the MTD, eight gastrointestinal treatment-emergent adverse e

254 In phase 1, to identify the MTD of lenalidomide, four patient cohorts received escal

255 e mean half-life was 23.9 h (SD 14.0) in the MTD group.

256 Furthermore, transduction saturation in the MTD is reached with only half the virus required to reac

257 ercent of trials that led to a change in the MTD, how far the revised MTD was from the true MTD, and

258 INTERPRETATION: The MTD of Nexvax2 was 150 mug for twice weekly intradermal

259 re-escalation up to 25 mg lenalidomide, the MTD was not reached.

260 erienced dose-limiting toxicity at 4 mg; the MTD was determined as 4 mg.

261 toxicities: 1 at 4.0 mg and 2 at 5.5 mg; the MTD was determined as 4.0 mg.

262 ientating toxicity studies in nude mice, the MTD of 1 was 3-fold higher compared to conventional doxo

263 It is efficacious at 1/10th of the MTD against human tumors derived from HCT-116 and NCI-H4

264 gnificant improvement in the accuracy of the MTD is obtained 30% of the time (ie, revised MTD is exac

265 ay result in a less accurate estimate of the MTD.

266 hase 2, patients received rituximab plus the MTD of lenalidomide, following the same cycles as for ph

267 (grade 3 pneumonia at 20 mg/kg QW/Q2W); the MTD was not reached.

268 nine patients were enrolled, 55 received the MTD (2.5 mg/d) and were evaluated.

269 44 (including six patients who received the MTD of lenalidomide in the phase 1 portion) in phase 2.

270 de 4 neutropenia) at 5 mg per day and so the MTD was 4 mg per day.

271 dict that drug concentrations lower than the MTD are as efficacious, suggesting that lowering the tot

272 exerted greater therapeutic effects than the MTD regimen, justifying its further clinical investigati

273 We demonstrate that the MTD can improve the efficiency of lentiviral transductio

274 ecause of the limited observed toxicity, the MTD was infrequently reached, and therefore, the recomme

275 Irinotecan 50 mg/m(2)/day for 5 days was the MTD when combined with vincristine, temozolomide and bev

276 are the accuracy of the revised MTD with the MTD obtained before expansion and with the true MTD base

277 The MTDs were 1.88, 1.5, and 1.0 mg/kg for schedules 1, 2, a

278 The MTDs were lenalidomide 25 mg, bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2), pe

279 ccumulation of LY2606368 was observed at the MTDs for both schedules.

280 nal failure) occurred at doses exceeding the MTDs.

281 Using the MTDs, termed Mito-CP and Mito-Q, we evaluated relative c

282 At their MTDs, the microtubule-binding drugs paclitaxel and ixabe

283 Therefore, MTD was 8 mg/kg once every 2 weeks or 12 mg/kg once ever

284 While this MTD approach builds upon the intuitively appealing princ

285 the revised MTD is within a level from true MTD.

286 obtained before expansion and with the true MTD based on simulated trials.

287 he time (ie, revised MTD is exactly the true MTD), and moderate improvement is obtained 80% of the ti

288 D, how far the revised MTD was from the true MTD, and the toxicity rates associated with each level a

289 e resistant to the same drug delivered under MTD, the question arises whether it may be a preferable

290 Upon MTD determination, patients were enrolled to 4 different

291 clitaxel and eribulin, we performed a 2-week MTD-dosing regimen, followed by a determination of drug

292 ekly (MTD 150 mg), 15 to three-times-weekly (MTD 150 mg), and seven to the 5/2 dosing schedule (MTD 6

293 once-daily (MTD 60 mg), 12 to twice-weekly (MTD 150 mg), 15 to three-times-weekly (MTD 150 mg), and

294 variables, including baseline %HbF, whereas MTD was best predicted by 5 variables, including serum c

295 While MTD generally cost more than no MTD, incremental cost sa

296 eradication is frequently not achieved with MTD, whereupon a de facto goal of longer-term tumor cont

297 to 100 mg twice daily was administered, with MTD determined as 75 mg twice daily.

298 Stober SNPs50 exhibit systemic toxicity with MTD of 103 +/- 11 mg.kg(-1) for female and 100 +/- 6 mg.

299 f mitochondrial bioenergetic metabolism with MTDs and glycolytic inhibitors such as 2-DG may offer a

300 iderable systemic sex-related toxicity, with MTDs ranging from 40 +/- 2 mg.kg(-1) to 95 +/- 2 mg.kg(-