Treosulfan (NSC 39069)
(Synonyms: 曲奥舒凡,NSC 39069; Treosulphan) 目录号 : GC32918
Treosulfan (NSC 39069, Treosulphan) is an alkylating agent used for conventional and high-dose chemotherapy regimens. Treosulfan is potently cytotoxic against pancreatic cancer cell lines.
Cas No.:299-75-2
Sample solution is provided at 25 µL, 10mM.
;)
,-1-7$$$37316672.jpg');)
;)
;)
$$$36806353.jpg');)
;33(7)%EF%BC%9A546-561$$$37156877.jpg');)
;)
;)
;)
%201124-1138.$$$35908550.jpg');)
%20766-780.$$$37100057.jpg');)
%20418-432.$$$36893736.jpg');)
%EF%BC%9A-240-255.$$$35108512.jpg');)
533-545$$$36543525.jpg');)
%201-13.$$$36600053.jpg');)
;)
Quality Control & SDS
- View current batch:
- Purity: >98.00%
- COA (Certificate Of Analysis)
- SDS (Safety Data Sheet)
- Datasheet
Cell experiment: | For cytotoxicity assays, the cells are plated at 1×104 cells/mL grown in 100 μL volume per well of 96-well tissue culture plates. The cells are left to adhere overnight and thereafter incubated with different concentrations of Treosulfan alone or in combination with gemcitabine. The drug combination is added to the cell cultures simultaneously or sequentially (the second drug added 12 h after the first). After 72 h of incubation, Alamar Blue® solution is added to the wells prior to further overnight incubation. Absorbance is then measured on a spectrophotometer and cell proliferation and cytotoxicity of drugs are calculated. In some experiments, proliferation and cytotoxicity are also determined by using trypan blue exclusion and cell counting with an improved Neubauer hemocytometer and cell viability assessed by staining the cells with 7-amino-actinomycin D (final concentration 200 μg/mL) and Annexin-V and analyzing via flow cytometry using a FACS Scan flow cytometer[1]. |
Animal experiment: | Mice[3]Female BALB/c mice are 10 to 12 weeks old and weighed approximately 20 g. Animals are fed with standard pelleted food and water ad libitum. They are housed in a climatized chamber with a dark/light cycle of 12 hours. They are divided into four groups: one group is given Treosulfan (1.5 g/kg/day) for 3 consecutive days, one group receives cyclophosphamide (0.1 g/kg/day) for 2 consecutive days, one group is treated with liposomal busulfan (37 mg/kg/day) for 4 consecutive days, and there is a control group with no treatment. Cyclophosphamide, busulfan, and Treosulfan doses are given at sublethal doses to maintain survival of the animals without bone marrow support. Animals are sacrificed on days 1, 3, 6, 9, and 12, after the last dose of treatment, and the spleen and femurs are removed. Six animals are included in each time point for the treated animals and two control animals[3]. |
References: [1]. Nitsch E, et al. Synergistic cytotoxic activity of treosulfan and gemcitabine in pancreatic cancer cell lines. Anticancer Res. 2014 Apr;34(4):1779-84. | |
Treosulfan (NSC 39069, Treosulphan) is an alkylating agent used for conventional and high-dose chemotherapy regimens. Treosulfan is potently cytotoxic against pancreatic cancer cell lines.
[1] Emilia Nitsch, et al. Anticancer Res. 2014 Apr;34(4):1779-84.
| Cas No. | 299-75-2 | SDF | |
| 别名 | 曲奥舒凡,NSC 39069; Treosulphan | ||
| Canonical SMILES | O[C@H]([C@@H](O)COS(C)(=O)=O)COS(C)(=O)=O | ||
| 分子式 | C6H14O8S2 | 分子量 | 278.3 |
| 溶解度 | DMSO : ≥ 100 mg/mL (359.32 mM);Water : 50 mg/mL (179.66 mM) | 储存条件 | Store at -20°C |
| General tips | 请根据产品在不同溶剂中的溶解度选择合适的溶剂配制储备液；一旦配成溶液，请分装保存，避免反复冻融造成的产品失效。 储备液的保存方式和期限：-80°C 储存时，请在 6 个月内使用，-20°C 储存时，请在 1 个月内使用。 为了提高溶解度，请将管子加热至37℃，然后在超声波浴中震荡一段时间。 |
||
| Shipping Condition | 评估样品解决方案：配备蓝冰进行发货。所有其他可用尺寸：配备RT，或根据请求配备蓝冰。 | ||
| 制备储备液 | |||
 |
1 mg | 5 mg | 10 mg |
| 1 mM | 3.5932 mL | 17.9662 mL | 35.9324 mL |
| 5 mM | 0.7186 mL | 3.5932 mL | 7.1865 mL |
| 10 mM | 0.3593 mL | 1.7966 mL | 3.5932 mL |
| 第一步：请输入基本实验信息（考虑到实验过程中的损耗，建议多配一只动物的药量） | ||||||||||
| 给药剂量 | mg/kg |  |
动物平均体重 | g | |
每只动物给药体积 | ul | |
动物数量 | 只 |
| 第二步：请输入动物体内配方组成（配方适用于不溶于水的药物；不同批次药物配方比例不同，请联系GLPBIO为您提供正确的澄清溶液配方） | ||||||||||
| % DMSO % % Tween 80 % saline | ||||||||||
| 计算重置 | ||||||||||
计算结果:
工作液浓度： mg/ml；
DMSO母液配制方法： mg 药物溶于 μL DMSO溶液（母液浓度 mg/mL，
体内配方配制方法：取 μL DMSO母液，加入 μL PEG300，混匀澄清后加入μL Tween 80，混匀澄清后加入 μL saline，混匀澄清。
1. 首先保证母液是澄清的；
2.
一定要按照顺序依次将溶剂加入，进行下一步操作之前必须保证上一步操作得到的是澄清的溶液，可采用涡旋、超声或水浴加热等物理方法助溶。
3. 以上所有助溶剂都可在 GlpBio 网站选购。
Treosulfan or busulfan plus fludarabine as conditioning treatment before allogeneic haemopoietic stem cell transplantation for older patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome (MC-FludT.14/L): a randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial
Lancet Haematol 2020 Jan;7(1):e28-e39.PMID:31606445DOI:10.1016/S2352-3026(19)30157-7.
Background: Further improvement of preparative regimens before allogeneic haemopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is an unmet medical need for the growing number of older or comorbid patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of conditioning with Treosulfan plus fludarabine compared with reduced-intensity busulfan plus fludarabine in this population. Methods: We did an open-label, randomised, non-inferiority, phase 3 trial in 31 transplantation centres in France, Germany, Hungary, Italy, and Poland. Eligible patients were 18-70 years, had acute myeloid leukaemia in first or consecutive complete haematological remission (blast counts <5% in bone marrow) or myelodysplastic syndrome (blast counts <20% in bone marrow), Karnofsky index of 60% or higher, and were indicated for allogeneic HSCT but considered at an increased risk for standard myeloablative preparative regimens based on age (≥50 years), an HSCT-specific comorbidity index of more than 2, or both. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive either intravenous 10 g/m2 Treosulfan daily applied as a 2-h infusion for 3 days (days -4 to -2) or 0·8 mg/kg busulfan applied as a 2-h infusion at 6-h intervals on days -4 and -3. Both groups received 30 mg/m2 intravenous fludarabine daily for 5 days (days -6 to -2). The primary outcome was event-free survival 2 years after HSCT. The non-inferiority margin was a hazard ratio (HR) of 1·3. Efficacy was assessed in all patients who received treatment and completed transplantation, and safety in all patients who received treatment. The study is registered with EudraCT (2008-002356-18) and ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT00822393). Findings: Between June 13, 2013, and May 3, 2016, 476 patients were enrolled (240 in the busulfan group received treatment and transplantation, and in the Treosulfan group 221 received treatment and 220 transplanation). At the second preplanned interim analysis (Nov 9, 2016), the primary endpoint was met and trial was stopped. Here we present the final confirmatory analysis (data cutoff May 31, 2017). Median follow-up was 15·4 months (IQR 8·8-23·6) for patients treated with Treosulfan and 17·4 months (6·3-23·4) for those treated with busulfan. 2-year event-free survival was 64·0% (95% CI 56·0-70·9) in the Treosulfan group and 50·4% (42·8-57·5) in the busulfan group (HR 0·65 [95% CI 0·47-0·90]; p<0·0001 for non-inferiority, p=0·0051 for superiority). The most frequently reported grade 3 or higher adverse events were abnormal blood chemistry results (33 [15%] of 221 patients in the Treosulfan group vs 35 [15%] of 240 patients in the busulfan group) and gastrointestinal disorders (24 [11%] patients vs 39 [16%] patients). Serious adverse events were reported for 18 (8%) patients in the Treosulfan group and 17 (7%) patients in the busulfan group. Causes of deaths were generally transplantation-related. Interpretation: Treosulfan was non-inferior to busulfan when used in combination with fludarabine as a conditioning regimen for allogeneic HSCT for older or comorbid patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. The improved outcomes in patients treated with the treosulfan-fludarabine regimen suggest its potential to become a standard preparative regimen in this population. Funding: medac GmbH.
Treosulfan compared with reduced-intensity busulfan improves allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation outcomes of older acute myeloid leukemia and myelodysplastic syndrome patients: Final analysis of a prospective randomized trial
Am J Hematol 2022 Aug;97(8):1023-1034.PMID:35617104DOI:10.1002/ajh.26620.
The phase III study was designed to compare event-free survival (EFS) after treosulfan-based conditioning with a widely applied reduced-intensity conditioning (RIC) busulfan regimen in older or comorbid patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) undergoing allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT). A previously reported confirmatory interim analysis of the randomized clinical study including 476 patients demonstrated statistically significant noninferiority for Treosulfan with clinically meaningful improvement in EFS. Here, the final study results and pre-specified subgroup analyses of all 570 randomized patients with completed longer-term follow-up are presented. Patients presenting HCT-specific comorbidity index >2 or aged ≥50 years were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous (IV) fludarabine with either Treosulfan (30 g/m2 IV) or busulfan (6.4 mg/kg IV) after stratification by disease risk group, donor type, and participating institution. The primary endpoint was EFS with disease recurrence, graft failure, or death from any cause as events. EFS of patients (median age 60 years) was superior after Treosulfan compared to RIC busulfan: 36-months-EFS rate 59.5% (95% CI, 52.2-66.1) vs. 49.7% (95% CI, 43.3-55.7) with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.49-0.84), p = 0.0006. Likewise, overall survival (OS) with Treosulfan was superior compared to busulfan: 36-month-OS rate 66.8% vs. 56.3%; HR 0.64 (95% CI, 0.48-0.87), p = 0.0037. Post hoc analyses revealed that these differences were consistent with the confirmatory interim analysis, and thereby the Treosulfan regimen appears particularly suitable for older AML and MDS patients.
High-Dose Treosulfan and Melphalan as Consolidation Therapy Versus Standard Therapy for High-Risk (Metastatic) Ewing Sarcoma
J Clin Oncol 2022 Jul 20;40(21):2307-2320.PMID:35427190DOI:10.1200/JCO.21.01942.
Purpose: Ewing 2008R3 was conducted in 12 countries and evaluated the effect of Treosulfan and melphalan high-dose chemotherapy (TreoMel-HDT) followed by reinfusion of autologous hematopoietic stem cells on event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival in high-risk Ewing sarcoma (EWS). Methods: Phase III, open-label, prospective, multicenter, randomized controlled clinical trial. Eligible patients had disseminated EWS with metastases to bone and/or other sites, excluding patients with only pulmonary metastases. Patients received six cycles of vincristine, ifosfamide, doxorubicin, and etoposide induction and eight cycles of vincristine, actinomycin D, and cyclophosphamide consolidation therapy. Patients were randomly assigned to receive additional TreoMel-HDT or no further treatment (control). The random assignment was stratified by number of bone metastases (1, 2-5, and > 5). The one-sided adaptive-inverse-normal-4-stage-design was changed after the first interim analysis via Müller-Schäfer method. Results: Between 2009 and 2018, 109 patients were randomly assigned, and 55 received TreoMel-HDT. With a median follow-up of 3.3 years, there was no significant difference in EFS between TreoMel-HDT and control in the adaptive design (hazard ratio [HR] 0.85; 95% CI, 0.55 to 1.32, intention-to-treat). Three-year EFS was 20.9% (95% CI, 11.5 to 37.9) in TreoMel-HDT and 19.2% (95% CI, 10.8 to 34.4) in control patients. The results were similar in the per-protocol collective. Males treated with TreoMel-HDT had better EFS compared with controls: median 1.0 years (95% CI, 0.8 to 2.2) versus 0.6 years (95% CI, 0.5 to 0.9); P = .035; HR 0.52 (0.28 to 0.97). Patients age < 14 years benefited from TreoMel-HDT with a 3-years EFS of 39.3% (95% CI, 20.4 to 75.8%) versus 9% (95% CI, 2.4 to 34); P = .016; HR 0.40 (0.19 to 0.87). These effects were similar in the per-protocol collective. This observation is supported by comparable results from the nonrandomized trial EE99R3. Conclusion: In patients with very high-risk EWS, additional TreoMel-HDT was of no benefit for the entire cohort of patients. TreoMel-HDT may be of benefit for children age < 14 years.
Total Body Irradiation or Chemotherapy Conditioning in Childhood ALL: A Multinational, Randomized, Noninferiority Phase III Study
J Clin Oncol 2021 Feb 1;39(4):295-307.PMID:33332189DOI:10.1200/JCO.20.02529.
Purpose: Total body irradiation (TBI) before allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) in pediatric patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is efficacious, but long-term side effects are concerning. We investigated whether preparative combination chemotherapy could replace TBI in such patients. Patients and methods: FORUM is a randomized, controlled, open-label, international, multicenter, phase III, noninferiority study. Patients ≤ 18 years at diagnosis, 4-21 years at HSCT, in complete remission pre-HSCT, and with an HLA-compatible related or unrelated donor were randomly assigned to myeloablative conditioning with fractionated 12 Gy TBI and etoposide versus fludarabine, thiotepa, and either busulfan or Treosulfan. The noninferiority margin was 8%. With 1,000 patients randomly assigned in 5 years, 2-year minimum follow-up, and one-sided alpha of 5%, 80% power was calculated. A futility stopping rule would halt random assignment if chemoconditioning was significantly inferior to TBI (EudraCT: 2012-003032-22; ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01949129). Results: Between April 2013 and December 2018, 543 patients were screened, 417 were randomly assigned, 212 received TBI, and 201 received chemoconditioning. The stopping rule was applied on March 31, 2019. The median follow-up was 2.1 years. In the intention-to-treat population, 2-year overall survival (OS) was significantly higher following TBI (0.91; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.95; P < .0001) versus chemoconditioning (0.75; 95% CI, 0.67 to 0.81). Two-year cumulative incidence of relapse and treatment-related mortality were 0.12 (95% CI, 0.08 to 0.17; P < .0001) and 0.02 (95% CI, < 0.01 to 0.05; P = .0269) following TBI and 0.33 (95% CI, 0.25 to 0.40) and 0.09 (95% CI, 0.05 to 0.14) following chemoconditioning, respectively. Conclusion: Improved OS and lower relapse risk were observed following TBI plus etoposide compared with chemoconditioning. We therefore recommend TBI plus etoposide for patients > 4 years old with high-risk ALL undergoing allogeneic HSCT.
Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation for Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome: an EBMT Inborn Errors Working Party analysis
Blood 2022 Mar 31;139(13):2066-2079.PMID:35100336DOI:10.1182/blood.2021014687.
Allogeneic hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) is a potentially curative treatment for patients affected by Wiskott-Aldrich syndrome (WAS). Reported HSCT outcomes have improved over time with respect to overall survival, but some studies have identified older age and HSCT from alternative donors as risk factors predicting poorer outcome. We analyzed 197 patients undergoing transplant at European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation centers between 2006 and 2017 who received conditioning as recommended by the Inborn Errors Working Party (IEWP): either busulfan (n = 103) or Treosulfan (n = 94) combined with fludarabine ± thiotepa. After a median follow-up post-HSCT of 44.9 months, 176 patients were alive, resulting in a 3-year overall survival of 88.7% and chronic graft-versus-host disease (GVHD)-free survival (events include death, graft failure, and severe chronic GVHD) of 81.7%. Overall survival and chronic GVHD-free survival were not significantly affected by conditioning regimen (busulfan- vs treosulfan-based), donor type (matched sibling donor/matched family donor vs matched unrelated donor/mismatched unrelated donor vs mismatched family donor), or period of HSCT (2006-2013 vs 2014-2017). Patients aged <5 years at HSCT had a significantly better overall survival. The overall cumulative incidences of grade III to IV acute GVHD and extensive/moderate/severe chronic GVHD were 6.6% and 2.1%, respectively. Patients receiving treosulfan-based conditioning had a higher incidence of graft failure and mixed donor chimerism and more frequently underwent secondary procedures (second HSCT, unconditioned stem cell boost, donor lymphocyte infusion, or splenectomy). In summary, HSCT for WAS with conditioning regimens currently recommended by IEWP results in excellent survival and low rates of GVHD, regardless of donor or stem cell source, but age ≥5 years remains a risk factor for overall survival.