Effects of enobosarm on muscle wasting and physical function in patients with cancer: a double-blind, randomised controlled phase 2 trial
Open accessAbstract
Background Cancer-induced muscle wasting begins early in the course of a patient's malignant disease, resulting in declining physical function and other detrimental clinical consequences. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial assessed the efficacy and safety of enobosarm, a selective androgen receptor modulator, in patients with cancer.Methods We enrolled male (>45 years) and female (postmenopausal) patients with cancer who were not obese and who had at least 2% weight loss in the previous 6 months. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1 ratio, by computer generated list, block size three, stratified by cancer type) to receive once-daily oral enobosarm 1 mg, 3 mg, or placebo for up to 113 days at US and Argentinian oncology clinics. The sponsor, study personnel, and participants were masked to assignment. The primary endpoint was change in total lean body mass from baseline, assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Efficacy analyses were done only in patients who had a baseline and an on-treatment assessment in the protocol-specified window of within 10 days before baseline or first study drug, and within 10 days of day 113 or end of study (evaluable efficacy population). Adverse events and other safety measurements were assessed in the intention-to-treat (safety) population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00467844.Findings Enrolment started on July 3, 2007, and the last patient completed the trial on Aug 1, 2008. 159 patients were analysed for safety (placebo, n=52; enobosarm 1 mg, n=53; enobosarm 3 mg, n=54). The evaluable efficacy population included 100 participants (placebo, n=34; enobosarm 1 mg, n=32; enobosarm 3 mg, n=34). Compared with baseline, significant increases in total lean body mass by day 113 or end of study were noted in both enobosarm groups (enobosarm 1 mg median 1·5 kg, range -2·1 to 12·6, p=0·0012; enodosarm 3 mg 1·0 kg, -4·8 to 11·5, p=0·046). Change in total lean body mass within the placebo group (median 0·02 kg, range -5·8 to 6·7) was not significant (p=0·88). The most common serious adverse events were malignant neoplasm progression (eight of 52 [15%] with placebo vs five of 53 [9%] with enobosarm 1 mg vs seven of 54 [13%] with enobosarm 3 mg), pneumonia (two [4%] vs two [4%] vs three [6%]), and febrile neutropenia (three [6%vs one [2%] vs none). None of these events were deemed related to study drug.Interpretation Cancer cachexia is an unmet medical need and our data suggest that use of enobosarm might lead to improvements in lean body mass, without the toxic effects associated with androgens and progestational agents.Funding GTx.
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Enobosarm increased muscle mass and physical function in patients without cancer and in those with advanced lung, colorectal or breast cancer or lymphoma.
“Enobosarm, a non-steroidal SARM, successfully increased muscle mass and physical function in patients without cancer and in those with advanced lung, colorectal or breast cancer or lymphoma427–429.”
From Sarcopenic obesity in older adults: aetiology, epidemiology and treatment strategies (2018) · cites this paper as [428]
The Results and Discussion report increased lean body mass and stair-climb power with enobosarm in patients with cancer, including the non-small-cell lung and colorectal cancer groups. The Methods list breast cancer and lymphoma as eligible diagnoses, but the Discussion groups their outcomes under “other cancers” rather than demonstrating improvements for each separately. The paper also reports a previous study’s findings in people without cancer; that was not a population in this trial. (LLM, conf=0.82)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measuredOther studies showed selective androgen receptor modulators increased lean mass without improving strength or physical performance in patients with sarcopenia.
“Other studies showed increases in lean mass without improvements in strength or physical performance in patients with sarcopenia428,430.”
From Sarcopenic obesity in older adults: aetiology, epidemiology and treatment strategies (2018) · cites this paper as [428]
The Results report increased lean body mass and no significant improvement in hand-grip strength, supporting those parts of the claim. But the Results and Discussion report significant improvements in stair-climb power, a measure of physical function—the opposite of the claimed lack of improvement. The trial studied patients with cancer-induced muscle wasting, not a general sarcopenia population. (LLM, conf=0.90)
Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 35 · Cited by 391
- Authors
- Dobs, A. S., Boccia, R. V., Croot, C. C., Gabrail, N. Y., Dalton, J. T., Hancock, M. L., Johnston, M. A., & Steiner, M. S.
- Affiliations
- Johns Hopkins University (US)
- Center for Cancers and Blood Disorders (US)
- North Mississippi Medical Center (US)
- Gabrail Cancer Center (US)
- GTx (United States) (US)
- Corresponding author
- Dobs, Adrian S
- Venue
- The Lancet Oncology
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2013-04
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 335-345
- ISSN
- 1470-2045 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC4898053
- OpenAlex
- W2124028388
- Cited by
- 391
- References
- 35
- Citations by year
- 2026: 26 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 28 · 2022: 25 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 30 · 2018: 40 · 2017: 33 · 2016: 28 · 2015: 25 · 2014: 28 · 2013: 5
- FWCI
- 20.19
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- The Lancet Oncology (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
- PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
- Funders
- National Cancer Institute (P30CA006973)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Nutrition and Health in Aging
- Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Muscle Physiology and Disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Hormonal and reproductive studies
- Keywords
- enobosarm, selective androgen receptor modulators, sarcopenia, lean body mass, physical function, cancer cachexia, weight loss, muscle strength, adverse events, drug safety, dose comparison, postmenopausal women, men, dual-energy X-ray absorptiometry
- MeSH terms
- Amides, Anilides, Argentina, Cachexia, Double-Blind Method, Female, Humans, Male, Muscles, Neoplasms, United States, Weight Loss, Body Mass Index
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review