Small Molecule
C32H29N5O2
170364-57-5
Enzastaurin is an orally available, investigational small-molecule drug, chemically classified as a synthetic bisindolylmaleimide, that functions as a serine/threonine kinase inhibitor. Originally developed by Eli Lilly and Company, its primary mechanism of action involves the potent and selective inhibition of Protein Kinase C beta (PKCβ), with secondary activity suppressing the critical PI3K/AKT cell survival pathway. This dual inhibition results in multifaceted antitumor effects, including the induction of apoptosis, suppression of cellular proliferation, and inhibition of tumor-induced angiogenesis.
The clinical development of Enzastaurin has followed a remarkable and instructive trajectory. Despite promising preclinical data, the drug's initial path was marked by a significant setback in 2013 with the failure of the pivotal Phase III PRELUDE trial, which found no benefit for Enzastaurin as a maintenance therapy in high-risk diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). This outcome led to the cessation of its development by the originator.
The program was revitalized when Denovo Biopharma acquired the global rights and applied a precision medicine strategy. Through retrospective genomic analysis of samples from the PRELUDE and other trials, a novel predictive biomarker, Denovo Genomic Marker 1 (DGM1), was identified. This biomarker stratified a subpopulation of patients who demonstrated a significant survival benefit from Enzastaurin treatment. This discovery prompted a second wave of development, culminating in two new biomarker-guided, global Phase III trials: the ENGINE study in first-line high-risk DLBCL and the ENGAGE study in newly diagnosed glioblastoma (GBM).
Concurrently, a strong, mechanistically distinct rationale emerged for repurposing Enzastaurin for the treatment of Vascular Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (vEDS), a rare and life-threatening genetic disorder. Preclinical models demonstrated that Enzastaurin could correct the underlying PKC-driven pathology responsible for fatal vascular ruptures in vEDS. This led to the initiation of the pivotal Phase III PREVEnt trial by Aytu BioPharma.
However, the development path has encountered further significant hurdles. The PREVEnt trial for vEDS was suspended indefinitely due to financial constraints. Furthermore, the recent voluntary withdrawal of the FDA and EMA orphan drug designations for both GBM and DLBCL, occurring after the completion of the ENGAGE and ENGINE trials, strongly suggests that these studies failed to meet their primary endpoints.
At the recommended oral dose of 500 mg daily, Enzastaurin has a generally manageable safety profile, with common adverse events including fatigue and chromaturia. Dose-limiting toxicities, notably thrombocytopenia and QTc interval prolongation, have been observed at higher or more frequent doses. Its pharmacokinetic profile is complex, characterized by saturable absorption and a profound susceptibility to drug-drug interactions involving the CYP3A4 enzyme system.
Enzastaurin stands as a quintessential case study in modern pharmaceutical development. Its history illustrates the immense challenges of translating preclinical promise into clinical success, the transformative potential of biomarker-driven drug rescue, and the formidable scientific and financial barriers to bringing novel therapies to market for both oncologic and rare disease indications. While its future in oncology appears uncertain, the compelling scientific rationale for its use in vEDS remains an unresolved opportunity.
Enzastaurin (LY-317615) is a synthetic, acyclic bisindolylmaleimide developed as an orally administered, targeted antineoplastic agent.[1] Its creation by Eli Lilly and Company emerged from a strategic shift in cancer drug discovery during the 1990s, moving away from broad cytotoxic agents toward compounds designed to inhibit specific molecular pathways driving tumorigenesis.[3] Enzastaurin was engineered for the treatment of a wide spectrum of solid and hematological malignancies, predicated on its ability to modulate key cellular signaling cascades.[4]
The core pharmacological premise for Enzastaurin's development was its function as a potent and selective adenosine triphosphate (ATP)-competitive inhibitor of Protein Kinase C beta (PKCβ).[5] PKCβ is a member of the serine/threonine kinase family that serves as a critical node in signal transduction pathways regulating cellular proliferation, apoptosis, differentiation, and angiogenesis.[7] Dysregulation and overexpression of PKC isoforms, particularly PKCβ, have been implicated in the pathology of numerous cancers, including diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and glioblastoma, where its expression is linked to poor prognosis.[7] By selectively targeting this enzyme, Enzastaurin was designed to disrupt tumor-induced angiogenesis and directly inhibit tumor cell growth and survival, offering a novel therapeutic strategy for these difficult-to-treat diseases.[9]
Enzastaurin is a small molecule drug belonging to the chemical classes of indoles and maleimides.[11] Its definitive chemical structure is identified by the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (IUPAC) name 3-(1-methylindol-3-yl)-4-[1-(pyridin-2-ylmethyl)piperidin-4-yl]indol-3-yl]pyrrole-2,5-dione.[1]
The drug has been developed for oral administration and has been studied in both capsule and tablet formulations.[2] Much of the clinical research has utilized the hydrochloride salt form, Enzastaurin Hydrochloride (CAS Number: 359017-79-1), which possesses a distinct molecular formula (
C32H30ClN5O2) and molecular weight from the parent compound.[14] Enzastaurin itself is soluble in dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) but has very low predicted aqueous solubility, a property that influences its absorption characteristics.[16] Its computed properties, including a high partition coefficient (AlogP: 4.93) and a molecular weight exceeding 500 g/mol, result in one violation of Lipinski's Rule of Five, suggesting potential challenges with oral bioavailability and membrane permeability.[16] A comprehensive summary of its key identifiers and properties is provided in Table 1.
Table 1: Key Identifiers and Physicochemical Properties of Enzastaurin
| Property | Value / Identifier | Source(s) |
|---|---|---|
| Drug Name | Enzastaurin | 17 |
| Synonyms | LY-317615, LY317615, enzastaurina | 12 |
| DrugBank ID | DB06486 | 12 |
| CAS Number | 170364-57-5 | 1 |
| PubChem CID | 176167 | 1 |
| ChEMBL ID | CHEMBL300138 | 12 |
| IUPAC Name | 3-(1-methylindol-3-yl)-4-[1-(pyridin-2-ylmethyl)piperidin-4-yl]indol-3-yl]pyrrole-2,5-dione | 12 |
| Molecular Formula | C32H29N5O2 | 11 |
| Molecular Weight | 515.617 g/mol | 1 |
| Solubility | Soluble in DMSO; Predicted Water Solubility: 0.00903 mg/mL | 16 |
| AlogP | 4.93 | 18 |
| Polar Surface Area | 72.16 A˚2 | 18 |
| H-Bond Donors (Lipinski) | 1 | 18 |
| H-Bond Acceptors (Lipinski) | 7 | 18 |
| Rule of Five Violations | 1 (Molecular Weight > 500) | 18 |
The pharmacological activity of Enzastaurin is characterized by its dual inhibitory effect on two central signaling pathways that are frequently dysregulated in cancer, leading to a triad of antitumor cellular effects.
Enzastaurin functions as a potent and highly selective inhibitor of the beta isoform of Protein Kinase C (PKCβ).[5] It acts as an ATP-competitive inhibitor, binding to the ATP-binding site of the enzyme to block its kinase activity and prevent the phosphorylation of downstream substrates.[1] In vitro assays have established its potency, with an inhibitory concentration (
IC50) of approximately 6 nM for PKCβ.[20] This inhibition is highly selective; Enzastaurin is 6- to 20-fold more selective for PKCβ compared to other PKC isoforms such as PKCα, PKCγ, and PKCε, which minimizes certain off-target effects associated with less specific PKC inhibitors.[20]
In addition to its primary target, Enzastaurin exerts a significant inhibitory effect on the phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K)/AKT signaling pathway.[7] This pathway is a master regulator of cell survival, proliferation, and metabolism, and its constitutive activation is a hallmark of many human cancers.[8] The ability of Enzastaurin to modulate two of the most critical oncogenic signaling networks simultaneously provides a more comprehensive blockade of tumor growth signals than would be achieved by targeting either pathway alone. This dual action may circumvent potential resistance mechanisms where one pathway compensates for the inhibition of the other.
The dual inhibition of the PKCβ and PI3K/AKT pathways by Enzastaurin translates into three primary downstream antitumor effects:
The molecular consequence of this pathway inhibition is a measurable reduction in the phosphorylation of key downstream effector proteins, most notably Glycogen Synthase Kinase-3 beta (GSK3β) and the ribosomal protein S6.[7] The level of phosphorylated GSK3β, in particular, has been identified as a useful pharmacodynamic biomarker to confirm the biological activity of Enzastaurin in both preclinical models and clinical samples.[7]
Enzastaurin demonstrated substantial antitumor activity in numerous preclinical cancer models. In vivo studies using human tumor xenografts showed that oral administration of Enzastaurin led to significant tumor growth delay in models of glioblastoma (U87MG), colorectal cancer (HCT116), and non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).[7] Furthermore, it exhibited additive or even synergistic antitumor effects when combined with standard-of-care cytotoxic agents, such as pemetrexed in NSCLC models, providing a strong rationale for its clinical investigation in combination regimens.[7]
The scientific basis for repurposing Enzastaurin for Vascular Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome (vEDS) is mechanistically distinct and compelling. Research led by Dr. Hal Dietz utilized a genetically engineered knock-in mouse model that accurately recapitulates the human disease, which is caused by mutations in the COL3A1 gene.[25] Transcriptional profiling of aortic tissue from these mice revealed that excessive PKC/ERK pathway signaling was a primary molecular driver of the vascular pathology, leading to fatal aortic rupture.[25] Subsequent experiments demonstrated that treatment with Enzastaurin, a potent PKCβ inhibitor, was highly efficacious in this model, significantly reducing the risk of death from vascular dissection and preventing the lethal phenotype.[25] This provides a direct, cause-and-effect therapeutic hypothesis, where Enzastaurin is not just targeting a general cancer pathway but is correcting a specific, disease-driving molecular defect.
The clinical pharmacology of Enzastaurin is complex and presents several challenges that have profoundly influenced its clinical development and interpretation of trial results. Its pharmacokinetic profile is characterized by saturable absorption, high protein binding, extensive metabolism with active metabolites, and a critical susceptibility to drug-drug interactions.
The bioavailability of Enzastaurin is significantly affected by food. Administration with a high-fat meal has been shown to substantially increase systemic exposure to the drug and its metabolites.[13] To ensure maximal and consistent absorption, clinical trial protocols mandated that patients take Enzastaurin within 30-60 minutes of a meal.[2] The dose-limiting absorption observed above 500 mg daily presented a therapeutic ceiling that could not be easily overcome. An attempt to bypass this by splitting the total daily dose (e.g., 250 mg twice daily) did result in higher average drug concentrations but was associated with unacceptable toxicity, likely due to the accumulation of long-lived active metabolites.[13]
Enzastaurin's heavy reliance on CYP3A4 for its metabolism makes it highly vulnerable to clinically significant drug-drug interactions.
Based on its in vitro potency and high plasma protein binding, the target mean steady-state total plasma concentration (parent drug plus active metabolites) for clinical efficacy was established at approximately 1,400 nmol/L.[9] This concentration was expected to yield a free-drug level sufficient to inhibit 90% of PKCβ activity (
IC90).[28] To monitor the biological effect of the drug in patients, the phosphorylation of GSK3β in peripheral blood mononuclear cells was identified as a viable pharmacodynamic biomarker, providing evidence of target engagement and downstream inhibition of the PI3K/AKT pathway.[9]
Table 2: Summary of Key Pharmacokinetic Parameters
| Parameter | Enzastaurin (Parent Drug) | LSN326020 (Primary Active Metabolite) | Source(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Elimination Half-life (t1/2) | 14 hours | 42 hours | 8 |
| Time to Max Concentration (tmax,ss) | 4.0 hours | 6.0 hours | 8 |
| Max Concentration (Cmax,ss) | 2370 nmol/L | 1070 nmol/L | 8 |
| Average Concentration (Cav,ss) | 1210 nmol/L | 907 nmol/L | 8 |
| Area Under the Curve (AUCτ,ss) | 29,100 nmol·h/L | 21,800 nmol·h/L | 8 |
| Plasma Protein Binding | ~95% | Not specified | 2 |
| Target Steady-State Concentration (Total Analytes) | \multicolumn{2}{c | }{≥ 1400 nmol/L} | 9 |
The clinical history of Enzastaurin is a compelling narrative of initial promise, significant failure, and a subsequent, innovative revival driven by precision medicine, followed by further setbacks. This journey spans multiple cancer types and a rare genetic disorder, offering profound lessons in drug development.
Initial Phase I dose-escalation studies in patients with advanced solid tumors successfully established a recommended Phase II dose of 525 mg once daily (later formulated as a 500 mg tablet).[7] These early trials highlighted the drug's favorable safety profile at this dose, with no significant Grade 3 or 4 toxicities, and defined the key pharmacokinetic characteristic of dose-saturating absorption, which rendered a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) determination moot.[2]
Subsequently, Enzastaurin was evaluated in numerous Phase II trials across a broad range of indications, including NSCLC, glioblastoma, mantle cell lymphoma, follicular lymphoma, and cutaneous T-cell lymphoma.[9] The results from these single-agent studies were generally modest. While the drug demonstrated some biological activity, evidenced by stable disease in a subset of patients and occasional partial responses in highly refractory settings—such as in patients with relapsed DLBCL and recurrent glioma—the overall efficacy was insufficient to support its advancement as a monotherapy in unselected patient populations.[9] One notable signal of activity was a partial response lasting over eight months in a patient with relapsed DLBCL.[8]
Based on the promising signals in lymphoma, Eli Lilly launched the PRELUDE trial (NCT00332202), a large-scale, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled Phase III study.[37] The trial enrolled 758 patients with high-risk DLBCL (International Prognostic Index [IPI] score ≥ 3) who had achieved a complete response after standard first-line R-CHOP chemotherapy.[37] The objective was to determine if maintenance therapy with Enzastaurin (500 mg daily for up to three years) could prevent disease relapse and improve disease-free survival (DFS).[37]
In 2013, the trial was declared a failure.[1] After a median follow-up of 48 months, the results showed no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint of DFS between the Enzastaurin and placebo groups. The hazard ratio for DFS was 0.92, and the 4-year DFS rates were nearly identical at 70% for Enzastaurin versus 71% for placebo.[30] This definitive negative result led Eli Lilly to halt further development of Enzastaurin for lymphoma and largely shelve the asset.[1]
The trajectory of Enzastaurin changed dramatically after Denovo Biopharma acquired the worldwide rights to the compound.[40] Denovo's strategy was to re-evaluate failed drugs by applying modern pharmacogenomic tools to identify biomarkers that could predict response in a subset of patients.[41] The company performed a retrospective, genome-wide analysis on archived DNA samples from patients who had participated in the PRELUDE trial.[30]
This analysis led to the discovery of a novel, proprietary genetic biomarker named Denovo Genomic Marker 1 (DGM1), a germline polymorphism.[30] The analysis revealed a striking correlation: DGM1-positive patients in the PRELUDE trial who received Enzastaurin had a significantly improved overall survival (OS) compared to DGM1-negative patients on the drug (Hazard Ratio 0.27; p=0.0002).[39]
To validate this finding, the DGM1 biomarker was tested in an independent dataset from the Phase II S028 trial, which had evaluated Enzastaurin in combination with R-CHOP in the first-line setting. The result was a powerful replication: high-risk, DGM1-positive patients treated with the Enzastaurin-R-CHOP combination showed a dramatic OS benefit compared to DGM1-positive patients receiving R-CHOP alone (HR 0.28; p=0.018).[43] Importantly, DGM1 status had no impact on survival in the placebo/control arms of these studies, indicating that it was a predictive biomarker for Enzastaurin efficacy, not merely a prognostic marker for the disease itself.[45]
The compelling retrospective data for the DGM1 biomarker provided a strong rationale to resurrect Enzastaurin's clinical development, this time within a precision medicine framework. Denovo Biopharma launched two prospective, biomarker-guided Phase III trials to confirm the initial findings.
Leveraging the strong preclinical evidence of efficacy in a genetically faithful mouse model of vEDS, Aytu BioPharma initiated a program to repurpose Enzastaurin for this rare, life-threatening connective tissue disorder.[25]
The safety of Enzastaurin has been evaluated in over 3,000 patients across numerous clinical trials for various oncologic indications.[39] At the standard therapeutic dose of 500 mg once daily, the drug has demonstrated a generally favorable and manageable safety profile, a characteristic that distinguished it from earlier, more toxic PKC inhibitors.[7]
A pooled analysis of safety data from 135 patients treated in early-phase trials provides a representative overview of the most common toxicities.[62] Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurring in 15% or more of patients were primarily low-grade and included fatigue (31%), cough (19%), diarrhea (19%), nausea (19%), constipation (17%), and peripheral edema (17%).[62]
A distinctive and frequently reported drug-related event is chromaturia, a reddish-orange discoloration of the urine, observed in approximately 14-15% of patients.[8] This is a benign effect attributed to the inherent color of the active pharmaceutical ingredient and its metabolites and is not indicative of renal toxicity.[62]
While well-tolerated at the 500 mg daily dose, attempts to increase drug exposure through higher or more frequent dosing revealed significant dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs).[13] In a Phase I trial evaluating total daily doses of 500 mg, 800 mg, and 1,000 mg, Enzastaurin was found to be poorly tolerated, with the primary DLTs being hematologic and cardiac:
This finding of QTc prolongation was consistent with preclinical toxicology studies in dogs, which also observed this effect at high drug exposures.[2] Other serious (Grade 3 or higher) adverse events reported in clinical trials, though less common, have included thromboembolic events (e.g., pulmonary embolism), hemorrhage, and elevated liver enzymes (alanine aminotransferase).[9] In a study involving patients with Waldenstrom's macroglobulinemia, one death from septic shock was considered possibly related to the drug.[21]
Formal prescribing information for Enzastaurin does not exist as it is an investigational agent. However, the exclusion criteria from its numerous clinical trials provide a clear picture of contraindications and populations requiring special caution.
Table 3: Summary of Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) from a Pooled Analysis (N=135)
| Adverse Event | All Events (All Grades, %) | Drug-Related Events (Grade 3/4, n) | Source(s) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Fatigue | 31% | 2 | 62 |
| Cough | 19% | 0 | 62 |
| Diarrhea | 19% | 0 | 62 |
| Nausea | 19% | 0 | 62 |
| Constipation | 17% | 0 | 62 |
| Peripheral Edema | 17% | 0 | 62 |
| Chromaturia | 15% | 0 | 62 |
| Thrombocytopenia | Not specified in this analysis | DLT at higher doses | 13 |
| QTc Prolongation | Not specified in this analysis | DLT at higher doses | 13 |
| Thromboembolic Events | Not specified in this analysis | Reported as Grade ≥3 | 9 |
The regulatory journey of Enzastaurin with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency (EMA) has been long and complex, reflecting its fluctuating development prospects. It has received multiple designations intended to facilitate the development of drugs for serious or rare diseases, but has also faced significant recent setbacks.
Orphan Drug Designation is granted to encourage the development of medicines for rare diseases (affecting fewer than 200,000 people in the U.S. or 5 in 10,000 in the E.U.) by providing incentives such as market exclusivity upon approval.[63] Enzastaurin has received several such designations, though its status has recently changed for its primary oncology indications.
The voluntary withdrawal of the orphan designations for both GBM and DLBCL by the sponsor is a highly significant event. Such designations carry substantial financial incentives, including seven years of market exclusivity post-approval. A sponsor is highly unlikely to relinquish these benefits unless the path to regulatory approval for that indication is no longer considered viable. The timing of these withdrawals—occurring in late 2023 and mid-2024, after the completion of the pivotal ENGINE (DLBCL) and ENGAGE (GBM) trials, respectively—strongly implies that these biomarker-guided studies did not meet their primary endpoints.
Table 4: Timeline of Key Regulatory Milestones
| Date | Regulatory Agency | Action | Indication | Source(s) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 19, 2005 | FDA | Orphan Drug Designation Granted | Glioblastoma Multiforme | 65 |
| Dec 23, 2005 | EMA | Orphan Designation Granted | Glioma | 66 |
| Mar 26, 2007 | EMA | Orphan Designation Granted | Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma | 63 |
| Mar 04, 2009 | FDA | Orphan Drug Designation Granted | Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma | 68 |
| Jul 17, 2020 | FDA | Fast Track Designation Granted | Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma (DGM1+) | 39 |
| Dec 07, 2021 | FDA | Orphan Drug Designation Granted | Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome | 25 |
| Dec 13, 2021 | FDA | IND Application Cleared | Vascular Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome | 25 |
| Feb 24, 2022 | EMA | Orphan Designation Granted | Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome | 58 |
| Nov 16, 2023 | FDA | Orphan Drug Designation Withdrawn | Diffuse Large B-Cell Lymphoma | 68 |
| May 2024 | EMA | Orphan Designation Withdrawn | Glioma | 67 |
| Jun 24, 2024 | FDA | Orphan Drug Designation Withdrawn | Glioblastoma Multiforme | 65 |
The development history of Enzastaurin offers a rich and multifaceted case study that encapsulates some of the most critical themes in modern pharmacology: the promise and peril of targeted therapies, the transformative power of precision medicine, and the stark economic realities of drug development for rare diseases. Its journey from a broadly targeted oncology agent to a biomarker-defined niche therapeutic and a repurposed candidate for a rare genetic disorder provides invaluable lessons for the biopharmaceutical industry.
Enzastaurin's story is a powerful, real-world illustration of the "drug rescue" paradigm. After its definitive failure in the large, unselected PRELUDE trial, the drug was effectively abandoned. Its revival by Denovo Biopharma, based on a strategy of applying retrospective genomic screening to archived clinical trial samples, represents a triumph of the precision medicine concept. The identification of the DGM1 biomarker appeared to turn a failed trial into a success for a specific sub-population, providing a compelling rationale to reinvest in two new, costly Phase III trials.
However, the subsequent withdrawal of orphan drug designations for both DLBCL and GBM following the completion of these prospective trials serves as a crucial and sobering counterpoint. This sequence of events strongly suggests that the promising retrospective signal from DGM1 did not translate into a statistically significant clinical benefit when tested prospectively. This outcome highlights the immense challenge of validating retrospective biomarker findings. A single germline polymorphism, while correlated with an outcome, may not be sufficient to capture the complex biological heterogeneity of diseases like DLBCL and GBM or may not be robust enough to overcome other confounding factors in a prospective setting. This journey underscores that while biomarker-guided approaches are the future of oncology, the path from a promising retrospective signal to a validated predictive marker is fraught with scientific and statistical hurdles.
The pharmacokinetic profile of Enzastaurin was a significant confounding factor throughout its development. The combination of saturable absorption, high protein binding, and extreme sensitivity to metabolism by CYP3A4 inducers like EIAEDs created a "perfect storm" of pharmacokinetic challenges. It is highly probable that a substantial number of patients in early trials, particularly for glioblastoma, were significantly under-dosed, which could have masked a true drug effect and contributed to the initial negative results. The inability to overcome this with simple dose escalation due to absorption saturation established a therapeutic ceiling that may have been too low for a broad population but potentially sufficient for a hypersensitive DGM1-positive subgroup—a hypothesis that now appears to have been disproven. This experience emphasizes that a deep understanding of a drug's clinical pharmacology is a prerequisite for designing effective trials, especially when potent drug-drug interactions are at play.
While the future of Enzastaurin in oncology appears bleak, its scientific rationale for treating Vascular Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome remains distinct and compelling. Unlike the more general "target an overexpressed kinase" approach in cancer, the vEDS hypothesis is based on correcting a specific, disease-driving molecular defect identified in a genetically faithful animal model. The suspension of the PREVEnt trial was a decision driven by financial strategy rather than scientific or safety concerns. This leaves a significant unmet medical need for vEDS patients and a scientifically plausible therapeutic candidate stranded in development limbo. The future of Enzastaurin in vEDS now depends entirely on whether a new sponsor or partner with sufficient capital can be found to resurrect and complete the pivotal trial. The situation starkly illustrates the vulnerability of rare disease drug development, where even programs with strong scientific merit can be derailed by economic pressures.
Enzastaurin's legacy may ultimately be defined more by the lessons it has taught the field of drug development than by its clinical successes. It stands as a testament to both the potential of precision medicine to find value in failed assets and the immense difficulty of prospectively validating those findings. It highlights the absolute necessity of accounting for complex pharmacokinetics and drug interactions in clinical trial design. While its path to approval in oncology has likely closed, the compelling preclinical evidence in vEDS represents a significant piece of unfinished business. The ultimate fate of Enzastaurin now hinges on whether the vEDS program can be revived, offering a final opportunity for this well-traveled molecule to fulfill its therapeutic potential for a patient population with no approved treatments.
Published at: August 19, 2025
This report is continuously updated as new research emerges.
Empowering clinical research with data-driven insights and AI-powered tools.
© 2025 MedPath, Inc. All rights reserved.