Improvements in Survival and Clinical Benefit With Gemcitabine as First-Line Therapy for Patients With Advanced Pancreas Cancer: A Randomized Trial.

PURPOSE: Most patients with advanced pancreas cancer experience pain and must limit their daily activities because of tumor-related symptoms. To date, no treatment has had a significant impact on the disease. In early studies with gemcitabine, patients with pancreas cancer experienced an improvement in disease-related symptoms. Based on those findings, a definitive trial was performed to assess the effectiveness of gemcitabine in patients with newly diagnosed advanced pancreas cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred twenty-six patients with advanced symptomatic pancreas cancer completed a lead-in period to characterize and stabilize pain and were randomized to receive either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 weekly x 7 followed by 1 week of rest, then weekly x 3 every 4 weeks thereafter (63 patients), or to fluorouracil (5-FU) 600 mg/m2 once weekly (63 patients). The primary efficacy measure was clinical benefit response, which was a composite of measurements of pain (analgesic consumption and pain intensity), Karnofsky performance status, and weight. Clinical benefit required a sustained (> or = 4 weeks) improvement in at least one parameter without worsening in any others. Other measures of efficacy included response rate, time to progressive disease, and survival. RESULTS: Clinical benefit response was experienced by 23.8% of gemcitabine-treated patients compared with 4.8% of 5-FU-treated patients (P = .0022). The median survival durations were 5.65 and 4.41 months for gemcitabine-treated and 5-FU-treated patients, respectively (P = .0025). The survival rate at 12 months was 18% for gemcitabine patients and 2% for 5-FU patients. Treatment was well tolerated. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that gemcitabine is more effective than 5-FU in alleviation of some disease-related symptoms in patients with advanced, symptomatic pancreas cancer. Gemcitabine also confers a modest survival advantage over treatment with 5-FU.

Larotrectinib in adult patients with solid tumours: a multi-centre, open-label, phase I dose-escalation study.

BACKGROUND: NTRK1, NTRK2 and NTRK3 gene fusions (NTRK gene fusions) occur in a range of adult cancers. Larotrectinib is a potent and highly selective ATP-competitive inhibitor of TRK kinases and has demonstrated activity in patients with tumours harbouring NTRK gene fusions. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This multi-centre, phase I dose escalation study enrolled adults with metastatic solid tumours, regardless of NTRK gene fusion status. Key inclusion criteria included evaluable and/or measurable disease, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-2, and adequate organ function. Larotrectinib was administered orally once or twice daily, on a continuous 28-day schedule, in increasing dose levels according to a standard 3 + 3 dose escalation scheme. The primary end point was the safety of larotrectinib, including dose-limiting toxicity. RESULTS: Seventy patients (8 with tumours with NTRK gene fusions; 62 with tumours without a documented NTRK gene fusion) were enrolled to 6 dose cohorts. There were four dose-limiting toxicities; none led to study drug discontinuation. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Larotrectinib-related adverse events were predominantly grade 1; none were grade 4 or 5. The most common grade 3 larotrectinib-related adverse event was anaemia [4 (6%) of 70 patients]. A dose of 100 mg twice daily was recommended for phase II studies based on tolerability and antitumour activity. In patients with evaluable TRK fusion cancer, the objective response rate by independent review was 100% (eight of the eight patients). Eight (12%) of the 67 assessable patients overall had an objective response by investigator assessment. Median duration of response was not reached. Larotrectinib had limited activity in tumours with NTRK mutations or amplifications. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed exposure was generally proportional to administered dose. CONCLUSIONS: Larotrectinib was well tolerated, demonstrated activity in all patients with tumours harbouring NTRK gene fusions, and represents a new treatment option for such patients. CLINCALTRIALS.GOV NUMBER: NCT02122913.

Updated results from MONALEESA-2, a phase III trial of first-line ribociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer.

Background: The phase III MONALEESA-2 study demonstrated significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) and a manageable toxicity profile for first-line ribociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole in patients with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer. Here, we report updated efficacy and safety data, together with exploratory biomarker analyses, from the MONALEESA-2 study. Patients and methods: A total of 668 postmenopausal women with HR+, HER2- recurrent/metastatic breast cancer were randomized (1 : 1; stratified by presence/absence of liver and/or lung metastases) to ribociclib (600 mg/day; 3-weeks-on/1-week-off; 28-day treatment cycles) plus letrozole (2.5 mg/day; continuous) or placebo plus letrozole. The primary end point was locally assessed PFS. The key secondary end point was overall survival (OS). Other secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR) and safety. Biomarker analysis was an exploratory end point. Results: At the time of the second interim analysis, the median duration of follow-up was 26.4 months. Median PFS was 25.3 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 23.0-30.3] for ribociclib plus letrozole and 16.0 months (95% CI 13.4-18.2) for placebo plus letrozole (hazard ratio 0.568; 95% CI 0.457-0.704; log-rank P = 9.63 × 10-8). Ribociclib treatment benefit was maintained irrespective of PIK3CA or TP53 mutation status, total Rb, Ki67, or p16 protein expression, and CDKN2A, CCND1, or ESR1 mRNA levels. Ribociclib benefit was more pronounced in patients with wild-type versus altered receptor tyrosine kinase genes. OS data remain immature, with 116 deaths observed; 50 in the ribociclib arm and 66 in the placebo arm (hazard ratio 0.746; 95% CI 0.517-1.078). The ORR was 42.5% versus 28.7% for all patients treated with ribociclib plus letrozole versus placebo plus letrozole, respectively, and 54.5% versus 38.8%, respectively, for patients with measurable disease. Safety results, after a further 11.1 months of follow-up, were comparable with those reported at the first analysis, with no new or unexpected toxicities observed, and no evidence of cumulative toxicity. Conclusions: The improved efficacy outcomes and manageable tolerability observed with first-line ribociclib plus letrozole are maintained with longer follow-up, relative to letrozole monotherapy. Clinical trials number: NCT01958021.

First-in-human phase 1 study of margetuximab (MGAH22), an Fc-modified chimeric monoclonal antibody, in patients with HER2-positive advanced solid tumors.

Background: Margetuximab is an anti-HER2 antibody that binds with elevated affinity to both the lower and higher affinity forms of CD16A, an Fc-receptor important for antibody dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity (ADCC) against tumor cells. A Phase 1 study was initiated to evaluate the toxicity profile, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of margetuximab in patients with HER2-overexpressing carcinomas. Patients and methods: Patients with HER2-positive breast or gastric cancer, or other carcinomas that overexpress HER2, for whom no standard therapy was available, were treated with margetuximab by intravenous infusion at doses of 0.1-6.0 mg/kg for 3 of every 4 weeks (Regimen A) or once every 3 weeks (10-18 mg/kg) (Regimen B). Results: Sixty-six patients received margetuximab (34 patients for Regimen A and 32 patients for Regimen B). The MTD was not reached for either regimen. Treatment was well-tolerated, with mostly Grade 1 and 2 toxicities consisting of constitutional symptoms such as pyrexia, nausea, anemia, diarrhea, and fatigue. Among 60 response-evaluable patients, confirmed partial responses and stable disease were observed in 7 (12%) and 30 (50%) patients, respectively; 26 (70%) of these patients had received prior HER2-targeted therapy. Tumor reductions were observed in over half (18/23, 78%) of response-evaluable patients with breast cancer including durable (>30 weeks) responders. Ex vivo analyses of patient peripheral blood mononuclear cell samples confirmed the ability of margetuximab to support enhanced ADCC compared with trastuzumab. Conclusions: Margetuximab was well-tolerated and has promising single-agent activity. Further development efforts of margetuximab as single agent and in combination with other therapeutic agents are ongoing. Trial Registration ID: NCT01148849.

Phase I study of safety and pharmacokinetics of the anti-MUC16 antibody-drug conjugate DMUC5754A in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer or unresectable pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: MUC16 is a tumor-specific antigen overexpressed in ovarian (OC) and pancreatic (PC) cancers. The antibody-drug conjugate (ADC), DMUC5754A, contains the humanized anti-MUC16 monoclonal antibody conjugated to the microtubule-disrupting agent, monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE). PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase I study evaluated safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics of DMUC5754A given every 3 weeks (Q3W, 0.3-3.2 mg/kg) or weekly (Q1W, 0.8-1.6 mg/kg) to patients with advanced recurrent platinum-resistant OC or unresectable PC. Biomarker studies were also undertaken. RESULTS: Patients (66 OC, 11 PC) were treated with DMUC5754A (54 Q3W, 23 Q1W). Common related adverse events (AEs) in >20% of patients (all grades) over all dose levels were fatigue, peripheral neuropathy, nausea, decreased appetite, vomiting, diarrhea, alopecia, and pyrexia in Q3W patents, and nausea, vomiting, anemia, fatigue, neutropenia, alopecia, decreased appetite, diarrhea, and hypomagnesemia in Q1W patients. Grade ≥3-related AE in ≥5% of patients included neutropenia (9%) and fatigue (7%) in Q3W patients, and neutropenia (17%), diarrhea (9%), and hyponatremia (9%) in Q1W patients. Plasma antibody-conjugated MMAE (acMMAE) and serum total antibody exhibited non-linear PK across tested doses. Minimal accumulation of acMMAE, total antibody, or unconjugated MMAE was observed. Confirmed responses (1 CR, 6 PRs) occurred in OC patients whose tumors were MUC16-positive by IHC (2+ or 3+). Two OC patients had unconfirmed PRs; six OC patients had stable disease lasting >6 months. For CA125, a cut-off of ≥70% reduction was more suitable for monitoring treatment response due to the binding and clearance of serum CA125 by MUC16 ADC. We identified circulating HE4 as a potential novel surrogate biomarker for monitoring treatment response of MUC16 ADC and other anti-MUC16 therapies in OC. CONCLUSIONS: DMUC5754A has an acceptable safety profile and evidence of anti-tumor activity in patients with MUC16-expressing tumors. Objective responses were only observed in MUC16-high patients, although prospective validation is required. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT01335958.

A phase Ib dose-escalation study of the MEK inhibitor trametinib in combination with the PI3K/mTOR inhibitor GSK2126458 in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Introduction This Phase Ib trial investigated the safety, tolerability, and recommended phase 2 dose for the pan-PI3K/mTOR inhibitor, GSK2126458 (GSK458), and trametinib combination when administered to patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients and Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors received escalating doses of GSK458 (once or twice daily, and continuous or intermittent) and trametinib following a zone-based 3 + 3 design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Assessments included monitoring for adverse events and response, and evaluating pharmacokinetic (PK) measures. Archival tissue and circulating free DNA samples were collected to assess biomarkers of response in the PI3K and RAS pathways. Results 57 patients were enrolled onto the continuous dosing cohort and 12 patients onto an intermittent BID dosing cohort. Two MTDs were established for the continuous daily dosing: 2 mg of GSK458 with 1.0 mg of trametinib or 1.0 mg of GSK458 with 1.5 mg of trametinib; no MTD was determined in the intermittent dosing cohort. The most frequent adverse events were rash (74 %) and diarrhea (61 %). Dose interruptions due to adverse events occurred in 42 % of patients. No significant PK interaction was observed. One patient achieved partial response and 12 patients had stable disease >16 weeks. Mutations in RAS/RAF/PI3K were detected in 70 % of patients, but no pattern emerged between response and mutational status. Conclusion GSK458 plus trametinib is poorly tolerated, due to skin and GI-related toxicities. Responses were minimal, despite enrichment for PI3K/RAS pathway driven tumors, which may be due to overlapping toxicities precluding sufficient dose exposure.

Statistical controversies in clinical research: statistical significance-too much of a good thing .

The use and interpretation of P values is a matter of debate in applied research. We argue that P values are useful as a pragmatic guide to interpret the results of a clinical trial, not as a strict binary boundary that separates real treatment effects from lack thereof. We illustrate our point using the result of BOLERO-1, a randomized, double-blind trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of adding everolimus to trastuzumab and paclitaxel as first-line therapy for HER2+ advanced breast cancer. In this trial, the benefit of everolimus was seen only in the predefined subset of patients with hormone receptor-negative breast cancer at baseline (progression-free survival hazard ratio = 0.66, P = 0.0049). A strict interpretation of this finding, based on complex 'alpha splitting' rules to assess statistical significance, led to the conclusion that the benefit of everolimus was not statistically significant either overall or in the subset. We contend that this interpretation does not do justice to the data, and we argue that the benefit of everolimus in hormone receptor-negative breast cancer is both statistically compelling and clinically relevant.

A phase IB trial of the oral MEK inhibitor trametinib (GSK1120212) in combination with everolimus in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: This phase Ib trial investigated the safety, tolerability, and recommended phase II dose and schedule of the MEK inhibitor trametinib in combination with the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor everolimus. Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetic (PK) characterization and evaluation of clinical activity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 67 patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled in this open-label, single-arm, dose-escalation study. Dose escalation followed a 3 + 3 design. Patients were assigned to one of 10 different cohorts, involving either daily dosing with both agents or daily dosing with trametinib and intermittent everolimus dosing. This included an expansion cohort comprising patients with pancreatic tumors. PKs samples were collected predose, as well as 1, 2, 4, and 6 h post-dose on day 15 of the first treatment cycle. RESULTS: Concurrent treatment with trametinib and everolimus resulted in frequent treatment-related adverse events, including mucosal inflammation (40%), stomatitis (25%), fatigue (54%), and diarrhea (42%). PK assessment did not suggest drug-drug interactions between these two agents. Of the 67 enrolled patients, 5 (7%) achieved partial response (PR) to treatment and 21 (31%) displayed stable disease (SD). Among the 21 patients with pancreatic cancer, PR was observed in 1 patient (5%) and SD in 6 patients (29%). CONCLUSIONS: This study was unable to identify a recommended phase II dose and schedule of trametinib in combination with everolimus that provided an acceptable tolerability and adequate drug exposure.

Everolimus plus exemestane for hormone-receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor-2-negative advanced breast cancer: overall survival results from BOLERO-2†.

BACKGROUND: The BOLERO-2 study previously demonstrated that adding everolimus (EVE) to exemestane (EXE) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) by more than twofold in patients with hormone-receptor-positive (HR(+)), HER2-negative advanced breast cancer that recurred or progressed during/after treatment with nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitors (NSAIs). The overall survival (OS) analysis is presented here. PATIENTS AND METHODS: BOLERO-2 is a phase III, double-blind, randomized international trial comparing EVE 10 mg/day plus EXE 25 mg/day versus placebo (PBO) + EXE 25 mg/day in postmenopausal women with HR(+) advanced breast cancer with prior exposure to NSAIs. The primary end point was PFS by local investigator assessment; OS was a key secondary end point. RESULTS: At the time of data cutoff (3 October 2013), 410 deaths had occurred and 13 patients remained on treatment. Median OS in patients receiving EVE + EXE was 31.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 28.0-34.6 months] compared with 26.6 months (95% CI 22.6-33.1 months) in patients receiving PBO + EXE (hazard ratio = 0.89; 95% CI 0.73-1.10; log-rank P = 0.14). Poststudy treatments were received by 84% of patients in the EVE + EXE arm versus 90% of patients in the PBO + EXE arm. Types of poststudy therapies were balanced across arms, except for chemotherapy (53% EVE + EXE versus 63% PBO + EXE). No new safety concerns were identified. CONCLUSIONS: In BOLERO-2, adding EVE to EXE did not confer a statistically significant improvement in the secondary end point OS despite producing a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in the primary end point, PFS (4.6-months prolongation in median PFS; P < 0.0001). Ongoing translational research should further refine the benefit of mTOR inhibition and related pathways in this treatment setting. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00863655.

A phase I/II study of lenalidomide in combination with sunitinib in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: This phase I/II study was conducted to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of lenalidomide plus sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed, metastatic RCC were treated with 10 mg/day lenalidomide plus 37.5 mg/day sunitinib, orally in 21-day cycles. Doses were escalated to determine the MTD in phase I, with additional patients planned at this dose in phase II. Primary end points were MTD and response rate. RESULTS: Sixteen patients received a median of 2, 3, and 5 cycles in cohort 1 [lenalidomide 10 mg (days 1-21) and sunitinib 37.5 mg (days 1-21)], cohort 2 [lenalidomide 10 mg (days 1-21) and sunitinib 37.5 mg (days 1-14)], and cohort 3 [lenalidomide 15 mg (days 1-21) and sunitinib 37.5 mg (days 1-14)], respectively. Median treatment durations were 41, 63, and 97 days for lenalidomide; and 41, 57, and 97.5 days for sunitinib. The MTD was found to be continuous dosing of lenalidomide 10 mg/day plus sunitinib 37.5 mg/day for 14 of 21 days. Dose-limiting toxicities included neutropenia, leukopenia, thrombocytopenia, asthenia, atrial fibrillation, and increased transaminases. The most frequent grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were hematologic, including neutropenia and leukopenia. One patient achieved partial response, and seven had stable disease of which three were confirmed at subsequent tumor assessments. B cells and several T-cell subsets were modulated versus baseline. CONCLUSION: The dose schedules of lenalidomide and sunitinib evaluated in this study were not well tolerated; cumulative toxicity precluded enrollment at the MTD.

Phase I study of weekly paclitaxel in combination with pazopanib and lapatinib in advanced solid malignancies.

BACKGROUND: We assessed the maximum tolerated regimen (MTR) and dose-limiting toxicities of pazopanib and lapatinib in combination with weekly paclitaxel, and the effect of pazopanib and lapatinib on paclitaxel pharmacokinetics. METHODS: Patients received intravenous paclitaxel on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle concurrently with daily pazopanib and lapatinib. Dose levels of paclitaxel (mg m(-2))/pazopanib(mg)/lapatinib(mg) were 50/400/1000, 50/800/1000, 80/800/1000, and 80/400/1000. At the MTR, additional patients were enrolled to further evaluate tolerability, and the potential effects of pazopanib and lapatinib, inhibitors of cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4, on the pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel, a CYP2C8 and CYP3A4 substrate. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were enrolled. Dose-limiting toxicities at the MTR (80/400/1000) included grade 4 thrombosis and grade 3 aspartate aminotransferase elevation. Other toxicities included diarrhoea, neutropenia, fatigue, and liver enzyme elevations. Coadministration of pazopanib 400 mg and lapatinib 1000 mg increased paclitaxel maximum plasma concentration (38%) and area under the curve (37%) relative to paclitaxel alone. One patient with a salivary gland tumour had a partial response; three patients had stable disease (⩾6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Pazopanib 400 mg per day and lapatinib 1000 mg per day can be combined with paclitaxel 80 mg m(-2) in 28-day cycles. Coadministration of pazopanib and lapatinib, weak inhibitors of CYP2C8 and CYP3A4, had an inhibitory effect on paclitaxel clearance.

Incidence and time course of everolimus-related adverse events in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive advanced breast cancer: insights from BOLERO-2.

BACKGROUND: In the BOLERO-2 trial, everolimus (EVE), an inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin, demonstrated significant clinical benefit with an acceptable safety profile when administered with exemestane (EXE) in postmenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive (HR(+)) advanced breast cancer. We report on the incidence, time course, severity, and resolution of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) as well as incidence of dose modifications during the extended follow-up of this study. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive EVE 10 mg/day or placebo (PBO), with open-label EXE 25 mg/day (n = 724). The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response rate, and safety. Safety evaluations included recording of AEs, laboratory values, dose interruptions/adjustments, and study drug discontinuations. RESULTS: The safety population comprised 720 patients (EVE + EXE, 482; PBO + EXE, 238). The median follow-up was 18 months. Class-effect toxicities, including stomatitis, pneumonitis, and hyperglycemia, were generally of mild or moderate severity and occurred relatively early after treatment initiation (except pneumonitis); incidence tapered off thereafter. EVE dose reduction and interruption (360 and 705 events, respectively) required for AE management were independent of patient age. The median duration of dose interruption was 7 days. Discontinuation of both study drugs because of AEs was higher with EVE + EXE (9%) versus PBO + EXE (3%). CONCLUSIONS: Most EVE-associated AEs occur soon after initiation of therapy, are typically of mild or moderate severity, and are generally manageable with dose reduction and interruption. Discontinuation due to toxicity was uncommon. Understanding the time course of class-effect AEs will help inform preventive and monitoring strategies as well as patient education. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00863655.

Intermittent dosing of axitinib combined with chemotherapy is supported by (18)FLT-PET in gastrointestinal tumours.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated week-on/week-off axitinib dosing plus chemotherapy in patients with gastrointestinal tumours, including tumour thymidine uptake by fluorine-18 3'-deoxy-3'-fluorothymidine positron emission tomography ((18)FLT-PET). METHODS: During a lead-in period, patients received twice daily (b.i.d.) axitinib 7 mg (n=3) or 10 mg (n=18) for 7 days followed by a 7-day dosing interruption; serial (18)FLT-PET scans were performed before day 1 and on days 7, 10, and 14. Axitinib plus FOLFIRI or FOLFOX was then administered in 2-week cycles; axitinib was interrupted on day 10 of each cycle for 7 days. RESULTS: The maximum tolerated dose of axitinib was 10 mg b.i.d., in a week-on/week-off schedule, combined with FOLFIRI or FOLFOX. Common all-causality grade 3 adverse events were neutropenia (38%), hypertension (33%), and fatigue (29%). Of 21 patients, 2 (10%) had a partial response and 12 (57%) had stable disease. Following 7 days of continuous axitinib dosing, tumour (18)FLT uptake decreased -49% from baseline and recovered to -28% and -17% from baseline, respectively, after 3 and 7 days of axitinib interruption. CONCLUSION: Axitinib administered in a week-on/week-off schedule combined with FOLFIRI or FOLFOX is supported by (18)FLT-PET data and was well tolerated in patients with gastrointestinal tumours.

Optimally tolerated dose of lapatinib in combination with docetaxel plus trastuzumab in first-line treatment of HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase IB, open-label, dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, tolerability, and optimally tolerated regimen (OTR) of lapatinib in combination with docetaxel and trastuzumab in patients with previously untreated stage IV metastatic breast cancer (MBC) tumors overexpressing human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Evaluated dose regimens included lapatinib (500-1500 mg/day), docetaxel (triweekly; 60-100 mg/m²), and trastuzumab (weekly; 2 mg/kg fixed dose); prophylactic granulocyte colony-stimulating factor was included with regimens with ≥750 mg/day lapatinib. End points included OTR and safety/tolerability (primary), overall response rate (ORR), and pharmacokinetics (secondary). RESULTS: None of the patients (N = 53) experienced dose-limiting toxic effects (DLTs) at the highest dose level; thus, the OTR of lapatinib with 100 mg/m(2) docetaxel was not determined. Common adverse events included diarrhea, nausea, alopecia, fatigue, and rash; grade 3/4 (≥2 patients) were neutropenia, diarrhea, leukopenia, peripheral neuropathy, and rash. Seven patients had DLTs (cycle 1). In 45 patients with measurable disease confirmed by bone scan, investigator-assessed ORR was 31%; without bone scan, confirmation was 64%; 8 patients without measurable disease were evaluated as stable. Lapatinib/docetaxel plasma concentrations were positively associated with complete response. CONCLUSIONS: Lapatinib/docetaxel/trastuzumab is a feasible and well-tolerated treatment of untreated HER2-positive stage IV MBC. Two lapatinib/docetaxel OTR doses were recommended (1250 mg/75 mg/m²; 1000 mg/100 mg/m²). CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00251433.

A Phase I study to assess the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of AZD4877, an intravenous Eg5 inhibitor in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Inhibition of kinesin spindle protein or Eg5 causes the formation of monoastral mitotic spindles, which leads to cell death. AZD4877 is a specific, potent inhibitor of Eg5. METHODS: This was a Phase I, open-label, two-part study to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and safety and tolerability of AZD4877 in patients with advanced solid malignancies. In part A, the MTD of AZD4877, administered as three weekly 1-h intravenous (iv) infusions in a 28-day schedule, was determined by evaluating dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). In part B, the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic profile of AZD4877 at the MTD were evaluated. RESULTS: In part A, 29 patients received at least one dose of AZD4877 (5 mg, n = 4; 7.5 mg, n = 4; 10 mg, n = 3; 15 mg, n = 3; 20 mg, n = 3; 30 mg, n = 6; 36 mg, n = 3; 45 mg, n = 3). The MTD was defined as 30 mg, with the primary DLT being neutropenia. Although exposures appeared to be similar at the AZD4877 20 and 30 mg doses, dose reductions and omissions were higher in the 30-mg cohort; therefore, an intermediate dose, 25 mg, was evaluated in part B (n = 14). In part B, neutropenia remained the most commonly reported causally related adverse event. Exposure to AZD4877 was approximately dose proportional. Severity of neutropenia was related to exposure. CONCLUSION: The MTD of AZD4877 given as a 1-h iv infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle was 30 mg. At the selected 25 mg dose, AZD4877 had an acceptable safety profile.

A Phase 1b/2 trial of mapatumumab in patients with relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: we conducted a multicentre Phase 1b/2 trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of mapatumumab, a fully human agonistic monoclonal antibody to the tumour necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand receptor 1 (TRAIL-R1) in patients with relapsed non-Hodgkin's lymphoma (NHL). METHODS: forty patients with relapsed or refractory NHL were treated with either 3 or 10 mg kg(-1) mapatumumab every 21 days. In the absence of disease progression or prohibitive toxicity, patients received a maximum of six doses. RESULTS: mapatumumab was well tolerated, with no patients experiencing drug-related hepatic or other dose-limiting toxicity. Three patients with follicular lymphoma (FL) experienced clinical responses, including two with a complete response and one with a partial response. Immunohistochemistry staining of the TRAIL-R1 suggested that strong staining in tumour specimens did not appear to be a requirement for mapatumumab activity in FL. CONCLUSIONS: mapatumumab is safe and has promising clinical activity in patients with FL.

Shortcomings of current therapies for non-small-cell lung cancer: unmet medical needs.

Non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is a major global health problem and is the leading cause of cancer death worldwide. Current treatment involves nonspecific, nonselective cytotoxic chemotherapy, which results in only a modest increase in survival and causes significant toxicity to the patient. Targeted agents are initially effective in certain small subpopulations of patients, but eventually nearly all patients become resistant to further treatment. The limitations in efficacy and safety associated with available treatments for NSCLC underscore the need for novel agents with improved efficacy and safety profiles. This review discusses the limitations of currently recommended therapies for patients with advanced NSCLC and discusses new agents in clinical development for this disease.

A phase II trial of EMD72000 (matuzumab), a humanized anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody, in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian and primary peritoneal malignancies.

OBJECTIVE: The primary objective of this study was to determine the rate of response to matuzumab in patients with recurrent, EGFR-positive ovarian, or primary peritoneal cancer. Secondary end points included safety and tolerability, time to tumor progression, duration of response, and overall survival. METHODS: A multi-institutional single arm phase II trial. RESULTS: Of 75 women screened for the study, 37 were enrolled and treated. Median age of the treated patient population was 58 years, and most patients had more than four prior lines of chemotherapy. Therapy was well tolerated, the most common toxicities being a constellation of skin toxicities, including rash, acne, dry skin, and paronychia, as well as headache, fatigue, and diarrhea. Serious adverse events were very rare but included a single episode of pancreatitis that may have been drug related. All patients completed therapy, receiving 1 to 30 infusions of matuzumab. There were no formal responses (RR=0%, 95% CI: 0-9.5%), although 7 patients (21%) were on therapy for more than 3 months with stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: Matuzumab at the dose and schedule selected is well tolerated. In this population of very heavily pretreated patients with epithelial ovarian and primary peritoneal malignancies, there was no evidence of significant clinical activity when matuzumab was administered as monotherapy.

A multi-center phase II study of BMS-247550 (Ixabepilone) by two schedules in patients with metastatic gastric adenocarcinoma previously treated with a taxane.

PURPOSE: Ixabepilone is one of the epothilones, a new class of cytotoxics, that function as microtubule-stabilizing agents. With the primary endpoint of assessing ixabepilone's response rate against metastatic gastric cancer previously treated with a taxane, we performed a multi-center phase II trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically documented metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma, who had previously received a taxane, were eligible. Patients were required to have near normal organ function, > or =18 years of age, ECOG performance status of 0 or 1. A written informed consent was obtained from all patients. Ixabepilone was administered over one hour intravenously at a dose of 50 mg/m2 every 21 days (23 patients; cohort A) and 24 subsequent patients were treated with an amended protocol schedule to receive 6 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1-5 every 21 days (cohort B). RESULTS: A total of 47 patients were treated. Most patients were men with a median performance status of 1. Two of 23 patients in cohort A achieved a confirmed partial response (9%, 95% CI 1.1-28%) but none of the 24 patients in cohort B achieved a response. A higher proportion of patients in cohort A experienced Grade 3/4 toxicities compared with those in cohort B. CONCLUSIONS: Ixabepilone, on a once every 21-day schedule, is modestly active against metastatic gastric cancer previously treated with a taxane. The days 1-5 every 21 days schedule had a more favorable safety profile but no activity. The results of this study suggest that once every 21-day ixabepilone schedule should be pursued further in untreated gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma patients.