Activity and safety of brigatinib in ALK-rearranged non-small-cell lung cancer and other malignancies: a single-arm, open-label, phase 1/2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) gene rearrangements are oncogenic drivers of non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Brigatinib (AP26113) is an investigational ALK inhibitor with potent preclinical activity against ALK mutants resistant to crizotinib and other ALK inhibitors. We aimed to assess brigatinib in patients with advanced malignancies, particularly ALK-rearranged NSCLC. METHODS: In this ongoing, single-arm, open-label, phase 1/2 trial, we recruited patients from nine academic hospitals or cancer centres in the USA and Spain. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age and had advanced malignancies, including ALK-rearranged NSCLC, and disease that was refractory to available therapies or for which no curative treatments existed. In the initial dose-escalation phase 1 stage of the trial, patients received oral brigatinib at total daily doses of 30-300 mg (according to a standard 3 + 3 design). The phase 1 primary endpoint was establishment of the recommended phase 2 dose. In the phase 2 expansion stage, we assessed three oral once-daily regimens: 90 mg, 180 mg, and 180 mg with a 7 day lead-in at 90 mg; one patient received 90 mg twice daily. We enrolled patients in phase 2 into five cohorts: ALK inhibitor-naive ALK-rearranged NSCLC (cohort 1), crizotinib-treated ALK-rearranged NSCLC (cohort 2), EGFRT790M-positive NSCLC and resistance to one previous EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (cohort 3), other cancers with abnormalities in brigatinib targets (cohort 4), and crizotinib-naive or crizotinib-treated ALK-rearranged NSCLC with active, measurable, intracranial CNS metastases (cohort 5). The phase 2 primary endpoint was the proportion of patients with an objective response. Safety and activity of brigatinib were analysed in all patients in both phases of the trial who had received at least one dose of treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01449461. FINDINGS: Between Sept 20, 2011, and July 8, 2014, we enrolled 137 patients (79 [58%] with ALK-rearranged NSCLC), all of whom were treated. Dose-limiting toxicities observed during dose escalation included grade 3 increased alanine aminotransferase (240 mg daily) and grade 4 dyspnoea (300 mg daily). We initially chose a dose of 180 mg once daily as the recommended phase 2 dose; however, we also assessed two additional regimens (90 mg once daily and 180 mg once daily with a 7 day lead-in at 90 mg) in the phase 2 stage. four (100% [95% CI 40-100]) of four patients in cohort 1 had an objective response, 31 (74% [58-86]) of 42 did in cohort 2, none (of one) did in cohort 3, three (17% [4-41]) of 18 did in cohort 4, and five (83% [36-100]) of six did in cohort 5. 51 (72% [60-82]) of 71 patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC with previous crizotinib treatment had an objective response (44 [62% (50-73)] had a confirmed objective response). All eight crizotinib-naive patients with ALK-rearranged NSCLC had a confirmed objective response (100% [63-100]). Three (50% [95% CI 12-88]) of six patients in cohort 5 had an intracranial response. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events across all doses were increased lipase concentration (12 [9%] of 137), dyspnoea (eight [6%]), and hypertension (seven [5%]). Serious treatment-emergent adverse events (excluding neoplasm progression) reported in at least 5% of all patients were dyspnoea (ten [7%]), pneumonia (nine [7%]), and hypoxia (seven [5%]). 16 (12%) patients died during treatment or within 31 days of the last dose of brigatinib, including eight patients who died from neoplasm progression. INTERPRETATION: Brigatinib shows promising clinical activity and has an acceptable safety profile in patients with crizotinib-treated and crizotinib-naive ALK-rearranged NSCLC. These results support its further development as a potential new treatment option for patients with advanced ALK-rearranged NSCLC. A randomised phase 2 trial in patients with crizotinib-resistant ALK-rearranged NSCLC is prospectively assessing the safety and efficacy of two regimens assessed in the phase 2 portion of this trial (90 mg once daily and 180 mg once daily with a 7 day lead-in at 90 mg). FUNDING: ARIAD Pharmaceuticals.

Ponatinib versus imatinib for newly diagnosed chronic myeloid leukaemia: an international, randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Ponatinib has shown potent activity against chronic myeloid leukaemia that is resistant to available treatment, although it is associated with arterial occlusion. We investigated whether this activity and safety profile would result in superior outcomes compared with imatinib in previously untreated patients with chronic myeloid leukaemia. METHODS: The Evaluation of Ponatinib versus Imatinib in Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (EPIC) study was a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial designed to assess the efficacy and safety of ponatinib, compared with imatinib, in newly diagnosed patients with chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukaemia. Patients from 106 centres in 21 countries were randomly assigned (1:1, with stratification by Sokal score at diagnosis) using an interactive voice and web response system to receive oral ponatinib (45 mg) or imatinib (400 mg) once daily until progression, unacceptable toxicity, or other criteria for withdrawal were met. Eligible patients were at least 18 years of age, within 6 months of diagnosis, and Philadelphia chromosome-positive by cytogenetic assessment, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and had not previously been treated with tyrosine kinase inhibitors. The primary endpoint was major molecular response at 12 months. Patients who remained on study and had molecular assessments at specified timepoints were studied at those timepoints. Safety analyses included all treated patients, as per study protocol. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01650805. FINDINGS: Between Aug 14, 2012, and Oct 9, 2013, 307 patients were randomly assigned to receive ponatinib (n=155) or imatinib (n=152). The trial was terminated early, on Oct 17, 2013, following concerns about vascular adverse events observed in patients given ponatinib in other trials. Trial termination limited assessment of the primary endpoint of major molecular response at 12 months, as only 13 patients in the imatinib group and ten patients in the ponatinib group could be assessed at this timepoint; the proportion of patients achieving a major molecular response at 12 months did not differ significantly between the two groups (eight [80%] of ten patients given ponatinib and five [38%] of 13 patients given imatinib; p=0·074). 11 (7%) of 154 patients given ponatinib and three (2%) of 152 patients given imatinib had arterial occlusive events (p=0·052); arterial occlusive events were designated serious in ten (6%) of 154 patients given ponatinib and in one (1%) of 152 patients given imatinib (p=0·010). The data monitoring committee criterion for risk assessment (significant difference in serious grade 3 or 4 ischaemic events between groups) was not met (five [3%] of 154 vs one [1%] of 152; p=0·21). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events observed in more than 5% of patients in the ponatinib group were increased lipase (22 [14%] of 154 vs three [2%] of 152 with imatinib), thrombocytopenia (19 [12%] of 154 vs ten [7%] of 152 with imatinib), rash (ten [6%] of 154 vs two [1%] of 152 with imatinib). In the imatinib group, grade 3 or 4 adverse events observed in more than 5% of patients were neutropenia (12 [8%] of 152 vs five [3%] of 154 with ponatinib) and thrombocytopenia (ten [7%] of 152 vs 19 [12%] of 154 with ponatinib). Serious adverse events that occurred in three or more patients given ponatinib were pancreatitis (n=5), atrial fibrillation (n=3), and thrombocytopenia (n=3). No serious adverse event occurred in three or more patients given imatinib. INTERPRETATION: The efficacy of ponatinib treatment of newly diagnosed chronic-phase chronic myeloid leukaemia compared with imatinib could not be assessed due to trial termination, but preliminary data suggest there might be benefit, although with more arterial occlusive events than with imatinib at the doses studied. Because the EPIC trial was terminated early, efficacy of ponatinib in this setting remains to be established. FUNDING: ARIAD Pharmaceuticals.

Ridaforolimus for patients with progressive or recurrent malignant glioma: a perisurgical, sequential, ascending-dose trial.

PURPOSE: This perisurgical phase 1 study evaluated the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and safety of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor ridaforolimus in patients (N = 10) with progressive or recurrent primary grade IV malignant glioma, who failed standard therapy. The primary objective of the study was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of ridaforolimus. METHODS: Treatment was administered intravenously at doses of 12.5 mg (N = 7) or 15 mg (N = 3) once daily for 4 days prior to surgical resection, then resumed for 5 consecutive days every 2 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, following a postsurgical recovery period. RESULTS: The MTD was not determined because the trial was suspended early due to slower than expected patient accrual and postsurgical drug administration challenges. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses showed that ridaforolimus concentrations declined slowly during the 24-h dosing interval and remained detectable for 10 days after the last infusion in whole blood samples. In peripheral blood mononuclear cells, median levels of the mTOR downstream effector p4E-BP1 were reduced by >80% compared with baseline by 4 h after dosing. Resected brain specimens showed reduced levels of pS6, another mTOR downstream effector, while nuclear staining for p27(kip1), a protein that functions as a cell cycle inhibitor, increased after treatment. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed, and the reported adverse events were consistent with the previously established safety profile for ridaforolimus. One of 3 patients evaluable for efficacy had stable disease as best response. CONCLUSION: Results suggest that ridaforolimus can cross the blood-brain barrier in areas of tumor involvement, and may inhibit mTOR activity in advanced gliomas based on decreased pS6 levels. This perisurgical trial design should serve as a template for evaluating intratumoral pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of other targeted agents in this patient population.