Systematic Evaluation of Osimertinib Population Pharmacokinetic Models in a Cohort of Dutch Adults with Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Several population pharmacokinetic (popPK) studies have been reported that can guide the prediction of osimertinib plasma concentrations in individual patients. It is currently unclear which popPK model offers the best predictive performance and which popPK models are most suitable for nonadherence management and model-informed precision dosing. Therefore, the objective of this study was to externally validate all osimertinib popPK models available in the current literature. METHODS: Published popPK models for osimertinib were constructed using NONMEM version 7.4.4. The predictive quality of the identified models was assessed with goodness-of-fit (GoF) plots, conditional weighted residuals (CWRES) plots and a prediction-corrected visual predictive check (pcVPC) for osimertinib and its active metabolite AZ5104. A subset from the Dutch OSIBOOST trial, where 11 patients with low osimertinib exposure were included, was used as evaluation cohort. RESULTS: The population GoF plots for all four models poorly followed the line of identity. For the individual GoF plots, all models performed comparable and were closely distributed among the line of identity. CWRES of the four models were skewed. The pcVPCs of all four models showed a similar trend, where all observed concentrations fell in the simulated shaded areas, but in the lower region of the simulated areas. CONCLUSION: All four popPK models can be used to individually predict osimertinib concentrations in patients with low osimertinib exposure. For population predictions, all four popPK models performed poorly in patients with low osimertinib exposure. A novel popPK model with good predictive performance should be developed for patients with low osimertinib exposure. Ideally, the cause for the relatively low osimertinib exposure in our evaluation cohort should be known. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT03858491.

Proactive monitoring of drug-drug interactions between direct oral anticoagulants and small-molecule inhibitors in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs) have revolutionised the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, SMI-induced drug-drug interactions (DDIs) with frequently co-administered direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), increase thromboembolic and bleeding risks. This study investigated and proactively managed the consequences of DOAC-SMI DDIs. METHODS: This prospective, observational study enrolled patients with NSCLC concomitantly using a DOAC and SMI. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with DOAC plasma trough (Ctrough) and peak (Cpeak) concentrations outside expected ranges. Secondary outcomes included DOAC treatment modifications, incidence of bleeding and thromboembolic events and feasibility evaluation of pharmacokinetically guided DOAC dosing. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were analysed. Thirty-nine percent (13/33) had DOAC Ctrough and/or Cpeak were outside the expected ranges in 39% (13/33). In 71% (5/7) of patients with DOAC concentrations quantified before and during concurrent SMI use, DOAC Ctrough and/or Cpeak increased or decreased >50% upon SMI initiation. In all patients in whom treatment modifications were deemed necessary, DOAC concentrations were adjusted to within the expected ranges. CONCLUSION: Proactive monitoring showed that a substantial proportion of patients had DOAC concentrations outside the expected ranges. DOAC concentrations were successfully normalised after treatment modifications. These results highlight the importance of proactive monitoring of DOAC-SMI DDIs to improve treatment in patients with NSCLC.

Model-Informed Development of a Cost-Saving Dosing Regimen for Sacituzumab Govitecan.

BACKGROUND: The antibody-drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan is approved for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer and has shown promising results in various other types of cancer. Its costs may limit patient access to this novel effective treatment modality. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to develop an evidence-based rational dosing regimen that results in targeted drug exposure within the therapeutic range while minimizing financial toxicity, to improve treatment access. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Exposure equivalent dosing strategies were developed based on pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation by using the published pharmacokinetic model developed by the license holder. The alternative dose was based on the principle of using complete vials to prevent spillage and on the established non-linear relationship between body weight and systemic exposure. Equivalent exposure compared to the approved dosing regimen of 10 mg/kg was aimed for. Equivalent exposure was conservatively defined as calculated geometric mean ratios within the 0.9-1.11 boundaries for area under the concentration-time curve (AUC), trough concentration (Ctrough) and maximum concentration (Cmax) of the alternative dosing regimen compared to the approved dosing regimen. Since different vial sizes are available for the European Union (EU) and United States (US) market, because body weight distributions differ between these populations, we performed our analysis for both scenarios. RESULTS: Dosing regimens of sacituzumab govitecan for the EU (< 50 kg: 400 mg, 50-80 kg: 600 mg, and > 80 kg: 800 mg) and US population (< 40 kg: 360 mg, 40-65 kg: 540 mg, 65-90 kg: 720 mg, and > 90 kg: 900 mg) were developed, based on weight bands. The geometric mean ratios for all pharmacokinetic outcomes were within the predefined equivalence boundaries, while the quantity of drug used was 21.5% and 19.0% lower for the EU and US scenarios, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: With the alternative dosing proposal, an approximately 20% reduction in drug expenses for sacituzumab govitecan can be realized while maintaining an equivalent and more evenly distributed exposure throughout the body weight range, without notable increases in pharmacokinetic variability.

Osimertinib Plasma Trough Concentration in Relation to Brain Metastases Development in Patients With Advanced EGFR-Mutated NSCLC.

Introduction: Brain metastases (BM) are common in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated (EGFRm+) NSCLC. Despite good BM-related outcomes of osimertinib, several patients still experience intracranial progression. A possible explanation is pharmacologic failure due to low plasma trough levels (Cmin,SS) and consequently limited intracranial osimertinib exposure. We investigated the relation between osimertinib Cmin,SS and BM development or progression. Methods: A prospective multicenter cohort study, including patients receiving osimertinib for advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC. At osimertinib start, patients were allocated to the BM or no or unknown BM cohort and were further divided into subgroups based on osimertinib Cmin,SS (low, middle, and high exposure). Cumulative incidence of BM progression or development and overall survival were determined for each group. Results: A total of 173 patients were included, with 49 (28.3%) had baseline BM. Of these patients, 36.7% experienced BM progression, of which 16.7% in the low (<159.3 ng/mL), 40.0% in the middle, and 47.1% in the high (>270.7 ng/mL) Cmin,SS subgroups. After 12 months, the cumulative incidence of BM progression for the BM cohort was 20% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.6-49.0), 31% (95% CI:10.6-53.9), and 31% (95% CI:10.8-54.5) per Cmin,SS subgroup, respectively. After 20 months, this was 20% (95% CI:2.6-49.0), 52% (95% CI:23.8-74.2), and 57% (95% CI:24.9-79.7), respectively. For the no or unknown BM cohort, 4.0% developed BM without differences within Cmin,SS subgroups. Conclusions: No relation was found between osimertinib Cmin,SS and BM development or progression in patients with advanced EGFRm+ NSCLC. This suggests that systemic osimertinib exposure is not a surrogate marker for BM development or progression.

Exploring the impact of patient-specific clinical features on osimertinib effectiveness in a real-world cohort of patients with EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancer.

Osimertinib is prescribed to patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a sensitizing EGFR mutation. Limited data exists on the impact of patient characteristics or osimertinib exposure on effectiveness outcomes. This was a Dutch, multicenter cohort study. Eligible patients were ≥18 years, with metastatic EGFRm+ NSCLC, receiving osimertinib. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Kaplan-Meier analyses and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were performed. In total, 294 patients were included. Primary EGFR-mutations were mainly exon 19 deletions (54%) and p.L858R point mutations (30%). Osimertinib was given in first-line (40%), second-line (46%) or beyond (14%), with median PFS 14.4 (95% CI: 9.4-19.3), 13.9 (95% CI: 11.3-16.1) and 8.7 months (95% CI: 4.6-12.7), respectively. Patients with low BMI (<20.0 kg/m2 ) had significantly shorter PFS/OS compared to all other subgroups. Patients with a high plasma trough concentration in steady state (Cmin,SS ; >271 ng/mL) had shorter PFS compared to a low Cmin,SS (<163 ng/mL; aHR 2.29; 95% CI: 1.13-4.63). A significant longer PFS was seen in females (aHR = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.45-0.82) and patients with the exon 19 deletion (aHR = 0.58, 95% CI: 0.36-0.92). A trend towards longer PFS was seen for TP53 wild-type patients, while age did not impact PFS. Patients with a primary EGFR exon 19 deletion had longer PFS, while a low BMI, male sex and a high Cmin,SS were indicative for shorter PFS and/or OS. Age was not associated with effectiveness outcomes of osimertinib.

Validated extended multiplexed LC-MS/MS assay for the quantification of adagrasib and sotorasib in human plasma, together with four additional SMIs.

Recently, two small molecular inhibitors (SMIs) -adagrasib and sotorasib- have been introduced for targeting Kirsten rat sarcoma (KRAS) p.G12C mutations in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In order to support pharmacokinetic research as well as clinical decision making, we developed and validated a simple and accurate liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method for the multiplexed quantification of adagrasib and sotorasib. This assay was co-validated with the quantification for brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib. Methanol was used for single-step protein precipitation. Chromatographic separation was performed using an Acquity® HSS C18 UPLC column, with an elution gradient of ammonium formate 0.1 % v/v in water and acetonitrile. In K2-EDTA plasma, adagrasib was found to be stable for at least seven days at room temperature and 4 °C, and at least 3 months at -80 °C. Sotorasib was found to be stable for at least three days at room temperature, seven days at 4 °C and at least 3 months at -80 °C. The method was validated over a linear range of 80-4000 ng/mL for adagrasib and 25-2500 ng/mL for sotorasib. The assay is therefore well-equipped for determining plasma concentrations in clinical practice.

Durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in patients with stage III non-small-cell lung cancer: real-world outcomes versus clinical trial results.

Aim: We investigated the effectiveness of durvalumab post-concurrent CRT (cCRT) and post-sequential CRT (sCRT) versus cCRT and sCRT alone and compared these outcomes with the PACIFIC trial. Methods: Four cohorts of stage III NSCLC patients who received CRT were included: cCRT with and without durvalumab, sCRT with and without durvalumab. PFS and OS were analyzed using Cox regression. Results: Durvalumab improved PFS (cCRT: aHR = 0.69, sCRT: aHR = 0.71) and OS (cCRT: aHR = 0.71, sCRT: aHR = 0.32), although not all results were significant. PFS was longer in the real-world than in the trial, while OS did not differ. Conclusion: Durvalumab after CRT improved the survival outcomes. The difference between PFS in our study and the trial may be due to differences in follow-up methods.

We assessed a medicine called durvalumab on patients with non-small cell lung cancer who received chemoradiotherapy in a real-world setting. We compared their outcomes with those from a clinical trial. Patients who received two types of chemoradiotherapy with or without durvalumab were included, and their progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) outcomes were analyzed. We found that patients treated with durvalumab had better PFS and OS than those treated without durvalumab. PFS was longer in the real-world than in the clinical trial, but OS was similar. The difference in PFS may be due to differences in measuring PFS.

Influence of germline variations in drug transporters ABCB1 and ABCG2 on intracerebral osimertinib efficacy in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Background: Central nervous system (CNS) metastases are present in approximately 40% of patients with metastatic epidermal growth factor receptor-mutated (EGFRm+) non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). The EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitor osimertinib is a substrate of transporters ABCB1 and ABCG2 and metabolized by CYP3A4. We investigated relationships between single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) ABCB1 3435C>T, ABCG2 421C>A and 34G>A, and CYP3A4∗22 and CNS treatment efficacy of osimertinib in EGFRm+ NSCLC patients. Methods: Patients who started treatment with osimertinib for EGFRm+ NSCLC between November 2014 and June 2021 were included in this retrospective observational multicentre cohort study. For patients with baseline CNS metastases, the primary endpoint was CNS progression-free survival (CNS-PFS; time from osimertinib start until CNS disease progression or death). For patients with no or unknown baseline CNS metastases, the primary endpoint was CNS disease-free survival (CNS-DFS; time from osimertinib start until occurrence of new CNS metastases). Relationships between SNPs and baseline characteristics with CNS-PFS and CNS-DFS were studied with competing-risks survival analysis. Secondary endpoints were relationships between SNPs and PFS, overall survival, severe toxicity, and osimertinib pharmacokinetics. Findings: From 572 included patients, 201 had baseline CNS metastases. No SNP was associated with CNS-PFS. Genotype ABCG2 34GA/AA and/or ABCB1 3435CC --present in 35% of patients-- was significantly associated with decreased CNS-DFS (hazard ratio 0.28; 95% CI 0.11-0.73; p = 0.009) in the multivariate analysis. This remained significant after applying a Bonferroni correction and internal validation through bootstrapping. ABCG2 421CA/AA was related to more severe toxicity (27.0% versus 16.5%; p = 0.010). Interpretation: ABCG2 34G>A and ABCB1 3435C>T are predictors for developing new CNS metastases during osimertinib treatment, probably because of diminished drug levels in the CNS. ABCG2 421C>A was significantly related with the incidence of severe toxicity. Pre-emptive genotyping for these SNPs could individualize osimertinib therapy. Addition of ABCG2 inhibitors for patients without ABCG2 34G>A should be studied further, to prevent new CNS metastases during osimertinib treatment. Funding: No funding was received for this trial.

Incidence of Bone Metastases and Skeletal-Related Events in Patients With EGFR-Mutated NSCLC Treated With Osimertinib.

Introduction: Bone metastases are frequent in patients with EGFR-mutated (EGFR+) NSCLC. Skeletal-related events (SREs) are common in these patients; however, no data on SRE in osimertinib-treated patients are reported. We investigated the development of bone metastases and SREs in patients with EGFR+ NSCLC treated with osimertinib. Methods: This is a retrospective multicenter cohort study that included patients with metastatic EGFR+ NSCLC who were treated with osimertinib between February 2016 and September 2021. Demographics, bone metastases-related outcomes, SREs, treatment efficacy, and overall survival (OS) were collected. Results: In total, 250 patients treated with osimertinib (43% first line) were included. Of the patients, 51% had bone metastases at initiation of osimertinib. Furthermore, 16% of the patients with bone metastases used bone-targeted agents. Median follow-up from initiation of osimertinib was 23.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.9-26.9 mo). During osimertinib treatment, 10% developed new bone metastases or bone progression. Of the patients with bone metastases, 39% had more than or equal to one SREs: 28% developed first SRE before osimertinib treatment, 1% after, and 11% during. Median OS post-bone metastasis was 30.8 months (95% CI: 21.9-39.7). Median OS after first SRE was 31.1 months (95% CI: 15.8-46.5). Conclusions: Bone metastases and SREs are frequent before and during treatment with osimertinib in EGFR+ NSCLC. Because of these findings and the long OS post-bone metastases, we advocate prescription of bone-targeted agents in these patients and recommend adding bone-specific end points in clinical trials.

A Systematic Evaluation of Cost-Saving Dosing Regimens for Therapeutic Antibodies and Antibody-Drug Conjugates for the Treatment of Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Expensive novel anticancer drugs put a serious strain on healthcare budgets, and the associated drug expenses limit access to life-saving treatments worldwide. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to develop alternative dosing regimens to reduce drug expenses. METHODS: We developed alternative dosing regimens for the following monoclonal antibodies used for the treatment of lung cancer: amivantamab, atezolizumab, bevacizumab, durvalumab, ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and ramucirumab; and for the antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan. The alternative dosing regimens were developed by means of modeling and simulation based on the population pharmacokinetic models developed by the license holders. They were based on weight bands and the administration of complete vials to limit drug wastage. The resulting dosing regimens were developed to comply with criteria used by regulatory authorities for in silico dose development. RESULTS: We found that alternative dosing regimens could result in cost savings that range from 11 to 28%, and lead to equivalent pharmacokinetic exposure with no relevant increases in variability in exposure. CONCLUSIONS: Dosing regimens based on weight bands and the use of complete vials to reduce drug wastage result in less expenses while maintaining equivalent exposure. The level of evidence of our proposal is the same as accepted by regulatory authorities for the approval of alternative dosing regimens of other monoclonal antibodies in oncology. The proposed alternative dosing regimens can, therefore, be directly implemented in clinical practice.

Therapeutic drug monitoring guided dosing versus standard dosing of alectinib in advanced ALK positive non-small cell lung cancer patients: Study protocol for an international, multicenter phase IV randomized controlled trial (ADAPT ALEC).

Background: Alectinib is first-line therapy in patients with stage IV non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) and an anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) fusion. A shorter median progression-free survival (mPFS) was observed when alectinib minimum plasma concentrations during steady state (Cmin,SS) were below 435 ng/mL. This may suggest that patients should have an alectinib Cmin,SS ≥ 435 ng/mL for a more favorable outcome. This potential target could be attained by using therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), i.e. adjusting the dose based on measured plasma trough concentrations. Hypothetically, this will increase mPFS, but this has not yet been evaluated in a randomized controlled trial (RCT). Therefore, the ADAPT ALEC trial is designed, with the primary objective to prolong mPFS in NSCLC patients treated with alectinib by using TDM. Methods: ADAPT ALEC is a multicenter, phase IV RCT, in which patients aged ≥ 18 years with advanced ALK positive (+) NSCLC eligible for alectinib in daily care are enrolled. Participants will be randomized (1:1 ratio) into intervention arm A (TDM) or B (control), stratified by brain metastases and prior ALK treatments. Starting dose in both arms is the approved flat fixed dose of alectinib 600 mg taken twice daily with food. In case of alectinib Cmin,SS < 435 ng/mL, arm A will receive increased doses of alectinib till Cmin,SS ≥ 435 ng/mL when considered tolerable. The primary outcome is mPFS, where progressive disease is defined according to RECIST v1.1 or all-cause death and assessed by CT-scans and MRI brain. Secondary endpoints are feasibility and tolerability of TDM, patient and physician adherence, overall response rate, median overall survival, intracranial PFS, quality of life, toxicity, alectinib-M4 concentrations and cost-effectiveness of TDM. Exploratory endpoints are circulating tumor DNA and body composition. Discussion: The ADAPT ALEC will show whether treatment outcomes of patients with advanced ALK+ NSCLC improve when using TDM-guided dosing of alectinib instead of fixed dosing. The results will provide high quality evidence for deciding whether TDM should be implemented as standard of care and this will have important consequences for the prescribing of alectinib. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT05525338.

Development and validation of an HPLC-MS/MS method to simultaneously quantify brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib in human K2-EDTA plasma.

A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was developed and validated to quantify the small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs) brigatinib, lorlatinib, pralsetinib and selpercatinib, which are used in patients with oncogenic-driven non-small cell lung cancer. Chromatographic separation was performed on a HyPURITY® C18 analytical column with a gradient elution using ammonium acetate in water and in methanol, both acidified with formic acid 0,1%. Detection and quantification were performed using a triple quad mass spectrometer with an electrospray ionization interface. The assay was validated over a linear range of 50-2,500 ng/ml for brigatinib, 25-1,000 ng/ml for lorlatinib, 100-10,000 ng/ml for pralsetinib and 50-5,000 ng/ml for selpercatinib. All four SMIs were stable for at least 7 days under cool conditions (2-8°C), and at least 24 h at room temperature (15-25°C) in K2-EDTA plasma. Under freezing conditions (-20°C), all SMIs were stable for at least 30 days, except for the lowest quality control (QCLOW ) of pralsetinib. The QCLOW of pralsetinib was stable for at least 7 days at -20°C. This method provides an efficient and simple way to quantify four SMIs with a single assay in clinical practice.

Renal function-based versus standard dosing of pemetrexed: a randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Pemetrexed is a chemotherapeutic drug in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer and mesothelioma. Optimized dosing of pemetrexed based on renal function instead of body surface area (BSA) is hypothesized to reduce pharmacokinetic variability in systemic exposure and could therefore improve treatment outcomes. The aim of this study is to compare optimized dosing to standard BSA-based dosing. METHODS: A multicenter randomized (1:1) controlled trial was performed to assess superiority of optimized dosing versus BSA-based dosing in patients who were eligible for pemetrexed-based chemotherapy. The individual exposure to pemetrexed in terms of area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) was determined. The fraction of patients attaining to a predefined typical target AUC (164 mg × h/L ± 25%) was calculated. RESULTS: A total of 81 patients were included. Target attainment was not statistically significant different between both arms (89% vs. 84% (p = 0.505)). The AUC of pemetrexed was similar between the optimized dosing arm (n = 37) and the standard of care arm (n = 44) (155 mg × h/L vs 160 mg × h/L (p = 0.436). CONCLUSION: We could not show superiority of optimized dosing of pemetrexed in patients with an adequate renal function does not show added value on the attainment of a pharmacokinetic endpoint, safety, nor QoL compared to standard of care dosing. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03655821.

Pharmacokinetic boosting of osimertinib with cobicistat in patients with non-small cell lung cancer: The OSIBOOST trial.

INTRODUCTION: Exposure to osimertinib, a third generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and a sensitizing EGFR mutation, can be substantially below average. We evaluated whether plasma levels could be boosted by co-administration of cobicistat, a strong Cytochrome P450 3A-inhibitor. METHODS: This was a pharmacokinetic, proof-of-concept clinical trial (the OSIBOOST trial, NCT03858491). NSCLC-patients with osimertinib were eligible if their steady state osimertinib plasma trough concentration was low (≤195 ng/mL). On day 1, the area under the plasma curve (AUC0-24,ss) of osimertinib and its metabolite (AZ5104) was calculated using a limited sampling strategy (four samples). Cobicistat co-treatment (150 mg, once daily) was started on day 2. Between day 22-26, a second AUC was determined. Cobicistat dose could be escalated if the osimertinib trough concentration was still ≤ 195 ng/mL, in the absence of toxicity. Primary endpoint was the increase in osimertinib exposure, secondary endpoint was toxicity. Cobicistat could be continued during the expanded access phase, with follow-up (2-4 months) of the boosting effect. RESULTS: The mean baseline osimertinib trough concentration for the eleven enrolled patients was 154 ng/mL. In all patients, cobicistat addition led to an increase in osimertinib exposure. Mean increase in total AUC0-24ss (AUC osimertinib + AUC AZ5104) was 60%, (range 19%-192%). The boosting effect was consistent over time. No grade ≥ 2 toxicity was observed. CONCLUSION: Pharmacokinetic boosting of osimertinib with cobicistat in patients with NSCLC is feasible without increasing toxicity, although the degree of boosting is variable.

Characteristics of patients with lung cancer in clinical practice and their potential eligibility for clinical trials evaluating tyrosine kinase inhibitors or immune checkpoint inhibitors.

INTRODUCTION: In- and exclusion criteria of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) aim to include a homogeneous study-population. This study compared characteristics of lung cancer patients from phase III RCTs evaluating tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) or immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) with characteristics of lung cancer patients in a real world setting in the United Kingdom. METHODS: A retrospective study was conducted using the Clinical Practice Research Datalink GOLD. Patients (N = 9239) with a first ever lung cancer registration between 2014 and 2018 were identified. Eligibility for inclusion was assessed for twelve RCTs (evaluating TKIs or ICIs). Reasons for potential exclusion and the number of unmet criteria were assessed for each RCT independently. OS was assessed using Kaplan-Meier and Cox proportional hazards analyses. RESULTS: The proportion of potentially eligible patients was 74.3% and 51.9% for TKI and ICI RCTs, respectively. History of another malignancy, renal insufficiency or concomitant drug-use were main reasons for exclusion. OS was considerably longer for potentially eligible patients. Hazards ratios varied from 1.17 (95% confidence interval, 1.11-1.24) to 1.35 (1.20-1.42) across the RCTs. CONCLUSION: This study showed that a considerable proportion of lung cancer patients in a real-world setting would have been ineligible for participation in phase III RCTs and that potentially ineligible patients experienced a shorter OS.

Hyperhydration with cisplatin does not influence pemetrexed exposure.

Pemetrexed is a cytotoxic drug for first-line treatment of lung cancer. It is often combined with other anticancer drugs such as cisplatin or carboplatin. In clinical practice, hyperhydration regimens are applied to overcome cisplatin-related nephrotoxicity. As pemetrexed is almost completely eliminated from the body by the kidneys, hyperhydration can result in augmented clearance. Furthermore, administration of large quantities of fluid may increase the volume of distribution of pemetrexed. Pharmacokinetics and, thus, efficacy and toxicity may be influenced by hyperhydration. This has not yet been properly studied. We performed a population pharmacokinetic analysis to assess hyperhydration as a covariate for pemetrexed clearance and for volume of distribution A relevant change was defined as >25% increase in clearance or volume of distribution. In our extensive dataset of 133 individuals, we found that hyperhydration did not significantly or relevantly explain variability in pemetrexed clearance (unchanged, P = .196) or volume of distribution (+7% change, P = .002), despite a power of >99% to detect a relevant change. Therefore, dose adjustments of pemetrexed are not required during hyperhydration with cisplatin.

Development and validation of an HPLC-MS/MS method to simultaneously quantify alectinib, crizotinib, erlotinib, gefitinib and osimertinib in human plasma samples, using one assay run.

A liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry method was developed and validated to quantify alectinib, crizotinib, erlotinib and gefitinib. This assay can be combined with our method for osimertinib, allowing quantification of the most used ALK- and EGFR-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in non-small cell lung cancer with a single-assay setup. Chromatographic separation was performed on a HyPurity® C18 analytical column using an elution gradient of ammonium acetate in water and in methanol, both acidified with formic acid 0.1%. Detection and quantification were performed using a triple quad mass spectrometer with an electrospray ionization interface. This method led to robust results, as the selectivity, carryover, precision and accuracy met all pre-specified requirements. The assay was validated over a linear range of 100-2,000 ng/ml for alectinib and erlotinib and 50-1,000 ng/ml for crizotinib and gefitinib. Alectinib, crizotinib, erlotinib and gefitinib were all stable for at least 4 h in whole blood (at room temperature and at 4°C) and for at least 1 month in EDTA plasma when stored at -80°C, while osimertinib proved to be unstable at room temperature. Although high-performance liquid chromatography was used, the run time was short and comparable with other methods using ultra-high performance liquid chromatography.

Nivolumab exposure in a hemodialysis patient with metastatic melanoma.

The effect of intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) on nivolumab serum concentrations in patients with severe renal impairment is largely unknown. Here, we present a 79-year-old patient with metastatic melanoma and end-stage renal disease on IHD three times a week, treated with 480 mg nivolumab every 4 weeks. A serum trough concentration of nivolumab was determined before the start of the third cycle, and two samples were taken immediately before and after a hemodialysis session during this cycle. All nivolumab serum concentrations were within a similar range as those previously measured among patients without renal insufficiency, after a comparable duration of nivolumab treatment. Therefore, we conclude that IHD does not influence nivolumab exposure. Furthermore, nivolumab treatment was continued without complications and appears to be well tolerated for patients on IHD.

Toxicity of pemetrexed during renal impairment explained-Implications for safe treatment.

Pemetrexed is an important component of first line treatment in patients with non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer. However, a limitation is the contraindication in patients with renal impairment due to hematological toxicity. Currently, it is unknown how to safely dose pemetrexed in these patients. The aim of our study was to elucidate the relationship between pemetrexed exposure and toxicity to support the development of a safe dosing regimen in patients with renal impairment. A population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis was performed based on phase II study results in three patients with renal dysfunction, supplemented with data from 106 patients in early clinical studies. Findings were externally validated with data of different pemetrexed dosing regimens. Alternative dosing regimens were evaluated using the developed model. We found that pemetrexed toxicity was driven by the time above a toxicity threshold concentration. The threshold for vitamin-supplemented patients was 0.110 mg/mL (95% CI: 0.092-0.146 mg/mL). It was observed that in patients with renal impairment (estimated glomerular filtration rate [eGFR]: <45 mL/min) the approved dose of 500 mg/m2 would yield a high probability of severe neutropenia in the range of 51.0% to 92.6%. A pemetrexed dose of 20 mg for patients (eGFR: 20 mL/min) is shown to be neutropenic-equivalent to the approved dose in patients with adequate renal function (eGFR: 90 mL/min), but would result in an approximately 13-fold lower area under the concentration-time curve. The pemetrexed exposure-toxicity relationship is explained by a toxicity threshold and substantially different from previously thought. Without prophylaxis for toxicity, it is unlikely that a therapeutic dose can be safely administered to patients with renal impairment.

Survival before and after the introduction of pertuzumab and T-DM1 in HER2-positive advanced breast cancer, a study of the SONABRE Registry.

PURPOSE: Immediate and proper implementation of a new and more potent therapy is important to ensure that the patient achieves the best possible outcome. This study aimed to examine whether the real-world overall survival (OS) has improved in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive (HER2 +) advanced breast cancer (ABC) since the market release of pertuzumab and T-DM1. Furthermore, we aimed to assess the implementation and survival rates per hormone receptor (HR) subtype. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We included 493 systemically treated patients consecutively diagnosed with HER2 + ABC in 2008-2017 from the SOutheast Netherlands Advanced BREast cancer (SONABRE) Registry. Median OS was obtained using the Kaplan-Meier method and differences between periods (2008-2012 versus 2013-2017) were tested using multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression modeling. The 3-year implementation rates were estimated for any HER2-targeted therapy, pertuzumab, and T-DM1 by using the competing risk method and calculated from the date of diagnosis of ABC to start of HER2-targeted therapy of interest. RESULTS: The median OS in 2008-2012 versus 2013-2017 was 28.3 versus 39.7 months in all patients (adjusted hazard ratio (adjHR) 0.85, 95%CI 0.66-1.08), 29.9 versus 36.3 months in patients with HR + /HER2 + disease (adjHR 0.97, 95%CI 0.72-1.32), and 22.7 versus 40.9 months in patients with HR-/HER2 + disease (adjHR 0.59, 95%CI 0.38-0.92). Any HER2-targeted therapy was used in 79% of patients in 2008-2012 and in 84% in 2013-2017. The use of pertuzumab and T-DM1 in 2013-2017 was 48% and 29%, respectively. For patients diagnosed with HR + /HER2 + and HR-/HER2 + disease, implementation rates in 2013-2017 were , respectively, 77% and 99% for any HER2-targeted therapy, 38% and 69% for pertuzumab, and 24% and 40% for T-DM1. CONCLUSION: The survival of patients with HER2 + ABC improved since the introduction of pertuzumab and T-DM1. There is room for improvement in implementation of these HER2-targeted therapies, especially in patients with HR + /HER2 + disease.