Phase II study of Vigil® DNA engineered immunotherapy as maintenance in advanced stage ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVES: The majority of women with Stage III/IV ovarian cancer who achieve clinical complete response with frontline standard of care will relapse within 2years. Vigil immunotherapy, a GMCSF/bi-shRNA furin DNA engineered autologous tumor cell (EATC) product, demonstrated safety and induction of circulating activated T-cells against autologous tumor in Phase I trial Senzer et al. (2012, 2013) . Our objectives for this study include evaluation of safety, immune response and recurrence free survival (RFS). METHODS: This is a Phase II crossover trial of Vigil (1.0×107 cells/intradermal injection/month for 4 to 12 doses) in Stage III/IV ovarian cancer patients achieving cCR (normal imaging, CA-125≤35units/ml, physical exam, and no symptoms suggestive of the presence of active disease) following primary surgical debulking and carboplatin/paclitaxel adjuvant or neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients received Vigil or standard of care during the maintenance period. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were entered into trial, 31 received Vigil and 11 received standard of care. No≥Grade 3 toxicity related to product was observed. A marked induction of circulating activated T-cell population was observed against individual, pre-processed autologous tumor in the Vigil arm as compared to pre-Vigil baseline using IFNγ ELISPOT response (30/31 negative ELISPOT pre Vigil to 31/31 positive ELISPOT post Vigil, median 134 spots). Moreover, in correlation with ELISPOT response, RFS from time of procurement was improved (mean 826days/median 604days in the Vigil arm from mean 481days/median 377days in the control arm, p=0.033). CONCLUSION: In conjunction with the demonstrated safety, the high rate of induction of T-cell activation and correlation with improvement in RFS justify further Phase II/III assessment of Vigil.

A Phase II, open-label study evaluating pazopanib in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The progression-free and median survival of patients with advanced ovarian cancer has not appreciably improved over the last decade. Novel targeted therapies, particularly antiangiogenic agents, may potentially improve clinical outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer. This phase II, open-label study evaluated oral pazopanib monotherapy in patients with low-volume recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal carcinoma with complete CA-125 response to initial platinum-based chemotherapy and subsequent elevation of CA-125 to ≥ 42 U/mL (> 2 × ULN) were treated with pazopanib 800 mg once daily until PD or unacceptable toxicity. This Green-Dahlberg study required 2 CA-125 responses in stage I (20 patients) to proceed to stage II (15 patients). The primary endpoint was CA-125 response (≥ 50% decrease from baseline, confirmed ≥ 21 days after initial evaluation). RESULTS: Eleven of 36 patients (31%) had a CA-125 response to pazopanib, with median time to response of 29 days and median response duration of 113 days. Overall response rate was 18% in patients with measurable disease at baseline. The most common adverse events leading to discontinuation of study drug were grade 3 ALT (8%) and AST (8%) elevation. Only 1 grade 4 toxicity (peripheral edema) was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Pazopanib monotherapy was relatively well tolerated, with toxicity similar to other small-molecule, oral angiogenesis inhibitors, and demonstrated promising single-agent activity in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. Further studies evaluating the potential role of pazopanib in patients with ovarian cancer are ongoing.

Phase I study of alternating doublets of topotecan/carboplatin and paclitaxel/carboplatin in patients with newly diagnosed, advanced ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate topotecan with carboplatin in an alternating doublet with carboplatin and paclitaxel in first-line ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients with newly diagnosed stage III/IV ovarian cancer were studied. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of topotecan (cycles 1, 3, 5, 7) in an alternating doublet regimen was determined through standard dose escalation in cohorts of three; doses of carboplatin (area under the curve [AUC] 4 to 5) and paclitaxel (175 mg/m(2), cycles 2, 4, 6, 8) were fixed. Dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was defined only for cycle 1 as febrile neutropenia, prolonged grade 4 granulocytopenia, grade 4 thrombocytopenia, > or =grade 3 nonhematologic toxicity, or failure to recover in < or =7 days. The use of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) to permit further dose escalation was also studied. RESULTS: Thirty-seven patients received 142 cycles of topotecan/carboplatin. Hematologic DLTs included grade 4 neutropenia (59 events, 42% of cycles) and thrombocytopenia (32 events, 23% of cycles). Granulocytopenia was generally short-lived, and only 2 cases of febrile neutropenia occurred. The MTD was 1.0 mg/m(2)/day topotecan and carboplatin AUC 4, alternating with 175 mg/m(2) paclitaxel and carboplatin AUC 4. Although G-CSF effectively managed myelosuppression, thrombocytopenia developed in later cycles, limiting further topotecan dose escalation. The median progression-free survival was 20.5 months, and elevated pretreatment CA-125 levels normalized in 29 of 34 (85%) patients. CONCLUSION: The establishment of a reasonably well-tolerated alternating doublet regimen, coupled with evidence of antitumor activity, provides the basis for further investigation of topotecan in first-line therapy of ovarian cancer. Topotecan (1.0 mg/m(2) daily for 3 days) was chosen for further evaluation in a phase II study.