The preclinical discovery and development of zolbetuximab for the treatment of gastric cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Gastric cancer remains a formidable challenge in oncology with high mortality rates and few advancements in treatment. Claudin-18.2 (CLDN18.2) is a tight junction protein primarily expressed in the stomach and is frequently overexpressed in certain subsets of gastric cancers. Targeting CLDN18.2 with monoclonal antibodies, such as zolbetuximab (IMAB362), has shown promising efficacy results in combination with chemotherapy. AREAS COVERED: The molecular cell biology of CLDN18.2 is discussed along with studies demonstrating the utility of CLDN18.2 expression as a biomarker and therapeutic target. Important clinical studies are reviewed, including Phase III trials, SPOTLIGHT and GLOW, which demonstrate the efficacy of zolbetuximab in combination with chemotherapy in patients with CLDN18.2-positive advanced gastric cancer. EXPERT OPINION: CLDN18.2 is involved in gastric differentiation through maintenance of epithelial barrier function and coordination of signaling pathways, and its expression in gastric cancers reflects a 'gastric differentiation' program. Targeting Claudin-18.2 represents the first gastric cancer specific 'targeted' treatment. Further studies are needed to determine its role within current gastric cancer treatment sequencing, including HER2-targeted therapies and immunotherapies. Management strategies will also be needed to better mitigate zolbetuximab-related treatment side effects, including gastrointestinal (GI) toxicities.

Molecular Characterization of KRAS Wild-type Tumors in Patients with Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: KRAS mutation (MT) is a major oncogenic driver in pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC). A small subset of PDACs harbor KRAS wild-type (WT). We aim to characterize the molecular profiles of KRAS WT PDAC to uncover new pathogenic drivers and offer targeted treatments. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Tumor tissue obtained from surgical or biopsy material was subjected to next-generation DNA/RNA sequencing, microsatellite instability (MSI) and mismatch repair status determination. RESULTS: Of the 2,483 patients (male 53.7%, median age 66 years) studied, 266 tumors (10.7%) were KRAS WT. The most frequently mutated gene in KRAS WT PDAC was TP53 (44.5%), followed by BRAF (13.0%). Multiple mutations within the DNA-damage repair (BRCA2, ATM, BAP1, RAD50, FANCE, PALB2), chromatin remodeling (ARID1A, PBRM1, ARID2, KMT2D, KMT2C, SMARCA4, SETD2), and cell-cycle control pathways (CDKN2A, CCND1, CCNE1) were detected frequently. There was no statistically significant difference in PD-L1 expression between KRAS WT (15.8%) and MT (17%) tumors. However, KRAS WT PDAC were more likely to be MSI-high (4.7% vs. 0.7%; P < 0.05), tumor mutational burden-high (4.5% vs. 1%; P < 0.05), and exhibit increased infiltration of CD8+ T cells, natural killer cells, and myeloid dendritic cells. KRAS WT PDACs exhibited gene fusions of BRAF (6.6%), FGFR2 (5.2%), ALK (2.6%), RET (1.3%), and NRG1 (1.3%), as well as amplification of FGF3 (3%), ERBB2 (2.2%), FGFR3 (1.8%), NTRK (1.8%), and MET (1.3%). Real-world evidence reveals a survival advantage of KRAS WT patients in overall cohorts as well as in patients treated with gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel or 5-FU/oxaliplatin. CONCLUSIONS: KRAS WT PDAC represents 10.7% of PDAC and is enriched with targetable alterations, including immuno-oncologic markers. Identification of KRAS WT patients in clinical practice may expand therapeutic options in a clinically meaningful manner.

A single-institution phase I feasibility study of dose-escalated IMRT for non-operative locally advanced esophageal carcinoma.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Radiation dose escalation to improve poor outcomes with chemoradiation in locally advanced esophageal carcinoma is limited in part by increased toxicity. This Phase I study investigates the use of IMRT to improve tolerability of dose escalation. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A single-institution, prospective study was conducted between 2007 and 2013 for individuals with inoperable esophageal carcinoma. Gross disease received 60 Gy in 30 fractions and at-risk sites received 54 Gy with simultaneous integrated boost. Concurrent chemotherapy primarily consisted of cisplatin/5-FU. The primary objective was to assess feasibility (<15% rate of grade 4-5 toxicity). Secondary objectives included assessment of overall survival (OS), progression free survival (PFS), and locoregional (LRR) and distant recurrence. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were enrolled with median follow up of 17.6 months (range 0.1 to 152.0). The majority were AJCC 7th edition Stage III (54%), distal esophagus primary (81%), and adenocarcinoma histology (85%). Twenty-one patients (81%) completed their course of radiation therapy, while only 55% received 2 cycles of concurrent cisplatin/5-FU. One grade 5 and one grade 4 cardiac event occurred, both during chemoradiation and before receiving 50 Gy. The 3-year OS was 48.6% (95% CI: 32.5 to 72.2%) and PFS was 28.5% (95% CI: 14.6 to 55.5%). Half developed distant failure with LRR occurring in 10 patients (38%), isolated in 5 patients. CONCLUSION: While feasibility was demonstrated, toxicity and compliance remained limiting factors with outcomes similar to historical controls. There remains an uncertain role for dose escalation in definitive management of locally advanced esophageal cancer.

Designing Dose-Finding Phase I Clinical Trials: Top 10 Questions That Should Be Discussed With Your Statistician.

In recent years, the landscape in clinical trial development has changed to involve many molecularly targeted agents, immunotherapies, or radiotherapy, as a single agent or in combination. Given their different mechanisms of action and lengths of administration, these agents have different toxicity profiles, which has resulted in numerous challenges when applying traditional designs such as the 3 + 3 design in dose-finding clinical trials. Novel methods have been proposed to address these design challenges such as combinations of therapies or late-onset toxicities. However, their design and implementation require close collaboration between clinicians and statisticians to ensure that the appropriate design is selected to address the aims of the study and that the design assumptions are pertinent to the study drug. The goal of this paper is to provide guidelines for appropriate questions that should be considered early in the design stage to facilitate the interactions between clinical and statistical teams and to improve the design of dose-finding clinical trials for novel anticancer agents.

Vorolanib (X-82), an oral anti-VEGFR/PDGFR/CSF1R tyrosine kinase inhibitor, with everolimus in solid tumors: results of a phase I study.

Background Anti-vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKI) combined with mTOR inhibitors, like everolimus, result in significant responses and prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) among patients with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) [1]. However, everolimus doses >5 mg are often not tolerated when combined with other TKIs2,3. Vorolanib (X-82), an oral anti-VEGFR/platelet derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR)/colony stimulating factor 1 receptor (CSF1R) multitarget TKI, has a short half-life and limited tissue accumulation. We conducted a Phase 1 study of vorolanib with everolimus (10 mg daily) in patients with solid tumors. Methods A 3 + 3 dose escalation design was utilized to determine dose limiting toxicities (DLT) and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of vorolanib/everolimus. Oral vorolanib at 100, 150, 200, 300, or 400 mg was combined with 10 mg oral everolimus daily. The phase 2 portion was terminated after enrolling two patients due to funding. Results Eighteen patients were evaluable for DLT among 22 treated subjects. Observed DLTs were grade 3 fatigue, hypophosphatemia, and mucositis. The RP2D is vorolanib 300 mg with everolimus 10 mg daily. In 15 patients evaluable for response, three had partial response (PR; 2 RCC, 1 neuroendocrine tumor [NET]) and eight had stable disease (SD; 2 RCC, 6 NET). Conclusions Vorolanib can safely be combined with everolimus. Encouraging activity is seen in RCC and NET. Further studies are warranted. Trial Registration Number: NCT01784861.

A phase I trial of temsirolimus and erlotinib in patients with refractory solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Resistance to treatment with inhibitors of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) is partially mediated by activation of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). We conducted a phase I study to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) of temsirolimus (mTOR inhibitor) combined with erlotinib (EGFR inhibitor) in patients with refractory solid tumors. METHODS: Standard "3 + 3" design was used for dose escalation. An expansion cohort at RP2D included only patients with squamous histology or mutations relevant to PI3K or EGFR pathway activation. Patients started daily erlotinib 7 days prior to starting temsirolimus on cycle 1. Intravenous temsirolimus was then administered weekly. Starting dose levels were 15 mg for temsirolimus and 100 mg for erlotinib. RESULTS: Forty-four patients received treatment on this study (28 in dose escalation and 16 in the expansion cohort). The RP2D was temsirolimus 25 mg IV weekly and erlotinib 100 mg orally daily. Two patients experienced DLTs (G3 dehydration and G4 renal failure). The most common drug-related adverse events (all grades) were rash, mucositis/stomatitis, diarrhea, nausea and fatigue. No complete or partial responses were observed. The median duration on this study was 69 days (range 3-770) for escalation and 88 days (range 25-243) for expansion cohorts. Among 11 response-evaluable patients in the expansion cohort, 9 (82%) had stable disease and 2 (18%) had progressive disease. CONCLUSION: The combination of temsirolimus and erlotinib at the RP2D was well tolerated, and the regimen resulted in prolonged disease stabilization in selected patients (NCT00770263).

Role of Immunotherapy in Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Immunotherapy and tumor microenvironment have been at the forefront of cancer research over the past several decades. Here, we will review the role of immunotherapy in advanced gastroesophageal cancers including targeted antibodies, immunomodulating agents, vaccines, oncolytic virus therapy, and adoptive immunotherapy, and discuss the future direction for immunotherapy in this population. RECENT FINDINGS: Targeted antibodies are already standard-of-care. An anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody is currently FDA approved for second-line treatment of locally advanced or metastatic ESCC, as well as beyond second-line treatment of advanced G/GEJ cancers, and recent data suggests it may be considered in first-line treatment of advanced G/GEJ cancers. Combination therapies such as immunotherapy plus chemotherapy and/or radiotherapy, vaccines, oncolytic viral therapy, and adoptive immunotherapy in varying combinations are currently under active investigation. Several trials are ongoing and are hoped to reach more efficacious and individualized treatment options in advanced gastroesophageal cancer, where novel treatment options are desperately needed.

Margetuximab plus pembrolizumab in patients with previously treated, HER2-positive gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma (CP-MGAH22-05): a single-arm, phase 1b-2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Margetuximab, a novel, investigational, Fc-engineered, anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody, is designed to more effectively potentiate innate immunity than trastuzumab. We aimed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of margetuximab plus pembrolizumab (an anti-PD-1 monoclonal antibody) in previously treated patients with HER2-positive gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma. METHODS: CP-MGAH22-05 was a single-arm, open-label, phase 1b-2 dose-escalation and cohort expansion study done at 11 academic centres in the USA and Canada and 15 centres in southeast Asia (Korea, Taiwan, and Singapore) that enrolled men and women aged 18 years or older with histologically proven, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic, HER2-positive, PD-L1-unselected gastro-oesophageal adenocarcinoma, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, who had progressed after at least one previous line of therapy with trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in the locally advanced unresectable or metastatic setting. In the dose-escalation phase, nine patients were treated: three received margetuximab 10 mg/kg intravenously plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks and six received the recommended phase 2 dose of margetuximab 15 mg/kg plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks. An additional 86 patients were enrolled in the phase 2 cohort expansion and received the recommended phase 2 dose. The primary endpoints were safety and tolerability, assessed in the safety population (patients who received at least one dose of either margetuximab or pembrolizumab) and the objective response rate as assessed by the investigator according to both Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST), version 1.1, in the response-evaluable population (patients with measurable disease at baseline and who received the recommended phase 2 dose of margetuximab and pembrolizumab). This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02689284. Recruitment for the trial has completed and follow-up is ongoing. FINDINGS: Between Feb 11, 2016, and Oct 2, 2018, 95 patients were enrolled. Median follow-up was 19·9 months (IQR 10·7-23·1). The combination therapy showed acceptable safety and tolerability; there were no dose-limiting toxicities in the dose-escalation phase. The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events were anaemia (four [4%]) and infusion-related reactions (three [3%]). Serious treatment-related adverse events were reported in nine (9%) patients. No treatment-related deaths were reported. Objective responses were observed in 17 (18·48%; 95% CI 11·15-27·93) of 92 evaluable patients. INTERPRETATION: These findings serve as proof of concept of synergistic antitumour activity with the combination of an Fc-optimised anti-HER2 agent (margetuximab) along with anti-PD-1 checkpoint blockade (pembrolizumab). FUNDING: MacroGenics.

Phase 1 Study to Evaluate the Effect of the Investigational Anticancer Agent Sapanisertib on the QTc Interval in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors.

The aim of this phase 1 study was to determine the effects of sapanisertib on the heart rate-corrected QT (QTc) interval in patients with advanced solid tumors. Adult patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled to receive a single sapanisertib 40-mg dose. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic analysis were collected and electrocardiogram readings were recorded at baseline and up to 48 hours after dosing. Patients could continue to receive sapanisertib 30 mg once weekly in 28-day cycles for up to 12 months. The primary objective was to characterize the effect of a single dose of sapanisertib (40 mg) on the QT interval. Secondary objectives were to evaluate safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics. Following a single sapanisertib 40-mg dose in 44 patients, the maximum least squares mean (upper bound of 1-sided 95% confidence interval) changes from time-matched baseline were 7.1 milliseconds (11.4 milliseconds) for individual rate-corrected QT interval at 24 hours after dosing, and 1.8 milliseconds (5.6 milliseconds) for Fridericia-corrected QTc at 1 hour post-dose. There was no sapanisertib plasma concentration-dependent increase in the change from time-matched baseline individual rate-corrected QTc interval or Fridericia-corrected QTc. The most common adverse events following sapanisertib 30 mg once-weekly dosing were nausea (80%), fatigue (61%), vomiting (57%), and decreased appetite (45%). A single sapanisertib 40 mg dose did not produce clinically relevant effects on QTc interval in patients with advanced solid tumors. The safety profile of sapanisertib 30 mg once weekly was favorable, and no new safety signals were observed (NCT02197572, clinicaltrials.gov).

The clonal evolution of metastatic colorectal cancer.

Tumor heterogeneity and evolution drive treatment resistance in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Patient-derived xenografts (PDXs) can model mCRC biology; however, their ability to accurately mimic human tumor heterogeneity is unclear. Current genomic studies in mCRC have limited scope and lack matched PDXs. Therefore, the landscape of tumor heterogeneity and its impact on the evolution of metastasis and PDXs remain undefined. We performed whole-genome, deep exome, and targeted validation sequencing of multiple primary regions, matched distant metastases, and PDXs from 11 patients with mCRC. We observed intricate clonal heterogeneity and evolution affecting metastasis dissemination and PDX clonal selection. Metastasis formation followed both monoclonal and polyclonal seeding models. In four cases, metastasis-seeding clones were not identified in any primary region, consistent with a metastasis-seeding-metastasis model. PDXs underrepresented the subclonal heterogeneity of parental tumors. These suggest that single sample tumor sequencing and current PDX models may be insufficient to guide precision medicine.

FOLFIRINOX for the Treatment of Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancers: A Phase 2 Nonrandomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Standard first-line regimens for patients with metastatic gastroesophageal adenocarcinomas have an approximate 40% objective response rate (ORR). The combination of leucovorin, fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (FOLFIRINOX) has been efficacious as first-line therapy for other gastrointestinal cancers, such as pancreatic and colon cancers. Objective: To evaluate the clinical activity and safety of FOLFIRINOX as first-line treatment for patients with advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is an open-label, single-arm phase 2 study of first-line FOLFIRINOX in patients with advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. Estimated sample size included 41 patients with ERBB2-negative disease with 90% power to detect an ORR of 60% or greater with α of .10. No enrollment goal was planned for ERBB2-positive patients, but they were allowed to receive trastuzumab in combination with FOLFIRINOX. Interventions: Starting doses were fluorouracil, 400 mg/m2 bolus, followed by 2400 mg/m2 over 46 hours; leucovorin, 400 mg/m2; irinotecan, 180 mg/m2; and oxaliplatin, 85 mg/m2. Trastuzumab was administered as a 6 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 4 mg/kg every 14 days in patients with ERBB2-positive disease. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was ORR by the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors, version 1.1. Secondary end points included safety profile, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and duration of response. Results: From November 2013 to May 2018, 67 patients were enrolled (median [range] age, 59.0 [34-78] years; including 56 [84%] men), and 26 of 67 (39%) had ERBB2-positive disease. Median follow-up was 17.4 months. The ORR was 61%(95% CI, 44.5%-75.8%) (25 of 41) in the ERBB2-negative group and 85% (95% CI, 65.1%-95.6%) (22 of 26) in the ERBB2-positive group, including 1 patient with complete response. For ERBB2-negative patients, median PFS was 8.4 months and median OS was 15.5 months; for ERBB2-positive patients, median PFS was 13.8 months and median OS was 19.6 months. Fifty-six patients (84%) had dose modifications or treatment delays. The most common toxic effects were neutropenia (91%, n = 61), diarrhea (63%, n = 42), peripheral sensory neuropathy (61%, n = 41), and nausea (48%, n = 32), with no unexpected toxic effects. Conclusions and Relevance: The FOLFIRINOX regimen with or without trastuzumab was associated with improved ORR and PFS in patients with advanced gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma in the first-line setting. This regimen may be a reasonable therapeutic option for patients with preserved performance status. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01928290.

Phase Ib/II study combining tosedostat with capecitabine in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (PDAC) is an aggressive malignancy with limited therapeutic options. We evaluated the safety and efficacy of the aminopeptidase inhibitor tosedostat with capecitabine in advanced PDAC. METHODS: We conducted a phase Ib/II trial of tosedostat with capecitabine as second-line therapy for advanced PDAC. Planned enrollment was 36 patients. Eligible patients were treated with capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2 oral twice-daily days 1-14 and oral tosedostat in a dose de-escalation design on days 1-21 of each 21-day cycle. Primary endpoints were the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS: Sixteen patients were enrolled. Tosedostat 120 mg oral twice daily with capecitabine 1,000 mg/m2 oral twice daily was the RP2D. There was one dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) (grade 3 acute coronary syndrome) during phase Ib. The most common treatment-related adverse events were gastrointestinal (nausea, diarrhea), cardiac [QTc prolongation, decreased ejection fraction (EF)], and fatigue. The median PFS was 7.1 months, and the median treatment failure free survival was 3 months. Eight patients experienced stable disease for greater than 3 months. The study was closed early due to lack of drug availability. CONCLUSIONS: Tosedostat with capecitabine displayed tolerable toxicity, and prolonged disease control in a subset of patients. These data encourage further exploration of aminopeptidase inhibitors in pancreatic cancer.

Pan-Cancer Efficacy of Vemurafenib in BRAF V600-Mutant Non-Melanoma Cancers.

BRAF V600 mutations occur in a wide range of tumor types, and RAF inhibition has become standard in several of these cancers. Despite this progress, BRAF V600 mutations have historically been considered a clear demonstration of tumor lineage context-dependent oncogene addiction, based predominantly on the insensitivity to RAF inhibition in colorectal cancer. However, the true broader activity of RAF inhibition pan-cancer remains incompletely understood. To address this, we conducted a multicohort "basket" study of the BRAF inhibitor vemurafenib in non-melanoma BRAF V600 mutation-positive solid tumors. In total, 172 patients with 26 unique cancer types were treated, achieving an overall response rate of 33% and median duration of response of 13 months. Responses were observed in 13 unique cancer types, including historically treatment-refractory tumor types such as cholangiocarcinoma, sarcoma, glioma, neuroendocrine carcinoma, and salivary gland carcinomas. Collectively, these data demonstrate that single-agent BRAF inhibition has broader clinical activity than previously recognized. SIGNIFICANCE: These data suggest that BRAF V600 mutations lead to oncogene addiction and are clinically actionable in a broad range of non-melanoma cancers, including tumor types in which RAF inhibition is not currently considered standard of care.See related commentary by Ribas and Lo, p. 640.This article is highlighted in the In This Issue feature, p. 627.

Folate Receptor α-Targeted 89Zr-M9346A Immuno-PET for Image-Guided Intervention with Mirvetuximab Soravtansine in Triple-Negative Breast Cancer.

Folate receptor α (FRα) is a well-studied tumor biomarker highly expressed in many epithelial tumors such as breast, ovarian, and lung cancers. Mirvetuximab soravtansine (IMGN853) is the antibody-drug conjugate of FRα-binding humanized monoclonal antibody M9346A and cytotoxic maytansinoid drug DM4. IMGN853 is currently being evaluated in multiple clinical trials, in which the immunohistochemical evaluation of an archival tumor or biopsy specimen is used for patient screening. However, limited tissue collection may lead to inaccurate diagnosis due to tumor heterogeneity. Herein, we developed a zirconium-89 (89Zr)-radiolabeled M9346A (89Zr-M9346A) as an immuno-positron emission tomography (immuno-PET) radiotracer to evaluate FRα expression in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patients, providing a novel means to guide intervention with therapeutic IMGN853. In this study, we verified the binding specificity and immunoreactivity of 89Zr-M9346A by in vitro studies in FRαhigh cells (HeLa) and FRαlow cells (OVCAR-3). In vivo PET/computed tomography (PET/CT) imaging in HeLa xenografts and TNBC patient-derived xenograft (PDX) mouse models with various levels of FRα expression demonstrated its targeting specificity and sensitivity. Following PET imaging, the treatment efficiencies of IMGN853, pemetrexed, IMGN853 + pemetrexed, paclitaxel, and saline were assessed in FRαhigh and FRαlow TNBC PDX models. The correlation between 89Zr-M9346A tumor uptake and treatment response using IMGN853 in FRαhigh TNBC PDX model suggested the potential of 89Zr-M9346A PET as a noninvasive tool to prescreen patients based on the in vivo PET imaging for IMGN853-targeted treatment.

Pharmacokinetics of the Investigational Aurora A Kinase Inhibitor Alisertib in Adult Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors or Relapsed/Refractory Lymphoma With Varying Degrees of Hepatic Dysfunction.

This clinical trial was designed to evaluate the effect of moderate or severe hepatic impairment on the single-dose pharmacokinetics (PK) of the investigational anticancer agent, alisertib, in adult patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma. Patients with normal hepatic function (total bilirubin and alanine transaminase [ALT] ≤ upper limit of normal [ULN]), moderate hepatic impairment (1.5 × ULN < total bilirubin ≤ 3 × ULN, with any ALT) or severe hepatic impairment (total bilirubin > 3 × ULN, with any ALT), received a single 50-mg oral dose of alisertib. Blood samples for PK were collected up to 168 hours postdose. Predose samples were also used to assess alisertib plasma protein binding. Patients could continue to receive alisertib for 7 days in 21-day cycles (50, 30, or 10 mg twice daily for normal hepatic function, moderate hepatic impairment, and severe hepatic impairment, respectively). Alisertib was approximately 99% protein bound in all hepatic function groups. Alisertib exposure was similar in moderate and severe hepatic impairment groups, but higher than the normal hepatic function group. The geometric least-squares mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) for unbound alisertib area under the curve extrapolated to infinity for moderate/severe impairment groups versus the normal hepatic function group was 254% (184%, 353%). Patients with moderate or severe hepatic impairment have approximately 150% higher unbound alisertib exposures compared with patients with normal hepatic function. An approximately 60% reduction of the starting dose of alisertib in patients with moderate/severe hepatic impairment is recommended based on pharmacokinetic considerations.

A phase 1b study evaluating the safety and pharmacokinetics of regorafenib in combination with cetuximab in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Regorafenib 160 mg orally once daily (QD) 3 weeks on/1 week off is approved in colorectal cancer, gastrointestinal stromal tumors and hepatocellular carcinoma. We established the safety and pharmacokinetics (PK) of regorafenib combined with cetuximab in advanced refractory solid tumors. This was a phase 1, open-label, dose-escalation study (NCT01973868) in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors who progressed after standard therapy. Regorafenib was administered at various dose levels QD continuously or intermittently (3 weeks on/1 week off) combined with intravenous cetuximab 250 mg/m2 weekly. The primary objectives were safety, PK and maximum tolerated dose (MTD). The secondary objective was tumor response. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluated in Cycle 1. Of 42 treated patients, 31 received regorafenib intermittently (120 mg, n = 8; 160 mg, n = 23) and 11 continuously (60 mg, n = 5; 100 mg, n = 6) plus cetuximab. The continuous arm was terminated due to low tolerable dose. In the intermittent arm, one DLT (grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction) was observed at 120 mg but none at 160 mg, therefore 160 mg/day was declared as the MTD in combination with cetuximab. The most common all-grade treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (52%), hypophosphatemia (48%) and diarrhea (40%). One grade 3 cetuximab-related dermatitis acneiform was observed. No clinically relevant drug-drug interactions were observed. Five patients (21%) had a partial response. Regorafenib 160 mg QD (3 weeks on/1 week off) plus standard dose of cetuximab was well tolerated with no unexpected toxicities and promising signs of efficacy.

Effect of CYP3A inhibitors on the pharmacokinetics of pevonedistat in patients with advanced solid tumours.

AIMS: This phase I study evaluated the effects of the moderate cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A inhibitor fluconazole and the strong CYP3A/P-glycoprotein (P-gp) inhibitor itraconazole on the pharmacokinetics of the investigational neural precursor cell expressed, developmentally downregulated 8 (NEDD8)-activating enzyme inhibitor pevonedistat in patients with advanced solid tumours. METHODS: Patients received single doses of intravenous pevonedistat 8 mg m-2 , alone and with fluconazole (loading: 400 mg; maintenance: 200 mg once daily), or pevonedistat 8, 15 or 20 mg m-2 , alone and with itraconazole 200 mg once daily. Serial blood samples for pevonedistat pharmacokinetics were obtained pre- and post-infusion on days 1 (alone) and 8 (with fluconazole/itraconazole). After completing the pharmacokinetic portion, patients remaining on study received pevonedistat with docetaxel or carboplatin and paclitaxel. RESULTS: The ratios of geometric mean area under the concentration-time curves (n; 90% confidence interval) of pevonedistat in the presence vs. absence of fluconazole or itraconazole were 1.11 (12; 1.03-1.19) and 1.14 (33; 1.07-1.23), respectively. Fifty patients (98%) experienced at least one adverse event (AE), with maximum severity of grade 1-2 in 28 patients (55%) and of grade ≥3 in 22 patients (43%). The most common drug-related AEs were vomiting (12%), diarrhoea (10%) and nausea (8%). No new safety findings were observed for pevonedistat. CONCLUSIONS: Fluconazole or itraconazole had insignificant effects on pevonedistat pharmacokinetics, indicating minor contributions of CYP3A/P-gp to pevonedistat clearance. The safety profile of single doses of pevonedistat plus steady-state fluconazole or itraconazole was consistent with prior clinical experience, with no new safety signals observed.

Combined PIK3CA and FGFR Inhibition With Alpelisib and Infigratinib in Patients With PIK3CA-Mutant Solid Tumors, With or Without FGFR Alterations.

PURPOSE: Concurrent PIK3CA mutations and fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) alterations occur in multiple cancer types, including estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer, bladder cancer, and endometrial cancer. In this first-in-human combination trial, we explored safety and preliminary efficacy of combining the PI3Kα selective inhibitor alpelisib with the FGFR1-4 selective inhibitor infigratinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with PIK3CA-mutant advanced solid tumors, with or without FGFR1-3 alterations, were enrolled in the dose escalation or one of three molecular-defined dose-expansion cohorts. The primary end point was the maximum tolerated dose. Secondary end points included safety, pharmacokinetics, and response. Archival tumor samples were sequenced to explore genomic correlates of response. RESULTS: In combination, both agents were escalated to full, single-agent recommended doses (alpelisib, 300 mg per day continuously; infigratinib, 125 mg per day 3 weeks on followed by 1 week off). The toxicity profile of the combination was consistent with the established safety profile of each agent, although 71% of all patients required at least one treatment interruption or dose reduction. Molecularly selected dose expansions in breast cancer and other solid tumors harboring PIK3CA mutations, alone or in combination with FGFR alterations, identified sporadic responses, predominately in tumor types and genotypes previously defined to have sensitivity to these agents. CONCLUSION: The combination of alpelisib and infigratinib can be administered at full single-agent doses, although the high rate of dose interruption or reduction suggests long-term tolerability may be challenging. In exploratory signal-seeking cohorts of patients harboring dual PIK3CA and FGFR1-3 alterations, no clear evidence of synergistic activity was observed.

Phase Ib study of pevonedistat, a NEDD8-activating enzyme inhibitor, in combination with docetaxel, carboplatin and paclitaxel, or gemcitabine, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Purpose This phase Ib study (NCT01862328) evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of pevonedistat in combination with standard-of-care chemotherapies in patients with solid tumors. Methods Patients received pevonedistat with docetaxel (arm 1, n = 22), carboplatin plus paclitaxel (arm 2, n = 26), or gemcitabine (arm 3, n = 10) in 21-days (arms 1 and 2) or 28-days (arm 3) cycles. A lead-in cohort (arm 2a, n = 6) determined the arm 2 carboplatin dose. Dose escalation proceeded via continual modified reassessment. Results Pevonedistat MTD was 25 mg/m2 (arm 1) or 20 mg/m2 (arm 2); arm 3 was discontinued due to poor tolerability. Fifteen (23%) patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1 (grade ≥3 liver enzyme elevations, febrile neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia), managed with dose holds or reductions. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 95% of patients. Most common AEs included fatigue (56%) and nausea (50%). One drug-related death occurred in arm 3 (febrile neutropenia). Pevonedistat exposure increased when co-administered with carboplatin plus paclitaxel; no obvious changes were observed when co-administered with docetaxel or gemcitabine. Among 54 response-evaluable patients, two had complete responses (arm 2) and 10 had partial responses (three in arm 1, one in arm 2a, six in arm 2); overall response rates were 16% (arm 1) and 35% (arm 2). High ERCC1 expression correlated with clinical benefit in arm 2. Conclusion Pevonedistat with docetaxel or with carboplatin plus paclitaxel was tolerable without cumulative toxicity. Sustained clinical responses were observed in pretreated patients receiving pevonedistat with carboplatin and paclitaxel. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01862328.