A phase 2, open-label study of brentuximab vedotin in patients with CD30-expressing solid tumors.

Purpose Brentuximab vedotin (BV) is an anti-CD30 antibody-drug conjugate used in the treatment of several types of lymphomas. Expression of the target antigen has also been reported on a variety of malignant tumors of nonlymphoid origin. This phase 2, open-label study evaluated the safety and antitumor activity of BV in patients with CD30-expressing nonlymphomatous malignancies. Methods Patients were dosed with 1.8 or 2.4 mg/kg BV once every three weeks. Antitumor activity was assessed at Cycles 2, 4, and every 4 cycles thereafter. Patients with stable disease or better were eligible to continue treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or study closure. Results Of the 2693 patients screened, 3.8% had solid tumors with CD30 expression and 63 eligible patients with solid tumors enrolled in this study. The most common CD30 positive solid tumors were testicular cancer and mesothelioma. Both subtypes had more than one patient with an objective response. The median duration of BV exposure was 6.1 weeks. The disease control rate, defined as achieving stable disease or better at any point during the study, was 55%. The objective response rate was 11%, with a median duration of response of 2.92 months. The most common adverse events reported were fatigue (57%), nausea (33%), and decreased appetite (32%). Conclusion The safety profile of BV in patients with solid tumors was similar to the known safety profile of BV. In solid tumors, BV had modest activity as a single agent, which was similar to other second-line treatments already available to patients.

Phase I study of the combination of crizotinib (as a MET inhibitor) and dasatinib (as a c-SRC inhibitor) in patients with advanced cancer.

Background Both MET and c-SRC are important mediators of cancer progression and there is cross talk between the two molecules. Preclinical studies have demonstrated combination of MET and c-SRC inhibitors is effective in multiple cancer types. Methods We analyzed the safety and efficacy of administering a c-SRC inhibitor (dasatinib) in combination with a MET inhibitor (crizotinib) in a two-arm concurrent phase I study. Arm A consisted of crizotinib fixed at 250 mg twice per day with escalation of dasatinib. Arm B consisted of dasatinib fixed at 140 mg daily with escalation of crizotinib. Endpoints included dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and response (RECIST 1.1). Results We enrolled 61 patients (arm A: 31, arm B: 30). The most common cancers were sarcoma (21%) and prostate cancer (16%). In Arm A, at dose level 2 (DL2), 40% (2/5) experienced DLTs. In the expanded DL1, 21% (4/19) experienced DLTs (all grade 3). In Arm B, at DL2, 50% (2/4) experienced DLTs. In the expanded DL1, 22% (4/18) experienced DLTs (all grade 3). RP2D was determined to be arm A, DL1 (250 mg crizotinib orally twice per day plus 50 mg dasatinib orally daily). Partial response (N = 1) and stable disease for ≥6 months (N = 3) were seen. Conclusions The combination of crizotinib and dasatinib is safe to administer but tolerability is limited given the high rate of adverse events. Responses and durable stable disease were limited. Further precision therapy approach using this specific combination may be difficult given the toxicity.

A phase I, open-label, two-stage study to investigate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of the oral AKT inhibitor GSK2141795 in patients with solid tumors.

Background We sought to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and schedule of GSK2141795, an oral pan-AKT kinase inhibitor. Patients and Methods Patients with solid tumors were enrolled in the dose-escalation phase. Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis after a single dose (Cycle 0) informed dose escalation using accelerated dose titration. Once one grade 2 toxicity or dose-limiting toxicity was observed in Cycle 1, the accelerated dose titration was terminated and a 3 + 3 dose escalation was started. Continuous daily dosing was evaluated along with two intermittent regimens (7 days on/7 days off and 3 times per week). In the expansion phase at RP2D, patients with endometrial or prostate cancer, as well as those with select tumor types with a PIK3CA mutation, AKT mutation or PTEN loss, were enrolled. Patients were evaluated for adverse events (AEs), PK parameters, blood glucose and insulin levels, and tumor response. Results The RP2D of GSK2141795 for once-daily dosing is 75 mg. The most common (>10%) treatment-related AEs included diarrhea, fatigue, vomiting, and decreased appetite. Most AEs were low grade. The frequency of hyperglycemia increased with dose; however, at the RP2D, grade 3 hyperglycemia was only reported in 4% of patients and no grade 4 events were observed. PK characteristics were favorable, with a prolonged half-life and low peak-to-trough ratio. There were two partial responses at the RP2D in patients with either a PIK3CA mutation or PTEN loss. Conclusion GSK2141795 was safe and well-tolerated, with clinical activity seen as monotherapy at the RP2D of 75 mg daily. NCT00920257.

Outcomes of patients ≥65 years old with advanced cancer treated on phase I trials at MD ANDERSON CANCER CENTER.

Patients ≥65 years with cancer remain underrepresented in clinical trials, particularly in phase I clinical trials. We analyzed the clinical course of patients ≥65 years treated on phase I clinical trials with particular emphasis on toxicities. We identified 347 consecutive patients ≥65 years with advanced cancer in our phase I clinic from 01/2004-12/2009 and analyzed disease characteristics, toxicities, survival and response. Overall, 251 patients received a targeted agent, of whom 241 (96%) received an investigational, non-FDA-approved drug. Clinical benefit (complete response + partial response + stable disease ≥ 6 months) was noted in 61 patients (18%). Eighty-nine patients (26%) had grade 3/4 toxicity, commonly hematologic, including 6 dose-limiting toxicities and 1 treatment-related death (<0.01%). Median overall survival from first Phase I Clinic visit was 8.8 months (95% CI: 7.8-10.6); median time to treatment failure was 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.8-2.1). Multivariable analyses revealed 4 indicators of lack of clinical benefit (liver metastases, performance status [PS] >1, prior radiation, ≥5 prior treatments; p <0.0001). Patients age 70-79 years had a greater risk of grade 3/4 toxicities when treated with combinations (≥2 drugs) compared to monotherapy (p = 0.006). Predictors of shorter time to treatment failure and overall survival included PS >1, thrombocytosis, >2 metastatic sites, and elevated lactate dehydrogenase (p <0.05). Our results suggest that phase I clinical trials are well tolerated in patients ≥65 years. Additionally, we identified risk factors that may facilitate patient selection for clinical trial participation.

Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of Pilaralisib (SAR245408, XL147) in Combination with Paclitaxel and Carboplatin in Patients with Solid Tumors.

LESSONS LEARNED: Despite involvement of PI3K pathway activation in tumorigenesis of solid tumors, single-agent PI3K inhibitors have shown modest clinical activity.Preclinical evidence suggests that combining PI3K pathway inhibitors and chemotherapy can enhance antitumor effects.In patients with solid tumors, the PI3K inhibitor pilaralisib had a favorable safety profile but did not enhance the antitumor activity of paclitaxel plus carboplatin.Further clinical evaluation is warranted to identify effective combination strategies with PI3K pathway inhibitors. BACKGROUND: Pilaralisib (SAR245408) is an oral, pan-class I phosphoinositide 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitor. This phase I dose-escalation study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and pharmacodynamics of pilaralisib in capsule and tablet formulations, administered in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: A 3 + 3 design was used. Pilaralisib was administered once daily (QD); paclitaxel (up to 175 mg/m2) and carboplatin (up to area under the curve [AUC] of 6) were administered on day 1 of 21-day cycles. An MTD expansion cohort of patients with endometrial carcinoma was included. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients were enrolled. Six patients (10.3%) had dose-limiting toxicities, of which only rash (two patients, 3.4%) occurred in more than one patient. The MTD of pilaralisib tablets in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin was determined to be 200 mg QD. The most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) of any grade were neutropenia (67.2%) and thrombocytopenia (67.2%). PK data showed no interaction between pilaralisib and paclitaxel/carboplatin. Tumor tissue showed moderate inhibition of PI3K and mitogen-activated protein kinase (MAPK) pathways. Seven of 52 evaluable patients had a partial response (PR; 13.5%). CONCLUSION: Pilaralisib had a favorable safety profile but did not enhance the antitumor activity of paclitaxel plus carboplatin in solid tumors. The Oncologist 2017;22:377-378.

Phase 1 study of APTO-253 HCl, an inducer of KLF4, in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors.

INTRODUCTION: This phase I, multicenter, open-label, single-arm, dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics and antitumor activity of APTO-253, an inducer of the transcription factor KLF4, in adults with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: APTO-253 was administered IV on days 1 and 2, and 15 and 16 of each 28 day cycle; the dose were escalated from 20 to 387 mg/m(2) in 9 cohorts until DLT was observed. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were treated on this trial (50 % colon cancer, 22 % other gastrointenstinal malignancies and 18 % non-small cell lung cancer). Fatigue was the only drug-related treatment-emergent adverse event to occur in >10 % of patients. Dose-limiting toxicities of hypersensitivity reaction and transient hypotension despite prophylaxis occurred at 387 mg/m(2) which led to identification of 298 mg/m(2) as the MTD. Only 1 patient had any drug-related treatment-emergent grade 3 adverse event at or below 229 mg/m(2). A total of 21 patients underwent at least one restaging after 2 cycles; 11 patients discontinued prior to the end of cycle 2 due to adverse events (9) or disease progression (2). The best overall response was stable disease (SD) in 5 of these 21 (23.8 %) with durations ranging from 3.6 to 8.4 months. CONCLUSION: APTO-253 was well tolerated at the Phase 2 recommended dose and produced evidence of antitumor activity in the form of stable disease in patients with advanced solid tumors. Based on the drug levels achieved and the lower frequency of treatment-emergent adverse events encountered, 229 mg/m(2) was selected as the recommended Phase 2 dose. Overall APTO-253 was found to be well tolerated and to have favorable pharmacokinetics, and treatment was associated with stable disease in 5 of 21 (24 %) of patients with far advanced solid tumors.

A phase I trial of combination trastuzumab, lapatinib, and bevacizumab in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: Preclinical data indicate that combination HER2-directed and anti-VEGF therapy may bypass resistance to trastuzumab. A phase I trial was performed to assess safety, activity, and correlates. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced, refractory malignancy were enrolled (modified 3 + 3 design with expansions for responding tumor types). Patients received lapatinib daily for 21 days, and bevacizumab and trastuzumab every 3 weeks. Correlates included HER2 extracellular domain levels (ECD) and single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs). RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were treated (median = four prior systemic therapies). The most common related adverse events ≥ grade 2 were diarrhea (n = 33, 35 %) and hypertension (n = 10, 11 %). The recommended phase 2 dose was trastuzumab 6 mg/m(2) (loading = 8 mg/m(2)) and bevacizumab 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks, with lapatinib 1,250 mg daily (full FDA-approved dose of each drug). One patient (1 %) achieved a complete response (CR); eight (9 %), a partial response (PR) (includes breast (n = 7, one of which was HER2 2+ by IHC) and salivary ductal carcinoma (n = 1); and 14 (15 %), stable disease (SD) ≥6 months (total SD ≥ 6 months/PR/CR =23 (25 %). All patients with PR/CR received prior trastuzumab +/- lapatinib. SD ≥ 6 months/PR/CR rate and time to treatment failure (TTF) correlated with elevated baseline HER2 ECD (N = 75 patients tested) but not with HER2 SNPs. CONCLUSIONS: Combination trastuzumab, lapatinib, and bevacizumab was well-tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced malignancy.

Dual antiangiogenic inhibition: a phase I dose escalation and expansion trial targeting VEGF-A and VEGFR in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Angiogenesis plays a pivotal role in tumor growth and metastasis. Sorafenib, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR), combined with bevacizumab, a monoclonal antibody to vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF-A), would vertically inhibit VEGF/VEGFR signaling. A phase I trial was performed to assess safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and clinical correlates. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapy were eligible. In cohorts of escalating doses, patients received sorafenib daily for 28 days and bevacizumab every two weeks. Clinical correlates included VEGF polymorphisms. Expansion cohorts of responding tumor types were enrolled. RESULTS: One hundred fifteen patients were treated, and the MTD was identified as 200 mg twice daily sorafenib and 5 mg/kg bevacizumab every two weeks. Median number of prior therapies was four. Twenty-nine patients (25 %) achieved stable disease ≥6 months; six patients (5 %) achieved a partial response (total SD ≥ 6 months/PR=35 (30 %)). 76 patients (66 %) experienced adverse events of grade 2 or higher, most commonly hand and foot syndrome (n = 27, 24 %) and hypertension (n = 24, 21 %). Dose-limiting toxicity occurred in eight patients (7 %), and 45 patients (39 %) required dose reduction for toxicity. Grade 3 and 4 hypertension was associated with longer time to treatment failure, overall survival, and higher response rate. CONCLUSIONS: Combination sorafenib and bevacizumab was well-tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced solid tumors.

Xilonix, a novel true human antibody targeting the inflammatory cytokine interleukin-1 alpha, in non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients were treated as part of a Phase I dose escalation and expansion study evaluating a true human monoclonal antibody targeting IL-1α (Xilonix), which is intended to modulate the malignant phenotype-inhibiting tumor growth, spread and offering relief of symptoms. METHODS: Sixteen NSCLC patients were included. Patients failed a median of 4 chemotherapy regimens, including 10/16 failing anti-EGFR therapy. Disease progression was evaluated using a multi-modal approach: tumor response, patient reported outcomes (EORTC-QLQC30), and lean body mass (LBM). Patients received infusions every 2 or 3 weeks until progression, and were followed 24 months to assess survival. RESULTS: There were no infusion reactions, dose-limiting toxicities, or deaths due to therapy. Albeit not statistically significant, there was a trend in IL-6 (-2.6 ± 18.5 (0.1 [-2.8-2.4]), platelet counts (-11 ± 54 (-4[-36.0-1.0]), CRP (-3.3 ± 30.2 (0.4 [-10.7-1.8]) and LBM (1.0 ± 2.5 (0.4 [-0.5-2.6]). Self-reported outcomes revealed reductions in pain, fatigue and improvement in appetite. Median survival was 7.6 (IQR 4.4-11.5) months, stratification based on prior anti-EGFR therapy revealed a median survival of 9.4 months (IQR 7.6-12.5) for those pretreated (N = 10) versus a survival of 4.8 months (IQR 4.3-5.7) for those without (N = 6, logrank p = 0.187). CONCLUSION: Xilonix was well tolerated, with gains in LBM and improvement in symptoms suggesting a clinically important response. Although not statistically significant, the survival outcomes observed for patients with and without prior anti-EGFR therapy raises intriguing questions about the potential synergy of IL-1α blockade and anti-EGFR therapy. Further study for this agent in NSCLC is warranted.

Dose-finding study of hepatic arterial infusion of irinotecan-based treatment in patients with advanced cancers metastatic to the liver.

BACKGROUND: Liver metastases are associated with a poor prognosis. We investigated the use of hepatic arterial infusion (HAI) of irinotecan combination therapy in patients with liver metastases. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with histologically confirmed advanced cancer with liver metastases that was refractory to standard therapy were eligible. A standard "3 + 3" phase I study design was used to determine the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Three cohorts were evaluated: HAI of irinotecan with systemic intravenous (IV) (a) bevacizumab, (b) oxaliplatin and bevacizumab, or (c) bevacizumab and cetuximab. RESULTS: From October 2009 through December 2013, 98 patients with various tumor types were enrolled (median age, 62 years, range, 34-85; and median number of prior therapies, 4, range, 1-11). In cohorts A and C, dose escalation continued until the highest dose level-considered the MTD-was reached. In cohort B, dose escalation continued until dose level 3, and dose level 2 was considered the MTD. Rates of grade 3/4 adverse events were as follows: diarrhea, 8 %; fatigue, 4 %; neutropenia, 4 %; thrombocytopenia, 2 %; and skin rash, 2 %. Seventy-seven patients were evaluable for response. Partial response was noted in 5 (6.5 %) patients (neuroendocrine cancer, n = 2; CRC, n = 2; NSCLC, n = 1); and stable disease ≥ 6 months in 17 (22.1 %) patients (CRC, n = 13; breast, n = 1; neuroendocrine, n = 1; NSCLC, n = 1; pancreatic, n = 1). CONCLUSIONS: HAI irinotecan in combination with bevacizumab; oxaliplatin plus bevacizumab; or cetuximab plus bevacizumab was safe and may be a treatment option for selected patients with advanced cancer and liver involvement.

Phase I combination of pazopanib and everolimus in PIK3CA mutation positive/PTEN loss patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapy.

PURPOSE: Combining agents that block both the VEGF and PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathways may be synergistic. We explored a novel dosing schedule to assess safety, toxicity and activity in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with refractory solid tumors were enrolled in a modified 3 + 3 Phase I dose escalation study to determine dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) and the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of a combination of everolimus (mTOR inhibitor) and pazopanib (tyrosine kinase inhibitor with anti-VEGF activity). An expansion cohort selected for patients with molecular alterations in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway. RESULTS: Sixty-two patients were enrolled; median age was 60 years; 29 were women. The MTD was pazopanib 600 mg every other day (QOD) alternating with everolimus 10 mg PO QOD. DLTs were grade 3 thrombocytopenia and creatinine elevation. Most common toxicities of any grade were thrombocytopenia, transaminitis, leukopenia/neutropenia and lipid abnormalities. Among 52 patients evaluable for response, the clinical benefit rate (CBR) was 27 % (14/52) including four partial responses (PR), and 10 stable disease (SD) ≥6 months. 26 of 45 patients evaluated for molecular alterations had at least one alteration in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway. CBR in patients with a matched alteration was 27 % (7/26) versus 26 % (5/19) for patients without an alteration (p = 0.764). However, 64% of those with CBR and molecular testing done for alteration in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway were positive. CONCLUSION: Combination treatment with pazopanib and everolimus was well tolerated and demonstrated activity in solid tumors. Further exploration of this combination and molecular correlation with treatment outcomes is warranted.

Multiple gene aberrations and breast cancer: lessons from super-responders.

BACKGROUND: The presence of multiple molecular aberrations in patients with breast cancer may correlate with worse outcomes. CASE PRESENTATIONS: We performed in-depth molecular analysis of patients with estrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, hormone therapy-refractory breast cancer, who achieved partial or complete responses when treated with anastrozole and everolimus. Tumors were analyzed using a targeted next generation sequencing (NGS) assay in a Clinical Laboratory Improvement Amendments laboratory. Genomic libraries were captured for 3,230 exons in 182 cancer-related genes plus 37 introns from 14 genes often rearranged in cancer and sequenced to high coverage. Patients received anastrozole (1 g PO daily) and everolimus (5 or 10 mg PO daily). Thirty-two patients with breast cancer were treated on study and 5 (16 %) achieved a partial or complete response. Primary breast tissue was available for NGS testing in three of the responders (partial response with progression free survival of 11 and 14 months, respectively; complete response with progression free survival of 9+ months). The following molecular aberrations were observed: PTEN loss by immunohistochemistry, CCDN1 and FGFR1 amplifications, and PRKDC re-arrangement (NGS) (patient #1); PIK3CA and PIK3R1 mutations, and CCDN1, FGFR1, MYC amplifications (patient #2); TP53 mutation, CCNE1, IRS2 and MCL1 amplifications (patient #3). Some (but not all) of these aberrations converge on the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway, perhaps accounting for response. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with estrogen receptor-positive breast cancer can achieve significant responses on a combination of anastrozole and everolimus, even in the presence of multiple molecular aberrations. Further study of next generation sequencing-profiled tumors for convergence and resistance pathways is warranted.

Next generation sequencing of exceptional responders with BRAF-mutant melanoma: implications for sensitivity and resistance.

BACKGROUND: Patients with BRAF mutation-positive advanced melanoma respond well to matched therapy with BRAF or MEK inhibitors, but often quickly develop resistance. METHODS: Tumor tissue from ten patients with advanced BRAF mutation-positive melanoma who achieved partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) on BRAF and/or MEK inhibitors was analyzed using next generation sequencing (NGS) assay. Genomic libraries were captured for 3230 exons in 182 cancer-related genes plus 37 introns from 14 genes often rearranged in cancer and sequenced to average median depth of 734X with 99% of bases covered >100X. RESULTS: Three of the ten patients (median number of prior therapies = 2) attained prolonged CR (duration = 23.6+ to 28.7+ months); seven patients achieved either a PR or a short-lived CR. One patient who achieved CR ongoing at 28.7+ months and had tissue available close to the time of initiating BRAF inhibitor therapy had only a BRAF mutation. Abnormalities in addition to BRAF mutation found in other patients included: mutations in NRAS, APC and NF1; amplifications in BRAF, aurora kinase A, MYC, MITF and MET; deletions in CDKN2A/B and PAX5; and, alterations in RB1 and ATM. Heterogeneity between patients and molecular evolution within patients was noted. CONCLUSION: NGS identified potentially actionable DNA alterations that could account for resistance in patients with BRAF mutation-positive advanced melanoma who achieved a PR or CR but whose tumors later progressed. A subset of patients with advanced melanoma may harbor only a BRAF mutation and achieve a durable CR on BRAF pathway inhibitors.

Olanzapine for cachexia in patients with advanced cancer: an exploratory study of effects on weight and metabolic cytokines.

BACKGROUND: Olanzapine is used for treatment of psychiatric conditions but causes substantial weight gain. This study assessed safety, efficacy, and changes in metabolic cytokines associated with olanzapine administration in patients with cachexia due to advanced cancer. METHODS: Patients with cancer-related cachexia were treated with olanzapine (doses ranging from 2.5 to 20 mg daily by mouth). Patients also received anti-neoplastic treatments. Serum samples were collected at baseline and after weeks 1, 2, 4, and 8 for analysis of levels of leptin, growth hormone, ghrelin, and interleukin-6 (IL-6). RESULTS: Of the 39 participants, 31 were evaluable for weight change (N = 6 excluded for new ascites; N = 2, incomplete body weight of data). Toxicities related to olanzapine were somnolence (n = 1), pancreatitis (n = 1), extrapyramidal symptoms (n = 1), and nausea/vomiting (n = 1) (all grade 2). The recommended dose of Olanzapine is 20 mg PO daily for cancer patients (same as FDA approved dose for psychiatric conditions). Samples from 29 patients were eligible for analysis of serum cytokine levels. Mean values of leptin, ghrelin, and growth hormone did not change on treatment, though IL-6 levels increased, perhaps due to tumor progression. There was no association between changes in cytokines and weight. The mean change in slope of weight loss before versus after therapy was 0.24 (95 % CI, -0.08, 0.56; p = 0.13) indicating a trend, albeit not reaching statistical significance, toward attenuation of weight loss. CONCLUSION: Changes in metabolic cytokines and body weight did not correlate. Treatment with olanzapine had only a modest effect in altering the trajectory of weight loss.

MABp1, a first-in-class true human antibody targeting interleukin-1α in refractory cancers: an open-label, phase 1 dose-escalation and expansion study.

BACKGROUND: Inflammation is an important feature of the malignant phenotype and promotes angiogenesis, tumour invasiveness, metastases, and cachexia. We used a first-in-class, monoclonal antibody (MABp1) cloned from a human being to target interleukin-1α, a mediator of chronic inflammation. We aimed to assess the safety and tolerability of MABp1 for interleukin-1α blockade in a refractory cancer population. METHODS: We did an open-label, dose-escalation, and phase 1 study of MABp1 in adults with metastatic cancer at the MD Anderson Clinical Center for Targeted Therapy (Houston, TX, USA). We used a standard 3+3 design to identify the maximum tolerated dose. Patients received MABp1 intravenously once every 3 weeks through four dose levels: 0.25 mg/kg, 0.75 mg/kg, 1.25 mg/kg, and 3.75 mg/kg. After the dose-escalation phase, a second dosing arm was started with dosing every 2 weeks at the maximum tolerated dose. The primary objectives were safety, tolerability, characterisation of the pharmacokinetic profile, and identification of the recommended phase 2 dose. Secondary endpoints included pharmacodynamic effects and antitumour activity. All patients who received at least one dose of MABp1 were included in the safety analyses. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01021072. FINDINGS: Between March 15, 2010, and July 30, 2012, 52 patients with metastatic cancer (18 tumour types) received anti-interleukin-1α monotherapy in dose-escalation and expansion groups. MABp1 was well tolerated, with no dose-limiting toxicities or immunogenicity. Thus, the recommended phase 2 dose was concluded to be 3.75 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Pharmacokinetic data were consistent at all dose levels and showed no evidence of accumulation or increased clearance of MABp1 at increasing doses. For 42 assessable patients, median plasma interleukin-6 concentrations had decreased from baseline to week 8 by a median of 2.7 pg/mL (IQR -12.6 to 3.0; p=0.08). Of the 34 patients restaged, one patient had a partial response and ten had stable disease. 30 patients were assessable for change in lean body mass, which increased by a mean of 1.02 kg (SD 2.24; p=0.02) between baseline and week 8. The most common adverse events possibly related to the study drug were proteinuria (n=11; 21%), nausea (7; 13%), and fatigue (7; 13%). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events (regardless of relation to treatment) were fatigue (3; 6%), dyspnoea (2; 4%), and headache (2; 4%). Two patients (4%) had grade 5 events (death due to disease progression), which were unrelated to treatment. INTERPRETATION: MABp1 was well tolerated, no dose-limiting toxicities were experienced in this study, and disease control was observed. Further study of MABp1 anti-interleukin-1α antibody therapy for advanced stage cancer is warranted.

Dual inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor pathway: a phase 1 trial evaluating bevacizumab and AZD2171 (cediranib) in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: The current study was conducted to evaluate the safety and biological activity of dual inhibition of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway with combined bevacizumab and cediranib (a VEGF receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor). METHODS: This was a 3 + 3 dose escalation study in patients with advanced solid tumors. Cediranib was given orally daily for 21 days and bevacizumab intravenously every 2 weeks. Pharmacokinetics and correlates (nitric oxide synthase, nitrate oxide, and circulating tumor cells) were assessed. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were treated. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) (grade 3-4; graded according to the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria of Adverse Events [version 3.0]) observed included 1 patient with chest pain, 1 patient with fatigue, 2 patients with thrombocytopenia, 3 patients with hypertension (1 with intracranial hemorrhage), and 1 patient with grade 5 hemoptysis. Moreover, 2 patients presented with grade 3 intracranial bleeding beyond the DLT window. Dose level 2 (cediranib at a dose of 20 mg/day and bevacizumab at a dose of 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks) was selected as the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D); 17 patients were treated at dose level 2 with 1 DLT and no intracranial bleeding or severe hypertension reported. Pharmacokinetics of cediranib at dose level 3 demonstrated a 46% to 77% increase in area under the curve (0-24 hours) on cycle 1 day 1 compared with historical controls. Four patients attained partial remissions: inflammatory breast cancer (-54%), basal cell carcinoma (-33%), alveolar soft part sarcoma (-33%), and synovial sarcoma (-32%). Patients with a lower circulating tumor cell count (< 30) at the predose period had a longer time to tumor progression (P = .024, log-rank test). CONCLUSIONS: Cediranib at a dose of 20 mg/day and bevacizumab at a dose of 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks was found to be the RP2D. Activity in several tumor types was noted. Central nervous system bleeding and severe hypertension were observed at doses above the RP2D.

Phase I dose-escalating study of TAS-106 in combination with carboplatin in patients with solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: TAS-106 was designed to inhibit RNA synthesis by blocking RNA polymerases I, II, and III. METHODS: This was a single-center, open-label, phase I study to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and biologic effects of the combination of TAS-106 and carboplatin, following a standard 3 + 3 design. This phase I trial was comprised of a regimen of a 60-min IV infusion of carboplatin on day 1 of each 21-day cycle followed by a 24-h infusion of TAS-106, also on day 1 of each cycle. RESULTS: 39 patients were treated (21 male, 18 female, median age 62 years, range 21-80 years). Median number of prior therapies was 4. Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) was 3 mg/m(2) TAS-106 with AU 4 carboplatin. Dose-limiting toxicities were neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, with and without growth factor support. While no patients achieved a complete or partial response, four patients had stable disease lasting ≥4 months, including one patient each with ovarian, non-small cell lung, basal cell and colorectal cancer. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, the combination of TAS-106 and carboplatin was well-tolerated, and further studies in non-small cell lung and ovarian cancer are warranted to assess the efficacy of this drug combination.

Exploratory study of carboplatin plus the copper-lowering agent trientine in patients with advanced malignancies.

PURPOSE: Preclinical data showed that trientine, a copper-lowering agent, re-sensitized cancer cells to carboplatin through enhanced human copper transporter 1 (hCtr1) -mediated platinum uptake. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We studied carboplatin and trientine in patients (n = 55; 45 who had failed platinum) with advanced malignancies (Phase I, modified 3 + 3 design). RESULTS: The most common cancers were head and neck (n = 13), non-small cell lung (n = 10) and epithelial ovarian (n = 8). The median number of prior regimens was four. No dose-limiting toxicity or treatment-related deaths were observed at doses up to carboplatin AUC 6 given with trientine. Eight patients achieved stable disease (SD) ≥ 6 months (six platinum failures) and one patient with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer, partial response (PR) (total SD ≥ 6 months/PR = 9, 16.4 %). The mean nadir serum copper level in the nine patients with SD ≥ 6 months/PR was 0.55 µg/mL (95 % CI, 0.34-0.75) versus 1.22 µg/mL (95 % CI, 1.02-1.42) (p < 0.001) in 38 tested patients with progression. In patients who maintained their ceruloplasmin (major copper-carrying protein) levels at 5-15 mg/dL (n = 9), the median progression-free and overall survivals were 9.2 and 15.2 months versus 1.9 (p = 0.001) and 5.7 months (p = 0.033) in patients who did not (n = 38), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of a copper-lowering agent with carboplatin was well tolerated and associated with antitumor activity, especially in patients in whom copper and/or ceruloplasmin levels were lowered. Further investigation of this strategy for reversing platinum resistance is warranted.

Phase I clinical trial of lenalidomide in combination with sorafenib in patients with advanced cancer.

BACKGROUND: Preclinical data have shown that lenalidomide and sorafenib target endothelial cells, inhibiting growth of ocular melanoma cells in a xenograft model. We conducted a Phase I study of lenalidomide and sorafenib in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: During the escalation phase, lenalidomide (days 1-21) and sorafenib (days 1-28) were given orally once daily at the following respective doses: level 1 (10 mg, 200 mg); level 2 (10 mg, 400 mg); level 3 (20 mg, 400 mg); and level 4 (25 mg, 400 mg) (1 cycle = 28 days). A "3 + 3" study design was used. RESULTS: Forty-one patients were treated (median age: 50 years). The most common diagnoses were adenoid cystic carcinoma (N = 9), ovarian adenocarcinoma (N = 7), and melanoma (N = 6); 142 cycles (median: 3) were administered. No dose-limiting toxicities were noted. The maximum tested dose (dose level 4) was used in the expansion phase. Grade 3-4 treatment-related toxicities were neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, skin rash, and thromboembolism. Of 38 patients who were evaluable for response, stable disease (SD) was noted in 53 % of patients (SD ≥6 months: 16 %). Tumor types with SD ≥ 6 months were as follows: ocular melanoma, 2/2 (100 %); other melanoma, 1/4 (25 %); adenoid cystic carcinoma, 2/9 (22 %); and ovarian cancer, 1/6 (17 %). The median progression-free survival duration was 3.5 months (95 % CI, 1.9-5.0), and the median overall survival duration was 12.3 months (95 % CI, 10.1-14.5). CONCLUSIONS: Lenalidomide and sorafenib was well tolerated and associated with disease stabilization for ≥6 months in patients with melanoma, adenoid cystic carcinoma, and ovarian adenocarcinoma.

Evaluation of a novel blood pressure scoring method and its association with clinical response in cancer patients treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor therapy.

BACKGROUND: The purposes of this study were to establish a novel blood pressure (BP) scoring method and to correlate it with clinical response in advanced cancer patients treated with anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapies. METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed data for 368 patients from 23 clinical trials that included at least one anti-VEGF agent. We determined BP scores using the traditional Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) version 4.0 and our novel method that considers both BP readings and number of anti-hypertensive medications the patient received. BP scores were categorized at baseline and four months. Logistic regression analysis correlated elevated scores with clinical response. Agreement between the CTCAE and the new method was assessed. RESULTS: Under the new BP scoring method, partial response rates were 20 % in patients with an elevated score at four months versus 6 % in patients without elevated score (P < 0.001). When adjusted for tumor type, age, sex, history of anti-VEGF treatment, and number of anti-VEGF treatments, elevated BP under the new scoring method had an odds ratio of 3.8 (95 % confidence interval [CI]: 1.8, 8.2; P < 0.001). The kappa statistic for agreement between the CTCAE and new scoring methods was 0.57 (95 % CI: 0.47, 0.67; P < 0.001), indicating significant concordance. CONCLUSION: Using the novel scoring method, an increase in BP scores was a marker for favorable clinical response in patients who received anti-VEGF treatment. This new method ultimately provides information with regard to clinical tumor response over and above that provided by the CTCAE scoring method.