A phase Ib study of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept followed by a phase II single-arm expansion cohort in chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC) have a poor prognosis and limited therapeutic options. In this phase Ib/II clinical trial, we established the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RPTD) for the combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept, and then we evaluated the efficacy of the combination in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC. METHODS: All patients were required to have a Karnofsky Performance Status > 70% and adequate organ function. The phase Ib dose escalation cohort included patients with advanced solid tumors who had progressed on all standard therapies. Using a standard 3 + 3 design, we identified the MTD and RPTD for the combination. Fifty patients with metastatic CRC who had progressed on or were intolerant of a fluoropyrimidine, oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and bevacizumab were then enrolled in a single-arm phase II expansion cohort, and were treated at the RPTD. Prior EGFR antibody therapy was required for subjects with RAS wildtype tumors. The primary endpoint for the expansion cohort was progression-free survival (PFS) at two months. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: A total of 63 patients were enrolled and evaluable for toxicity (13 dose escalation; 50 expansion). The MTD and RPTD were: capecitabine 850 mg/m2, P.O. bid, days 1-14, and ziv-aflibercept 6 mg/kg I.V., day 1, of each 21-day cycle. In the expansion cohort, 72% of patients were progression-free at two months (95% confidence interval [CI], 60-84%). Median PFS and OS were 3.9 months (95% CI, 2.3-4.5) and 7.1 months (95% CI: 5.8-10.0), respectively. Among all patients evaluable for toxicity, the most common treatment related adverse events (all grade [%]; grade ≥ 3 [%]) included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (41%; 6%), hypertension (33%; 22%), and mucositis (19%; 5%). RNA was isolated from archived tumor specimens and gene expression analyses revealed no association between angiogenic biomarkers and clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION: The combination of capecitabine and ziv-aflibercept at the RPTD demonstrated acceptable safety and tolerability. PFS at 2 months in patients with chemotherapy refractory metastatic CRC was significantly greater than that in historical controls, indicating that this combination warrants further study. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This clinical trial was registered in the www.clinicaltrials.gov system as NCT01661972 on July 31, 2012.

Validation of histone deacetylase 3 as a therapeutic target in castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Whereas the androgen receptor (AR) signaling axis remains a therapeutic target in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC), the emergence of AR mutations and splice variants as mechanisms underlying resistance to contemporary inhibitors of this pathway highlights the need for new therapeutic approaches to target this disease. Of significance in this regard is the considerable preclinical data, indicating that histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors may have utility in the treatment of CRPC. However, the results of clinical studies using HDAC inhibitors (directed against HDAC1, 2, 3, and 8) in CRPC are equivocal, a result that some have attributed to their ability to induce an epithelial to mesenchymal transition (EMT) and neuroendocrine differentiation. We posited that it might be possible to uncouple the beneficial effects of HDAC inhibitors on AR signaling from their undesired activities by targeting specific HDACs as opposed to using the pan-inhibitor strategy that has been employed to date. METHODS: The relative abilities of pan- and selective-Class I HDAC inhibitors to attenuate AR-mediated target gene expression and proliferation were assessed in several prostate cancer cell lines. Small interfering RNA (siRNA)-mediated knockdown approaches were used to confirm the importance of of HDAC 1, 2, and 3 expression in these processes. Further, the ability of each HDAC inhibitor to induce the expression of EMT markers (RNA and protein) and EMT-like phenotype(s) (migration) were also assessed. The anti-tumor efficacy of a HDAC3-selective inhibitor, RGFP966, was compared to the pan-HDAC inhibitor Suberoylanilide Hydroxamic Acid (SAHA) in the 22Rv1 xenograft model. RESULTS: Using genetic and pharmacological approaches we demonstrated that a useful inhibition of AR transcriptional activity, absent the induction of EMT, could be achieved by specifically inhibiting HDAC3. Significantly, we also determined that HDAC3 inhibitors blocked the activity of the constitutively active AR V7-splice variant and inhibited the growth of xenograft tumors expressing this protein. CONCLUSIONS: Our studies provide strong rationale for the near-term development of specific HDAC3 inhibitors for the treatment of CRPC.