Liposomal irinotecan (HR070803) in combination with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with advanced solid tumors: a phase 1b dose-escalation and expansion study.

This phase 1b study aimed to evaluate the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of HR070803, a novel nanoliposomal formulation of irinotecan, in combination with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with pretreated advanced solid tumors. This study consisted of dose-escalation and expansion stages. Dose escalation was performed with a traditional 3 + 3 design; patients received intravenous infusion of HR070803 from 60 to 80 mg/m2, followed by leucovorin (200 mg/m2) and 5-fluorouracil (2000 mg/m2) every 2 weeks. In the expansion stage, patients received treatments at selected tolerable dose. Fifteen patients received treatments at 60 mg/m2 (n = 12) and 80 mg/m2 (n = 3). DLTs occurred in 2 patients at 80 mg/m2 (grade 2 neutropenia that resulted in a dose delay of ≥ 7 days, n = 1; grade 3 febrile neutropenia, n = 1). The MTD was determined to be 60 mg/m2. The most frequent HR070803related adverse events included anorexia, leukopenia, neutropenia, nausea, fatigue, and diarrhea. SN-38, the active metabolite of irinotecan, exhibited lower maximum plasma concentrations and a prolonged terminal half-life when irinotecan was administered via nanoliposome compared to conventional injection. Overall, 4 patients achieved a partial response (confirmed, n = 2), and 9 had stable disease. The MTD of HR070803 was 60 mg/m2 when infused with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin. Nanoliposomal encapsulation modified the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and SN-38. HR070803 with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin demonstrated a manageable safety profile and promising antitumor efficacy in advanced solid tumors. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT05086848. Retrospectively registered on Oct. 12, 2021.

Rituximab, gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in relapsed or refractory indolent and mantle cell lymphoma: results of a multicenter phase I/II-study of the German Low Grade Lymphoma Study Group.

Rituximab, gemcitabine and oxaliplatin (R-GemOx) has demonstrated to be effective and safe in lymphoma patients. We aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of oxaliplatin in combination with rituximab and gemcitabine and to explore the efficacy and safety of R-GemOx in relapsed or refractory (r/r) indolent and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL). In this single-arm, phase I/II trial, we enrolled 55 patients with r/r indolent lymphoma and MCL not suitable for autologous stem-cell transplantation. Patients received 4 cycles of R-GemOx. In the dose escalation group, 70 mg/m2 of oxaliplatin was applied and interindividually increased by 10 mg/m2 until the MTD was reached together with fixed doses of rituximab and gemcitabine. At the oxaliplatin MTD, an extension cohort was opened. Primary aim was to detect an overall response rate (ORR) greater than 65% (α = 0.05). Oxaliplatin 70 mg/m2 (MTD) was chosen for the extension cohort after 3 of 6 patients experienced a DLT at 80 mg/m2. Among 46 patients evaluable for the efficacy analysis ORR was 72% (33/46), missing the primary aim of the study (p = 0.21). After a median follow-up of 7.9 years, median PFS and OS were 1.0 and 2.1 years. Most frequent grade ≥ 3 adverse events were cytopenias. R-GemOx induces decent response rates in r/r indolent lymphoma and MCL, though novel targeted therapies have largely replaced chemotherapy in the relapse setting. Particularly in MCL, R-GemOx might be an alternative option in late relapses or as bridging to CAR-T-cells. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov on Aug 4th, 2009, number NCT00954005.

Determining the maximum tolerated dose of paclitaxel combined with fixed dose of cisplatin for hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy in ovarian cancer: A multicenter phase I trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of paclitaxel combined with a fixed dose of cisplatin (75 mg/m2) delivered via hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) to patients with ovarian cancer. METHODS: This multicenter Phase I trial employed a Bayesian Optimal Interval (BOIN) design. The MTD was determined to have a target dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate of 25%. The starting dose was 175 mg/m2. The Data and Safety Monitoring Board made decisions regarding dose escalation or de-escalation in increments of 25 mg/m2 for subsequent patient cohorts, up to a maximum sample size of 30 or 12 patients treated at a given dose. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients participated in this study. Among the three evaluable patients who received 150 mg/m2 paclitaxel, no DLTs were observed. Among the 12 evaluable patients who received 175 mg/m2 paclitaxel, two reported DLTs: one had grade 4 neutropenia and one had grade 4 anemia, neutropenia, and leukopenia. Four of the six evaluable patients who received 200 mg/m2 paclitaxel reported DLTs: one patient had grade 4 diarrhea, one had grade 3 kidney injury, and two had grade 4 anemia. The isotonic estimate of the DLT rate in the 175 mg/m2 dose group was 0.17 (95% confidence interval, 0.02-0.42), and this dose was selected as the MTD. CONCLUSION: Paclitaxel, when combined with a fixed dose of cisplatin (75 mg/m2), can be safely administered intraperitoneally at a dose of 175 mg/m2 in patients with ovarian cancer who received HIPEC (43 °C, 90 min) following cytoreductive surgery.

Hydroxyurea at escalated dose versus fixed low-dose hydroxyurea in adults with sickle cell disease.

Hydroxyurea reduces the frequency of vaso-occlusive complications, increases hemoglobin, and decreases mortality in sickle cell disease (SCD). Although current guidelines recommend escalation to maximum tolerated dose (MTD), the use of fixed low-dose hydroxyurea is common in low-resource countries. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the efficacy of escalated doses versus fixed low-dose of hydroxyurea in adults with SCD. Nine studies were included in the quantitative synthesis, four evaluating fixed low-dose and five evaluating escalated doses of hydroxyurea. Average daily doses of hydroxyurea in the fixed low-dose and escalated dose studies were ~10 and 22 mg/kg, respectively. There was no difference in the estimate of vaso-occlusive crisis rate between escalated and fixed low-dose studies (p = .73). The mean difference in hemoglobin from baseline to follow-up was greater for fixed low-dose than escalated dose studies (1.07 g/dL vs. 0.54 g/dL, p = .01). No difference was seen in the mean estimate of fetal hemoglobin. Despite limited eligible studies and substantial heterogeneity of effect between the studies for several outcomes, there appears to be clinical equipoise regarding the most appropriate hydroxyurea dosing regimen in adults with SCD. Controlled studies of hydroxyurea at MTD versus fixed low-dose in adults with SCD are required.

An extended Bayesian semi-mechanistic dose-finding design for phase I oncology trials using pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic information.

We propose a model-based, semi-mechanistic dose-finding (SDF) design for phase I oncology trials that incorporates pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic (PK/PD) information when modeling the dose-toxicity relationship. This design is motivated by a phase Ib/II clinical trial of anti-CD20/CD3 T cell therapy in non-Hodgkin lymphoma patients; it extends a recently proposed SDF model framework by incorporating measurements of a PD biomarker relevant to the primary dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). We propose joint Bayesian modeling of the PK, PD, and DLT outcomes. Our extensive simulation studies show that on average the proposed design outperforms some common phase I trial designs, including modified toxicity probability interval (mTPI) and Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) designs, the continual reassessment method (CRM), as well as an SDF design assuming a latent PD biomarker (SDF-woPD), in terms of the percentage of correct selection of maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and average number of patients allocated to MTD, under a variety of dose-toxicity scenarios. When the working PK model and the class of link function between the cumulative PD effect and DLT probability is correctly specified, the proposed design also yields better estimated dose-toxicity curves than CRM and SDF-woPD. Our sensitivity analyses suggest that the design's performance is reasonably robust to prior specification for the parameter in the link function, as well as misspecification of the PK model and class of the link function.

The patient perspective on dose optimization for anticancer treatments: A new era of cancer drug dosing-Challenging the "more is better" dogma.

The Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative, a patient-led effort advocating for a paradigm shift in determining cancer drug dosing strategies, pioneers a departure from traditional oncology drug dosing practices. Historically, oncology drug dosing relies on identifying the maximum tolerated dose through phase 1 dose escalation methodology, favoring higher dosing for greater efficacy, often leading to higher toxicity. However, this approach is not universally applicable, especially for newer treatments like targeted therapies and immunotherapies. Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative challenges this "more is better" ethos, particularly as metastatic breast cancer patients themselves, as they not only seek longevity but also a high quality of life since most metastatic breast cancer patients stay on treatment for the rest of their lives. Surveying 1221 metastatic breast cancer patients and 119 oncologists revealed an evident need for flexible dosing strategies, advocating personalized care discussions based on patient attributes. The survey results also demonstrated an openness toward flexible dosing and a willingness from both patients and clinicians to discuss dosing as part of their care. Patient-centered dosing emphasizes dialogue between clinicians and patients, delving into treatment efficacy-toxicity trade-offs. Similarly, clinical trial advocacy for multiple dosing regimens encourages adaptive strategies, moving away from strict adherence to maximum tolerated dose, supported by recent research in optimizing drug dosages. Recognizing the efficacy-effectiveness gap between clinical trials and real-world practice, Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative underscores the necessity for patient-centered dosing strategies. A focus on individual patient attributes aligns with initiatives like Project Optimus and Project Renewal, aiming to optimize drug dosages for improved treatment outcomes at both the pre- and post-approval phases. Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative's efforts extend to patient education, providing tools to initiate dosage-related conversations with physicians. In addition, it emphasizes physician-patient dialogues and post-marketing studies as essential in determining optimal dosing and refining drug regimens. A dose-finding paradigm prioritizing drug safety, tolerability, and efficacy benefits all stakeholders, reducing emergency care needs and missed treatments for patients, aligning with oncologists' and patients' shared goals. Importantly, it represents a win-win scenario across healthcare sectors. In summary, the Patient-Centered Dosing Initiative drives transformative changes in cancer drug dosing, emphasizing patient well-being and personalized care, aiming to enhance treatment outcomes and optimize oncology drug delivery.

Considerations for the development of guidance on dose level selection for developmental and reproductive toxicity studies.

In 2022, the European Chemicals Agency issued advice on the selection of high dose levels for developmental and reproductive toxicity (DART) studies indicating that the highest dose tested should aim to induce clear evidence of reproductive toxicity without excessive toxicity and severe suffering in parental animals. In addition, a recent publication advocated that a 10% decrease in body weight gain should be replaced with a 10% decrease in bodyweight as a criterion for dose adequacy. Experts from the European Centre for Ecotoxicology and Toxicology of Chemicals evaluated these recent developments and their potential impact on study outcomes and interpretation and identified that the advice was not aligned with OECD test guidelines or with humane endpoints guidance. Furthermore, data analysis from DART studies indicated that a 10% decrease in maternal body weight during gestation equates to a 25% decrease in body weight gain, which differs from the consensus of experts at a 2010 ILSI/HESI workshop. Dose selection should be based on a biological approach that considers a range of other factors. Excessive dose levels that cause frank toxicity and overwhelm homeostasis should be avoided as they can give rise to effects that are not relevant to human health assessments.

On the relative conservativeness of Bayesian logistic regression method in oncology dose-finding studies.

The Bayesian logistic regression method (BLRM) is a widely adopted and flexible design for finding the maximum tolerated dose in oncology phase I studies. However, the BLRM design has been criticized in the literature for being overly conservative due to the use of the overdose control rule. Recently, a discussion paper titled "Improving the performance of Bayesian logistic regression model with overall control in oncology dose-finding studies" in Statistics in Medicine has proposed an overall control rule to address the "excessive conservativeness" of the standard BLRM design. In this short communication, we discuss the relative conservativeness of the standard BLRM design and also suggest a dose-switching rule to further enhance its performance.

Reparametrized Firth's Logistic Regressions for Dose-Finding Study With the Biased-Coin Design.

Finding an adequate dose of the drug by revealing the dose-response relationship is very crucial and a challenging problem in the clinical development. The main concerns in dose-finding study are to identify a minimum effective dose (MED) in anesthesia studies and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in oncology clinical trials. For the estimation of MED and MTD, we propose two modifications of Firth's logistic regression using reparametrization, called reparametrized Firth's logistic regression (rFLR) and ridge-penalized reparametrized Firth's logistic regression (RrFLR). The proposed methods are designed by directly reducing the small-sample bias of the maximum likelihood estimate for the parameter of interest. In addition, we develop a method on how to construct confidence intervals for rFLR and RrFLR using profile penalized likelihood. In the up-and-down biased-coin design, numerical studies confirm the superior performance of the proposed methods in terms of the mean squared error, bias, and coverage accuracy of confidence intervals.

First-in-human study of ONO-4578, an antagonist of prostaglandin E2 receptor 4, alone and with nivolumab in solid tumors.

EP4, a prostaglandin E2 receptor, has shown an immunosuppressive activity on cancer cells. This first-in-human study evaluated ONO-4578, a highly selective EP4 antagonist, as monotherapy and in combination with nivolumab in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. A daily dose ranging from 30 mg to 100 mg of ONO-4578 monotherapy and that ranging from 2 mg to 60 mg of ONO-4578 with biweekly nivolumab 240 mg were administered. A total of 31 patients were enrolled, 10 receiving monotherapy and 21 receiving combination therapy. Overall, 26 patients experienced treatment-related adverse events. Dose-limiting toxicities were observed in three patients; one of six patients receiving 100 mg monotherapy developed grade 3 duodenal ulcer and two of six patients receiving 60 mg combination therapy developed either grade 3 erythema multiforme or grade 3 increased amylase and grade 4 increased lipase. One patient with small-cell lung cancer who received 40 mg combination therapy had a partial response, and three patients with monotherapy and six patients with combination therapy had stable disease. Pharmacodynamics analyses showed that ONO-4578 had EP4 antagonistic activity at doses as low as 2 mg. In conclusion, the maximum tolerated dose of ONO-4578 alone or in combination with nivolumab was not reached. ONO-4578 was well tolerated at the tested doses and showed signs of antitumor activity. Considering safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics/pharmacodynamics results, ONO-4578 40 mg daily with nivolumab 240 mg biweekly was selected as the recommended dose for future clinical trials. (Registration: JapicCTI-173,496 and NCT03155061).

Afatinib plus osimertinib in the treatment of osimertinib-resistant non-small cell lung carcinoma: a phase I clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Conquering acquired resistance to osimertinib remains a major challenge in treating patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutation-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Thus, we aimed to determine the safety and efficacy of combination treatment with osimertinib and afatinib for patients with acquired resistance to osimertinib. METHODS: This open-label phase I study was a feasibility study of the combination of afatinib and osimertinib for patients with advanced EGFR-positive NSCLC who had progressive disease after receiving osimertinib. The primary endpoint was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). We enrolled patients who received afatinib at three different dose levels (level 1, 20 mg; level 2, 30 mg; level 3, 40 mg) combined with osimertinib at a standard dose of 80 mg once per day. RESULTS: Thirteen patients were enrolled in this study. The MTD was defined as 30 mg afatinib when combined with daily oral administration of osimertinib (80 mg). The most frequent adverse events were diarrhea (76.9%), anemia (76.9%), and rash (69.2%). Considering the toxicity profiles during all treatment periods, the recommended oral dose of afatinib was determined as 20 mg daily, with an osimertinib dose of 80 mg. For all evaluable patients (n = 12), the response rate was 7.7% and the disease-control rate was 46.2%. CONCLUSION: Combination therapy with osimertinib and afatinib was tolerable; however, the synergistic effect of afatinib with osimertinib may be limited in osimertinib-resistant patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Japan Registry of Clinical Trials ID: jRCTs051180008, registered date: 08/11/2018.

DROID: dose-ranging approach to optimizing dose in oncology drug development.

In the era of targeted therapy, there has been increasing concern about the development of oncology drugs based on the "more is better" paradigm, developed decades ago for chemotherapy. Recently, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) initiated Project Optimus to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development. To accommodate this paradigm shifting, we propose a dose-ranging approach to optimizing dose (DROID) for oncology trials with targeted drugs. DROID leverages the well-established dose-ranging study framework, which has been routinely used to develop non-oncology drugs for decades, and bridges it with established oncology dose-finding designs to optimize the dose of oncology drugs. DROID consists of two seamlessly connected stages. In the first stage, patients are sequentially enrolled and adaptively assigned to investigational doses to establish the therapeutic dose range (TDR), defined as the range of doses with acceptable toxicity and efficacy profiles, and the recommended phase 2 dose set (RP2S). In the second stage, patients are randomized to the doses in RP2S to assess the dose-response relationship and identify the optimal dose. The simulation study shows that DROID substantially outperforms the conventional approach, providing a new paradigm to efficiently optimize the dose of targeted oncology drugs. DROID aligns with the approach of a randomized, parallel dose-response trial design recommended by the FDA in the Guidance on Optimizing the Dosage of Human Prescription Drugs and Biological Products for the Treatment of Oncologic Diseases.

Optimal dose escalation methods using deep reinforcement learning in phase I oncology trials.

In phase I trials of a novel anticancer drug, one of the most important objectives is to identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). To this end, a number of methods have been proposed and evaluated under various scenarios. However, the percentages of correct selection (PCS) of MTDs using previous methods are insufficient to determine the dose for late-phase trials. The purpose of this study is to construct an action rule for escalating or de-escalating the dose and continuing or stopping the trial to increase the PCS as much as possible. We show that deep reinforcement learning with an appropriately defined state, action, and reward can be used to construct such an action selection rule. The simulation study shows that the proposed method can improve the PCS compared with the 3 + 3 design, CRM, BLRM, BOIN, mTPI, and i3 + 3 methods.

Enhancement of Bayesian optimal interval design by accounting for overdose and underdose errors trade-offs.

Model-assisted designs, a new class of dose-finding designs for determining the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), model only the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) data observed at the current dose based on a simple binomial model and offer the boundaries of DLT for the determination of dose escalation, retention, or de-escalation before beginning the trials. The boundaries for dose-escalation and de-escalation decisions are relevant to the operating characteristics of the design. The well-known model-assisted design, Bayesian Optimal Interval (BOIN), selects these boundaries to minimize the probability of incorrect decisions at each dose allocation but does not distinguish between overdose and underdose allocations caused by incorrect decisions when calculating the probability of incorrect decisions. Distinguishing between overdose and underdose based on the decision error in the BOIN design is expected to increase the accuracy of MTD determination. In this study, we extended the BOIN design to account for the decision probabilities of incorrect overdose and underdose allocations separately. To minimize the two probabilities simultaneously, we propose utilizing multiple objective optimizations and formulating an approach for determining the boundaries for dose escalation and de-escalation. Comprehensive simulation studies using fixed and randomly generated scenarios of DLT probability demonstrated that the proposed method is superior or comparable to existing interval designs, along with notably better operating characteristics of the proposed method.

Performance of phase-I dose finding designs with and without a run-in intra-patient dose escalation stage.

Dose-finding designs for phase-I trials aim to determine the recommended phase-II dose (RP2D) for further phase-II drug development. If the trial includes patients for whom several lines of standard therapy failed or if the toxicity of the investigated agent does not necessarily increase with dose, optimal dose-finding designs should limit the frequency of treatment with suboptimal doses. We propose a two-stage design strategy with a run-in intra-patient dose escalation part followed by a more traditional dose-finding design. We conduct simulation studies to compare the 3 + 3 design, the Bayesian Optimal Interval Design (BOIN) and the Continual Reassessment Method (CRM) with and without intra-patient dose escalation. The endpoints are accuracy, sample size, safety, and therapeutic efficiency. For scenarios where the correct RP2D is the highest dose, inclusion of an intra-patient dose escalation stage generally increases accuracy and therapeutic efficiency. However, for scenarios where the correct RP2D is below the highest dose, intra-patient dose escalation designs lead to increased risk of overdosing and an overestimation of RP2D. The magnitude of the change in operating characteristics after including an intra-patient stage is largest for the 3 + 3 design, decreases for the BOIN and is smallest for the CRM.

AIDE: Adaptive intrapatient dose escalation designs to accelerate Phase I clinical trials.

Designing Phase I clinical trials is challenging when accrual is slow or sample size is limited. The corresponding key question is: how to efficiently and reliably identify the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) using a sample size as small as possible? We propose model-assisted and model-based designs with adaptive intrapatient dose escalation (AIDE) to address this challenge. AIDE is adaptive in that the decision of conducting intrapatient dose escalation depends on both the patient's individual safety data, as well as other enrolled patient's safety data. When both data indicate reasonable safety, a patient may perform intrapatient dose escalation, generating toxicity data at more than one dose. This strategy not only provides patients the opportunity to receive higher potentially more effective doses, but also enables efficient statistical learning of the dose-toxicity profile of the treatment, which dramatically reduces the required sample size. Simulation studies show that the proposed designs are safe, robust, and efficient to identify the MTD with a sample size that is substantially smaller than conventional interpatient dose escalation designs. Practical considerations are provided and R code for implementing AIDE is available upon request.

Anticancer Properties of 3-Dietoxyphosphorylfuroquinoline-4,9-dione.

Herein, the antitumor activity of a novel synthetic analog with 5,8-quinolinedione scaffold, diethyl (2-(2-chlorophenyl)-4,9-dioxo-4,9-dihydrofuro [3,2-g]quinolin-3-yl)phosphonate (AJ-418) was investigated on two breast cancer cell lines. This analog was selected from a small library of synthetic quinolinediones on the basis of its strong antiproliferative activity against MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 cells and 4-5-fold lower cytotoxicity towards healthy MCF-10A cells. The morphology of MCF-7 and MDA-MB-231 cancer cells treated with AJ-418 changed drastically, while non-tumorigenic MCF-10A cells remained unaffected. In MCF-7 cells, after 24 h incubation, the increased number of apoptotic cells coincided with a decrease in proliferation and cell viability. The 24 h treatment of MDA-MB-231 cells with the tested compound reduced their cell viability and proliferation rate; however, a significant pro-apoptotic effect was visible only after longer incubation times (48 h and 72 h). Then, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of compound AJ-418 in C3H mice after subcutaneous administration was determined to be 160 mg/kg, showing that this analog was well tolerated and can be further evaluated to assess its potential therapeutic effect in tumor-bearing mice.

Patient-centered dosing: oncologists' perspectives about treatment-related side effects and individualized dosing for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC).

PURPOSE: Although metastatic breast cancer (MBC) is treatable, it is not curable and most patients remain on treatment indefinitely. While oncologists commonly prescribe the recommended starting dose (RSD) from the FDA-approved label, patient tolerance may differ from that seen in clinical trials. We report on a survey of medical oncologists' perspectives about treatment-related toxicity and willingness to discuss flexible dosing with patients. METHODS: We disseminated a confidential survey via social media/email in Spring 2021. Eligible respondents needed to be US-based medical oncologists with experience treating patients with MBC. RESULTS: Of 131 responses, 119 were eligible. Physicians estimated that 47% of their patients reported distressing treatment-related side effects; of these, 15% visited the Emergency Room/hospital and 37% missed treatment. 74% (n = 87) of doctors reported improvement of patient symptoms after dose reduction. 87% (n = 104) indicated that they had ever, if appropriate, initiated treatment at lower doses. Most (85%, n = 101) respondents did not believe that the RSD is always more effective than a lower dose and 97% (n = 115) were willing to discuss individualized dosing with patients. CONCLUSION: Treatment-related side effects are prevalent among patients with MBC, resulting in missed treatments and acute care visits. To help patients tolerate treatment, oncologists may decrease initial and/or subsequent doses. The majority of oncologists reject the premise that a higher dose is always superior and are willing to discuss individualized dosing with patients. Given potential improvements regarding quality of life and clinical care, dose modifications should be part of routine shared decision-making between patients and oncologists.

Factors associated with non-use and sub-target dosing of medical therapy for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.

In clinical practice, many patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) are either not prescribed guideline-directed medical therapies for which they are eligible or are prescribed therapies at sub-target doses. The objective of this study was to examine the factors associated with not receiving guideline-directed medical therapies or receiving sub-target doses. We conducted a systematic review of articles published between January 2014 and May 2019 that described dosing patterns and factors associated with non-use and sub-target dosing of HFrEF therapies in clinical practice. Thirty-seven studies were included. The percentages of patients reaching target doses for angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor blockers, sacubitril/valsartan, beta-blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists ranged from 4 to 55%, 11 to 87%, 4 to 60%, and 22 to 80%, respectively. Older age and worsening renal function were associated with non-use and sub-target dosing, lower body mass index was commonly associated with non-use, and hyperkalemia and hypotension were commonly associated with sub-target dosing. In conclusion, several common patient characteristics are associated with non-use and sub-target dosing of medical therapy for HFrEF. These high-risk groups are in particular need of further studies to improve implementation of available medications and to define the role of novel therapies.

Phase 1 trial of apatinib combined with intensity-modulated radiotherapy in unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: To investigate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of apatinib delivered during and after intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). METHODS: Patients with unresectable HCC who were not eligible for radiofrequency ablation (RFA), transcatheter arterial chemoembolization (TACE), or residual/ recurrent after the prior local treatment were enrolled. Patients were scheduled to be treated with IMRT at 50-60 Gy/25-30 fractions. Oral apatinib tablets were administered concurrently with IMRT and continued thereafter. We used a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, with three dose levels of apatinib (250, 500, and 750 mg). Grade 3 or more severe adverse events (AEs) were defined as dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). The treatment response was calculated using the Modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours. RESULTS: Nine patients with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer Stage C were included. One patient withdrew from the apatinib 250 mg group and another patient was added. No DLTs occurred in the apatinib 250 mg group. Five patients were included in the apatinib 500 mg group, and 2 cases of DLT (grade 3 leukopenia) were found among them. Dose escalation was terminated and the MTD was determined to be 250 mg. Common grade 1-2 AEs included fatigue, hypertension, dizziness, bone marrow suppression, and hyperbilirubinemia. The median follow-up time for all patients was 16.0 months. Three patients achieved complete response and another three achieved partial response. The objective response rate was 6/9 (66.7%), and the disease control rate was 9/9 (100%). Three patients relapsed out of the radiation field. The median progression-free survival was 17.0 months, and the median overall survival was 16.7 months. CONCLUSIONS: When combined with IMRT, apatinib 250 mg daily was recommended for a phase 2 study of unresectable HCC. The antitumor activity of the combination treatment was encouraging. The safety and efficacy of apatinib combined with IMRT for unresectable HCC should be further investigated in future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registration No. ChiCTR1800018309 . Registered 11 September 2018. Retrospectively registered, https://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=30461 .