Predictors of response to anti-IL6 monoclonal antibody therapy (siltuximab) in idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease: secondary analyses of phase II clinical trial data.

Siltuximab is the only US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment for idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease (iMCD), a rare haematological disorder associated with substantial morbidity and mortality. Although siltuximab induces a response in a significant proportion of iMCD patients via interleukin 6 (IL6) neutralization, it is not universally effective. To develop a predictive model of response, we performed an in-depth analysis of 38 baseline laboratory parameters in iMCD patients from the phase II siltuximab trial who met criteria for treatment response or treatment failure. Univariate analyses identified eight baseline laboratory parameters that were significantly different between responders and treatment failures: albumin, immunoglobulin G (IgG), immunoglobulin A, C reactive protein (CRP), fibrinogen, haemoglobin, sodium and triglycerides. Stepwise logistic regression analysis of these candidate parameters identified a top performing model that included fibrinogen, IgG, haemoglobin and CRP. Based on cross-validation of the final multivariate logistic regression model, the model accurately discriminated responders from those who failed treatment (area under the receiver operator characteristic curve 0·86, 95% confidence interval: 0·73-0·95). All four laboratory parameters associated with response to siltuximab have biological relationships with IL6 and acute inflammation. Our model suggests that iMCD patients with laboratory evidence of an inflammatory syndrome are the best candidates for siltuximab therapy.

Remote Monitoring and Data Collection for Decentralized Clinical Trials.

Importance: Less than 5% of patients with cancer enroll in a clinical trial, partly due to financial and logistic burdens, especially among underserved populations. The COVID-19 pandemic marked a substantial shift in the adoption of decentralized trial operations by pharmaceutical companies. Objective: To assess the current global state of adoption of decentralized trial technologies, understand factors that may be driving or preventing adoption, and highlight aspirations and direction for industry to enable more patient-centric trials. Design, Setting, and Participants: The Bloomberg New Economy International Cancer Coalition, composed of patient advocacy, industry, government regulator, and academic medical center representatives, developed a survey directed to global biopharmaceutical companies of the coalition from October 1 through December 31, 2022, with a focus on registrational clinical trials. The data for this survey study were analyzed between January 1 and 31, 2023. Exposure: Adoption of decentralized clinical trial technologies. Main Outcomes and Measures: The survey measured (1) outcomes of different remote monitoring and data collection technologies on patient centricity, (2) adoption of these technologies in oncology and all therapeutic areas, and (3) barriers and facilitators to adoption using descriptive statistics. Results: All 8 invited coalition companies completed the survey, representing 33% of the oncology market by revenues in 2021. Across nearly all technologies, adoption in oncology trials lags that of all trials. In the current state, electronic diaries and electronic clinical outcome assessments are the most used technology, with a mean (SD) of 56% (19%) and 51% (29%) adoption for all trials and oncology trials, respectively, whereas visits within local physician networks is the least adopted at a mean (SD) of 12% (18%) and 7% (9%), respectively. Looking forward, the difference between the current and aspired adoption rate in 5 years for oncology is large, with respondents expecting a 40% or greater absolute adoption increase in 8 of the 11 technologies surveyed. Furthermore, digitally enabled recruitment, local imaging capabilities, and local physician networks were identified as technologies that could be most effective for improving patient centricity in the long term. Conclusions and Relevance: These findings may help to galvanize momentum toward greater adoption of enabling technologies to support a new paradigm of trials that are more accessible, less burdensome, and more inclusive.

Lenalidomide, bortezomib, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, and dexamethasone in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma: a phase 1/2 Multiple Myeloma Research Consortium trial.

This phase 1/2 trial evaluated combination lenalidomide, bortezomib, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, and dexamethasone (RVDD) in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (MM) patients. Patients received RVDD at 4 dose levels, including the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Patients with a very good partial response or better (≥ VGPR) after cycle 4 proceeded to autologous stem cell transplantation or continued treatment. The primary objectives were MTD evaluation and response to RVDD after 4 and 8 cycles. Seventy-two patients received a median of 4.5 cycles. The MTDs were lenalidomide 25 mg, bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2), pegylated liposomal doxorubicin 30 mg/m(2), and dexamethasone 20/10 mg, as established with 3-week cycles. The most common adverse events were fatigue, constipation, sensory neuropathy, and infection; there was no treatment-related mortality. Response rates after 4 and 8 cycles were 96% and 95% partial response or better, 57% and 65% ≥ VGPR, and 29% and 35% complete or near-complete response, respectively. After a median follow-up of 15.5 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached. The estimated 18-month PFS and OS were 80.8% and 98.6%, respectively. RVDD was generally well tolerated and highly active, warranting further study in newly diagnosed MM patients. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00724568.

Driving Diversity and Inclusion in Cancer Drug Development - Industry and Regulatory Perspectives, Current Practices, Opportunities, and Challenges.

In April 2022, the FDA issued draft guidance to help industry develop strategies to improve diversity in clinical trials. Historically, clinical trial sponsors have not systematically incorporated efforts to promote diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI), particularly during the early design stages of clinical development plans and operational strategies. Unfortunately, a retrospective approach to DEI often results in clinical trial participants not being reflective of the diversity of patients intended to be treated with new therapies. A shift to prospective, intentional DEI strategies for clinical trials, including long-term engagement with diverse patients and communities throughout the development life cycle, is necessary to maximize the benefits and minimize the risks of new drugs and devices for all patients. Sponsors' current practices and opportunities for improving DEI address four major topics: institutional commitment, culture change, and governance; clinical development strategy; setting enrollment goals to ensure trial participant diversity; and development and implementation of the operational strategy. As DEI practices gain wider adoption in clinical trials, shared learning and collaboration among stakeholders on an ongoing and noncompetitive basis will lead to sustainable change. Prioritization of enrollment of diverse populations as an integral part of study start-up planning, clinical trial design, and recruitment capabilities will enhance the clinical development process for oncology therapies. Importantly, these efforts will help provide equitable access to clinical trials and innovative cancer therapies.

Discovery and validation of a novel subgroup and therapeutic target in idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease.

Idiopathic multicentric Castleman disease (iMCD) is a poorly understood hematologic disorder involving cytokine-induced polyclonal lymphoproliferation, systemic inflammation, and potentially fatal multiorgan failure. Although the etiology of iMCD is unknown, interleukin-6 (IL-6) is an established disease driver in approximately one-third of patients. Anti-IL-6 therapy, siltuximab, is the only US Food and Drug Administration-approved treatment. Few options exist for siltuximab nonresponders, and no validated tests are available to predict likelihood of response. We procured and analyzed the largest-to-date cohort of iMCD samples, which enabled classification of iMCD into disease categories, discovery of siltuximab response biomarkers, and identification of therapeutic targets for siltuximab nonresponders. Proteomic quantification of 1178 analytes was performed on serum of 88 iMCD patients, 60 patients with clinico-pathologically overlapping diseases (human herpesvirus-8-associated MCD, N = 20; Hodgkin lymphoma, N = 20; rheumatoid arthritis, N = 20), and 42 healthy controls. Unsupervised clustering revealed iMCD patients have heterogeneous serum proteomes that did not cluster with clinico-pathologically overlapping diseases. Clustering of iMCD patients identified a novel subgroup with superior response to siltuximab, which was validated using a 7-analyte panel (apolipoprotein E, amphiregulin, serum amyloid P-component, inactivated complement C3b, immunoglobulin E, IL-6, erythropoietin) in an independent cohort. Enrichment analyses and immunohistochemistry identified Janus kinase (JAK)/signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 signaling as a candidate therapeutic target that could potentially be targeted with JAK inhibitors in siltuximab nonresponders. Our discoveries demonstrate the potential for accelerating discoveries for rare diseases through multistakeholder collaboration.

Harnessing Real-World Evidence for the Development of Novel Cancer Therapies.

Resourcing real-world evidence (RWE) is becoming an increasingly important asset in developing novel therapies for cancer. In this article, an overview of the benefits and challenges of using these data is provided. Through several case examples we highlight future applications and potential.

Pegylated interferon alfa-2b treatment for patients with solid tumors: a phase I/II study.

PURPOSE: The efficacy of interferon alfa has been established in treating advanced melanoma and renal cell carcinoma (RCC) patients. We conducted a phase I/II study to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), the safety and tolerability, and the preliminary efficacy of once-weekly pegylated interferon alfa-2b (IFNalpha-2b) in patients with advanced solid tumors (primarily RCC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: To determine the MTD, 35 patients with a variety of advanced solid tumors received 0.75 to 7.5 micro g/kg/wk of pegylated IFNalpha-2b by subcutaneous injection for 12 weeks. An additional 35 previously untreated RCC patients received 6.0 and 7.5 micro g/kg/wk for up to 12 weeks. Patients with a response or stable disease after 12 weeks were eligible for the extension protocol and were treated for up to 1 year or until disease progression. RESULTS: The MTD for pegylated IFNalpha-2b at 12 weeks was 6.0 micro g/kg/wk. One year of 6.0 micro g/kg/wk was well tolerated with appropriate dose modification; no grade 3 or 4 fatigue occurred, and safety was comparable with that with nonpegylated IFNalpha-2b. The most common nonhematologic adverse events included mild to moderate nausea, anorexia, and fatigue. Six patients had grade 3 or 4 hematologic toxicity. Twenty-nine patients continued on the extension protocol. Four patients had a complete response, and five patients had a partial response. Among 44 previously untreated RCC patients, the objective response rate was 14%. Median survival for all RCC patients was 13.2 months. CONCLUSION: Pegylated IFNalpha-2b was active and well tolerated in patients with metastatic solid tumors, including RCC, at doses up to 6.0 micro g/kg/wk.

Randomized phase III trial of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin versus vinorelbine or mitomycin C plus vinblastine in women with taxane-refractory advanced breast cancer.

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) with that of a common salvage regimen (comparator) in patients with taxane-refractory advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Following failure of a first- or second-line taxane-containing regimen for metastatic disease, 301 women were randomly assigned to receive PLD (50 mg/m(2) every 28 days); or comparator-vinorelbine (30 mg/m(2) weekly) or mitomycin C (10 mg/m(2) day 1 and every 28 days) plus vinblastine (5 mg/m(2) day 1, day 14, day 28, and day 42) every 6 to 8 weeks. Patients were stratified before random assignment based on number of previous chemotherapy regimens for metastatic disease and presence of bone metastases only. RESULTS: Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were similar for PLD and comparator (PFS: hazard ratio [HR], 1.26; 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.62; P =.11; median, 2.9 months [PLD] and 2.5 months [comparator]; OS: HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.33; P =.71; median, 11.0 months [PLD] and 9.0 months [comparator]). In anthracycline-naïve patients, PFS was somewhat longer with PLD, relative to the comparator (n = 44; median PFS, 5.8 v 2.1 months; HR, 2.40; 95% CI, 1.16 to 4.95; P =.01). Most frequently reported adverse events were nausea (23% to 31%), vomiting (17% to 20%), and fatigue (9% to 20%) and were similar among treatment groups. PLD-treated patients experienced more palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (37%; 18% grade 3, 1 patient grade 4) and stomatitis (22%; 5% grades 3/4). Neuropathy (11%), constipation (16%), and neutropenia (14%) were more common with vinorelbine. Alopecia was low in both the PLD and vinorelbine groups (3% and 5%). CONCLUSION: PLD has efficacy comparable to that of common salvage regimens in patients with taxane-refractory metastatic breast cancer, thereby representing a useful therapeutic option.

Phase I study of the farnesyltransferase inhibitor lonafarnib with paclitaxel in solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To establish the maximum tolerated dose of lonafarnib, a novel farnesyltransferase inhibitor, in combination with paclitaxel in patients with solid tumors and to characterize the safety, tolerability, dose-limiting toxicity, and pharmacokinetics of this combination regimen. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In a Phase I trial, lonafarnib was administered p.o., twice daily (b.i.d.) on continuously scheduled doses of 100 mg, 125 mg, and 150 mg in combination with i.v. paclitaxel at doses of 135 mg/m(2) or 175 mg/m(2) administered over 3 h on day 8 of every 21-day cycle. Plasma paclitaxel and lonafarnib concentrations were collected at selected time points from each patient. RESULTS: Twenty-four patients were enrolled; 21 patients were evaluable. The principal grade 3/4 toxicity was diarrhea (5 of 21 patients), which was most likely due to lonafarnib. dose-limiting toxicities included grade 3 hyperbilirubinemia at dose level 3 (100 mg b.i.d. lonafarnib and 175 mg/m(2) paclitaxel); grade 4 diarrhea and grade 3 peripheral neuropathy at dose level 3A (125 mg b.i.d. lonafarnib and 175 mg/m(2) paclitaxel); and grade 4 neutropenia with fever and grade 4 diarrhea at level 4 (150 mg b.i.d. lonafarnib and 175 mg/m(2) paclitaxel). The maximum tolerated dose established by the continual reassessment method was lonafarnib 100 mg b.i.d. and paclitaxel 175 mg/m(2). Paclitaxel appeared to have no effect on the pharmacokinetics of lonafarnib. The median duration of therapy was eight cycles, including seven cycles with paclitaxel. Six of 15 previously treated patients had a durable partial response, including 3 patients who had previous taxane therapy. Notably, two of five patients with taxane-resistant metastatic non-small cell lung cancer had partial responses. CONCLUSIONS: When combined with paclitaxel, the recommended dose of lonafarnib for Phase II trials is 100 mg p.o. twice daily with 175 mg/m(2) of paclitaxel i.v. every 3 weeks. Additional studies of lonafarnib in combination regimens appear warranted, particularly in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

Treating cancer with PEG Intron: pharmacokinetic profile and dosing guidelines for an improved interferon-alpha-2b formulation.

BACKGROUND: PEG Intron (pegylated interferon-alpha-2b [IFN-alpha-2b]; Schering-Plough, Kenilworth, NJ) has demonstrated delayed clearance and increased area under the curve compared with native IFN-alpha-2b. Studies in patients with chronic hepatitis C infection and malignancies have demonstrated both biologic and clinical activity of PEG Intron and have provided empiric data to compare the pharmacokinetics (PK) and pharmacodynamics of PEG Intron and IFN-alpha-2b. METHODS: The authors conducted a review of the available data comparing the PK and pharmacodynamic effects of PEG Intron and IFN-alpha-2b. Safety and efficacy data from Phase I/II studies of PEG Intron in patients with chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) and solid tumors were also reviewed. RESULTS: Data from patients with chronic hepatitis C infection suggest that exposure to IFN at a PEG Intron dose of 0.25 microg/kg per week is similar to that observed after administration of IFN-alpha-2b at a dose of 3 million International Units, three times per week. PEG Intron at doses up to 6 microg/kg per week was well tolerated and demonstrated clinical activity in patients with CML and solid tumors, including metastatic melanoma and renal cell carcinoma. CONCLUSIONS: Dose intensification can be achieved safely in patients with CML and solid tumors using PEG Intron, which could improve efficacy. These results provide useful dosing guidelines to clinicians investigating the antitumor activity of PEG Intron in patients with malignancies. More data are needed to determine the optimal dose in various oncologic indications. However, these results provide a sound rationale for further investigation of PEG Intron.