Randomized phase III trial of regorafenib in metastatic colorectal cancer: analysis of the CORRECT Japanese and non-Japanese subpopulations.

BACKGROUND: In the international, phase III, randomized, double-blind CORRECT trial, regorafenib significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) versus placebo in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) that had progressed on all standard therapies. This post hoc analysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of regorafenib in Japanese and non-Japanese subpopulations in the CORRECT trial. METHODS: Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to regorafenib 160 mg once daily or placebo for weeks 1-3 of each 4-week cycle. The primary endpoint was OS. Outcomes were assessed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: One hundred Japanese and 660 non-Japanese patients were randomized to regorafenib (n = 67 and n = 438) or placebo (n = 33 and n = 222). Regorafenib had a consistent OS benefit in the Japanese and non-Japanese subpopulations, with hazard ratios of 0.81 (95 % confidence interval [CI] 0.43-1.51) and 0.77 (95 % CI 0.62-0.94), respectively. Regorafenib-associated hand-foot skin reaction, hypertension, proteinuria, thrombocytopenia, and lipase elevations occurred more frequently in the Japanese subpopulation than in the non-Japanese subpopulation, but were generally manageable. CONCLUSION: Regorafenib appears to have comparable efficacy in Japanese and non-Japanese subpopulations, with a manageable adverse-event profile, suggesting that this agent could potentially become a standard of care in patients with mCRC.

Regorafenib monotherapy for previously treated metastatic colorectal cancer (CORRECT): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: No treatment options are available for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer that progresses after all approved standard therapies, but many patients maintain a good performance status and could be candidates for further therapy. An international phase 3 trial was done to assess the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib in these patients. METHODS: We did this trial at 114 centres in 16 countries. Patients with documented metastatic colorectal cancer and progression during or within 3 months after the last standard therapy were randomised (in a 2:1 ratio; by computer-generated randomisation list and interactive voice response system; preallocated block design (block size six); stratified by previous treatment with VEGF-targeting drugs, time from diagnosis of metastatic disease, and geographical region) to receive best supportive care plus oral regorafenib 160 mg or placebo once daily, for the first 3 weeks of each 4 week cycle. The primary endpoint was overall survival. The study sponsor, participants, and investigators were masked to treatment assignment. Efficacy analyses were by intention to treat. This trial is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01103323. FINDINGS: Between April 30, 2010, and March 22, 2011, 1052 patients were screened, 760 patients were randomised to receive regorafenib (n=505) or placebo (n=255), and 753 patients initiated treatment (regorafenib n=500; placebo n=253; population for safety analyses). The primary endpoint of overall survival was met at a preplanned interim analysis; data cutoff was on July 21, 2011. Median overall survival was 6·4 months in the regorafenib group versus 5·0 months in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·77; 95% CI 0·64-0·94; one-sided p=0·0052). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 465 (93%) patients assigned regorafenib and in 154 (61%) of those assigned placebo. The most common adverse events of grade three or higher related to regorafenib were hand-foot skin reaction (83 patients, 17%), fatigue (48, 10%), diarrhoea (36, 7%), hypertension (36, 7%), and rash or desquamation (29, 6%). INTERPRETATION: Regorafenib is the first small-molecule multikinase inhibitor with survival benefits in metastatic colorectal cancer which has progressed after all standard therapies. The present study provides evidence for a continuing role of targeted treatment after disease progression, with regorafenib offering a potential new line of therapy in this treatment-refractory population. FUNDING: Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals.

Phase I trial of BAY 50-4798, an interleukin-2-specific agonist in advanced melanoma and renal cancer.

PURPOSE: BAY 50-4798 is an analogue of interleukin-2 that selectively activates T cells over natural killer cells. This phase I study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and safety of BAY 50-4798, screen for tumor response, and assess pharmacokinetics. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Forty-five patients with metastatic melanoma or renal cancer were enrolled, 31 on escalating doses to determine the MTD, with 20 renal cell carcinoma patients treated at MTD to detect antitumor activity. BAY 50-4798 was delivered i.v. every 8 h, days 1 to 5 and 15 to 19, and could be repeated after 9 weeks if tumor was stable or responding. RESULTS: The MTD was defined by and reported in terms of doses received. The doses tested ranged from 1.3 to 26.1 microg/kg, and the MTD was defined as 10.4 microg/kg based on toxicities similar to those of aldesleukin. Two patients achieved partial responses, one with melanoma and one with renal cell carcinoma. Among all 45 patients, 53% and 9% experienced a grade 3 and 4 toxicity, respectively. Among the patients treated at the MTD of 10.4 microg/kg, 71% and 10% experienced a grade 3 and 4 toxicity, respectively. Pharmacokinetics showed dose-dependent peak concentrations (C(max)) and area under the curve with a half-life of approximately 2 h and no evidence of accumulation. Lymphocyte subset analysis confirmed the preferential expansion of T-cell subsets over natural killer cells. CONCLUSIONS: The antitumor activity of BAY 50-4798 in malignancies that respond to high-dose interleukin-2 was low. BAY 50-4798 might provide advantages over aldesleukin in antigen-specific immunotherapies.

Lack of effect of ketoconazole-mediated CYP3A inhibition on sorafenib clinical pharmacokinetics.

Sorafenib is a novel, small-molecule anticancer compound that inhibits tumor cell proliferation by targeting Raf in the Raf/MEK/ERK signalling pathway, and inhibits angiogenesis by targeting tyrosine kinases such as vascular-endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR-2 and VEGFR-3) and platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR). In vitro microsomal data indicate that sorafenib is metabolized by two pathways: phase I oxidation mediated by cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4; and phase II conjugation mediated by UGT1A9. Approximately 50% of an orally administered dose is recovered as unchanged drug in the feces, due to either biliary excretion or lack of absorption. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of CYP3A inhibition by ketoconazole on sorafenib pharmacokinetics. This was an open-label, non-randomized, 2-period, one-way crossover study in sixteen healthy male subjects. A single 50 mg dose of sorafenib was administered alone (period 1) and in combination with ketoconazole 400 mg once daily (period 2) (ketoconazole was given for 7 days, and a single 50 mg sorafenib dose was administered concomitantly on day 4). No clinically relevant change in pharmacokinetics of sorafenib and no clinically relevant adverse events or laboratory abnormalities were observed in this study upon co-administration of the two drugs. Plasma concentrations of the main CYP3A4 generated metabolite, sorafenib N-oxide, decreased considerably upon ketoconazole co-administration. This effect is in accordance with the in vitro finding that CYP3A4 is the primary enzyme for sorafenib N-oxide formation. Further, these data indicate that blocking sorafenib metabolism by the CYP3A4 pathway will not lead to an increase in sorafenib exposure. This is consistent with data from a clinical mass-balance study that showed 15% of the administered dose was eliminated by glucuronidation, compared to less than 5% eliminated as oxidative metabolites. Since there was no increase in sorafenib exposure following concomitant administration of the highly potent CYP3A4 inhibitor ketoconazole with low dose sorafenib, it is postulated that higher therapeutic doses of sorafenib may be safely co-administered with ketoconazole, as well as with other inhibitors of CYP3A.

Differential effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin on high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and apolipoprotein A-I are consistent across hypercholesterolemic patient subgroups.

BACKGROUND: In addition to lowering plasma levels of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C), statins also raise high-density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL-C). HYPOTHESIS: Recent studies have shown that treatment with simvastatin results in larger increases in HDL-C than those seen with atorvastatin. The results of three clinical studies are analyzed, comparing the effects of simvastatin and atorvastatin on HDL-C and apolipoprotein A-I (apo A-I) in the total cohort and in several subgroups of hypercholesterolemic patients. The three studies were all multicenter, randomized clinical trials that included simvastatin (20-80 mg) and atorvastatin (10-80 mg) treatment arms. The subgroup analyses performed were gender; age (< 65 and > or = 65 years); baseline HDL-C (male: < 40 or > or = 40 mg/dl; female: < 45 or > or = 45 mg/dl), baseline LDL-C (< 160 or > or = 160 mg/dl), and baseline triglycerides (< 200 or > or = 200 mg/dl). RESULTS: Both drugs produced similar increases in HDL-C levels at low doses; however, at higher drug doses (40 and 80 mg), HDL-C showed a significantly greater increase with simvastatin than with atorvastatin (p < 0.05 to < 0.001). Therefore, while HDL-C remained consistently elevated across all doses of simvastatin, there appeared to be a pattern of decreasing HDL-C with an increasing dose of atorvastatin. A similar negative dose response pattern was also observed with apo A-I in atorvastatin-treated patients, suggesting a reduction in the number of circulating HDL particles at higher doses. Both drugs reduced LDL-C and triglycerides in a dose-dependent fashion, with atorvastatin showing slightly greater effects. The differential effects of atorvastatin and simvastatin on HDL-C and apo A-I were observed for both the whole study cohorts and all subgroups examined; thus, no consistent treatment-by-subgroup interactions were observed. CONCLUSION: The data presented show that, across different hypercholesterolemic patient subgroups, simvastatin increases HDL-C and apo A-I more than atorvastatin at higher doses, with evidence of a negative dose response effect on HDL-C and apo A-I with atorvastatin, but not simvastatin.

A phase I open-label study evaluating the cardiovascular safety of sorafenib in patients with advanced cancer.

PURPOSE: To characterize the cardiovascular profile of sorafenib, a multitargeted kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Fifty-three patients with advanced cancer received oral sorafenib 400 mg bid in continuous 28-day cycles in this open-label study. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was evaluated using multigated acquisition scanning at baseline and after 2 and 4 cycles of sorafenib. QT/QTc interval on the electrocardiograph (ECG) was measured in triplicate with a Holter 12-lead ECG at baseline and after 1 cycle of sorafenib. Heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) were obtained in duplicate at baseline and after 1 and 4 cycles of sorafenib. Plasma pharmacokinetic data were obtained for sorafenib and its 3 main metabolites after 1 and 4 cycles of sorafenib. RESULTS: LVEF (SD) mean change from baseline was -0.8 (±8.6) LVEF(%) after 2 cycles (n = 31) and -1.2 (±7.8) LVEF(%) after 4 cycles of sorafenib (n = 24). The QT/QTc mean changes from baseline observed at maximum sorafenib concentrations (t(max)) after 1 cycle (n = 31) were small (QTcB: 4.2 ms; QTcF: 9.0 ms). Mean changes observed after 1 cycle in BP (n = 31) and HR (n = 30) at maximum sorafenib concentrations (t(max)) were moderate (up to 11.7 mm Hg and -6.6 bpm, respectively). No correlation was found between the AUC and C(max) of sorafenib and its main metabolites and any cardiovascular parameters. CONCLUSIONS: The effects of sorafenib on changes in QT/QTc interval on the ECG, LVEF, BP, and HR were modest and unlikely to be of clinical significance in the setting of advanced cancer treatment.

Phase III study of carboplatin and paclitaxel alone or with sorafenib in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE This phase III, multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled trial assessed the efficacy and safety of sorafenib, an oral multikinase inhibitor, in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel in chemotherapy-naïve patients with unresectable stage IIIB or IV non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS Nine hundred twenty-six patients were randomly assigned to receive up to six 21-day cycles of carboplatin area under the curve 6 and paclitaxel 200 mg/m(2) (CP) on day 1, followed by either sorafenib 400 mg twice a day (n = 464, arm A) or placebo (n = 462, arm B) on days 2 to 19. The maintenance phase after CP consisted of sorafenib 400 mg or placebo twice a day. The primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included progression-free survival and tumor response. RESULTS Overall demographics were balanced between arms; 223 patients (24%) had squamous cell histology. On the basis of a planned interim analysis, median OS was 10.7 months in arm A and 10.6 months in arm B (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.94 to 1.41; P = .915). The study was terminated after the interim analysis concluded that the study was highly unlikely to meet its primary end point. A prespecified exploratory analysis revealed that patients with squamous cell histology had greater mortality in arm A than in arm B (HR = 1.85; 95% CI, 1.22 to 2.81). Main grade 3 or 4 sorafenib-related toxicities included rash (8.4%), hand-foot skin reaction (7.8%), and diarrhea (3.5%). CONCLUSION No clinical benefit was observed from adding sorafenib to CP chemotherapy as first-line treatment for NSCLC.

Phase II, multicenter, uncontrolled trial of single-agent sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor that targets the Ras/Raf/MEK/ERK mitogenic signaling pathway and the angiogenic receptor tyrosine kinases, vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 and platelet-derived growth factor receptor beta. We evaluated the antitumor response and tolerability of sorafenib in patients with relapsed or refractory, advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), most of whom had received prior platinum-based chemotherapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a phase II, single-arm, multicenter study. Patients with relapsed or refractory advanced NSCLC received sorafenib 400 mg orally twice daily until tumor progression or an unacceptable drug-related toxicity occurred. The primary objective was to measure response rate. RESULTS: Of 54 patients enrolled, 52 received sorafenib. The predominant histologies were adenocarcinoma (54%) and squamous cell carcinoma (31%). No complete or partial responses were observed. Stable disease (SD) was achieved in 30 (59%) of the 51 patients who were evaluable for efficacy. Four patients with SD developed tumor cavitation. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 2.7 months, and median overall survival was 6.7 months. Patients with SD had a median PFS of 5.5 months. Major grades 3 to 4, treatment-related toxicities included hand-foot skin reaction (10%), hypertension (4%), fatigue (2%), and diarrhea (2%). Nine patients died within a 30-day period after discontinuing sorafenib, and one patient experienced pulmonary hemorrhage that was considered drug related. CONCLUSION Continuous treatment with sorafenib 400 mg twice daily was associated with disease stabilization in patients with advanced NSCLC. The broad activity of sorafenib and its acceptable toxicity profile suggest that additional investigation of sorafenib as therapy for patients with NSCLC is warranted.

Sorafenib for older patients with renal cell carcinoma: subset analysis from a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: The perception that older cancer patients may be at higher risk than younger patients of toxic effects from cancer therapy but may obtain less clinical benefit from it may be based on the underrepresentation of older patients in clinical trials and the known toxic effects of cytotoxic chemotherapy. It is not known how older patients respond to targeted therapy. METHODS: This retrospective subgroup analysis of data from the phase 3, randomized Treatment Approach in Renal Cancer Global Evaluation Trial examined the safety and efficacy of sorafenib in older (age >or=70 years, n = 115) and younger patients (age <70 years, n = 787) who received treatment for advanced renal cell carcinoma. Patient demographics and progression-free survival were recorded. Best tumor response, clinical benefit rate (defined as complete response plus partial response plus stable disease), time to self-reported health status deterioration, and toxic effects were assessed by descriptive statistics. Health-related quality of life was assessed with a Cox proportional hazards model. Kaplan-Meier analyses were used to summarize time-to-event data. RESULTS: Median progression-free survival was similar in sorafenib-treated younger patients (23.9 weeks; hazard ratio [HR] for progression compared with placebo = 0.55, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.47 to 0.66) and older patients (26.3 weeks; HR = 0.43, 95% CI = 0.26 to 0.69). Clinical benefit rates among younger and older sorafenib-treated patients were also similar (83.5% and 84.3%, respectively) and were superior to those of younger and older placebo-treated patients (53.8% and 62.2%, respectively). Adverse events were predictable and manageable regardless of age. Sorafenib treatment delayed the time to self-reported health status deterioration among both older patients (121 days with sorafenib vs 85 days with placebo; HR = 0.66, 95% CI = 0.43 to 1.03) and younger patients (90 days with sorafenib vs 52 days with placebo; HR = 0.69, 95% CI = 0.59 to 0.81) and improved quality of life over that time. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma receiving sorafenib treatment, outcomes of older (>or=70 years) and younger (<70 years) patients were similar.

Simultaneous administration of vardenafil and tamsulosin does not induce clinically significant hypotension in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the pharmacodynamic effects of coadministered vardenafil and tamsulosin in patients with benign prostatic hyperplasia (BPH) undergoing stable tamsulosin therapy. METHODS: In this Phase 1, placebo-controlled, two-stage, two-way, crossover study, 22 patients undergoing stable (longer than 4 weeks) tamsulosin therapy for BPH (18 using 0.4 mg and 4 using 0.8 mg tamsulosin daily) received vardenafil 10 mg (or placebo), followed by vardenafil 20 mg (or placebo), simultaneously with tamsulosin. The mean maximal change from baseline with vardenafil use versus placebo was evaluated for supine and standing blood pressure and heart rate for up to 6 hours after dosing. RESULTS: In patients receiving vardenafil 10 mg, the mean maximal change from baseline versus placebo in supine systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), and heart rate was -4.5 mm Hg (95% confidence interval [CI] -8.2 to -0.8), -2.3 mm Hg (95% CI -4.9 to 0.4), and 3.7 beats per minute (95% CI 1.1 to 6.3), respectively. In patients receiving vardenafil 20 mg, the mean maximal change from baseline versus placebo in supine SBP, DBP, and heart rate was -4.0 mm Hg (95% CI -6.3 to -1.8), -2.9 mm Hg (95% CI -5.6 to -0.2), and 0.8 beats per minute (95% CI -1.2 to 2.9), respectively. These hemodynamic changes were similar to those obtained in the standing position. Two placebo patients and 1 vardenafil 10-mg patient had a drop of 20 mm Hg or more in standing DBP; 1 vardenafil 10-mg patient had a standing SBP drop of 30 mm Hg or more. No patient exhibited symptomatic hypotension (SBP less than 85 mm Hg with dizziness). Three patients receiving vardenafil 20 mg/tamsulosin 0.4 mg reported dizziness, but never had an SBP of less than 95 mm Hg. No serious adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, no evidence was found that coadministered vardenafil and tamsulosin induced clinically significant hypotension in patients with BPH.