Reasons for non-feasibility of therapeutic drug monitoring of oral targeted therapies in oncology - an analysis of the closed cohorts of a multicentre prospective study.

BACKGROUND: Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) - performing dose adjustments based on measured drug levels and established pharmacokinetic (PK) targets - could optimise treatment with drugs that show large interpatient variability in exposure. We evaluated the feasibility of TDM for multiple oral targeted therapies. Here we report on drugs for which routine TDM is not feasible. METHODS: We evaluated drug cohorts from the Dutch Pharmacology Oncology Group - TDM study. Based on PK levels taken at pre-specified time points, PK-guided interventions were performed. Feasibility of TDM was evaluated, and based on the success and practicability of TDM, cohorts could be closed. RESULTS: For 10 out of 24 cohorts TDM was not feasible and inclusion was closed. A high incidence of adverse events resulted in closing the cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib cohort. The enzalutamide and erlotinib cohorts were closed because almost all PK levels were above target. Other, non-pharmacological reasons led to closing the palbociclib, olaparib and tamoxifen cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Although TDM could help personalising treatment for many drugs, the above-mentioned reasons can influence its feasibility, usefulness and clinical applicability. Therefore, routine TDM is not advised for cabozantinib, dabrafenib/trametinib, enzalutamide, erlotinib, everolimus, regorafenib and vismodegib. Nonetheless, TDM remains valuable for individual clinical decisions.

Exposure-response analyses of cabozantinib in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer.

AIM: In the registration trial, cabozantinib exposure ≥ 750 ng/mL correlated to improved tumor size reduction, response rate and progression free survival (PFS) in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC). Because patients in routine care often differ from patients in clinical trials, we explored the cabozantinib exposure-response relationship in patients with mRCC treated in routine care. METHODS: Cabozantinib trough concentrations (Cmin) were collected and average exposure was calculated per individual. Exposure-response analyses were performed using the earlier identified target of Cmin > 750 ng/mL and median Cmin. In addition, the effect of dose reductions on response was explored. PFS was used as measure of response. RESULTS: In total, 59 patients were included:10% were classified as favourable, 61% as intermediate and 29% as poor IMDC risk group, respectively. Median number of prior treatment lines was 2 (0-5). Starting dose was 60 mg in 46%, 40 mg in 42% and 20 mg in 12% of patients. Dose reductions were needed in 58% of patients. Median Cmin was 572 ng/mL (IQR: 496-701). Only 17% of patients had an average Cmin ≥ 750 ng/mL. Median PFS was 52 weeks (95% CI: 40-64). No improved PFS was observed for patients with Cmin ≥ 750 ng/mL or ≥ 572 ng/ml. A longer PFS was observed for patients with a dose reduction vs. those without (65 vs. 31 weeks, p = .001). After incorporating known covariates (IMDC risk group and prior treatment lines (< 2 vs. ≥ 2)) in the multivariable analysis, the need for dose reduction remained significantly associated with improved PFS (HR 0.32, 95% CI:0.14-0.70, p = .004). CONCLUSION: In these explorative analyses, no clear relationship between increased cabozantinib exposure and improved PFS was observed. Average cabozantinib exposure was below the previously proposed target in 83% of patients. Future studies should focus on validating the cabozantinib exposure required for long term efficacy.

Ritonavir-Boosted Exposure of Kinase Inhibitors: an Open Label, Cross-over Pharmacokinetic Proof-of-Concept Trial with Erlotinib.

BACKGROUND: Although kinase inhibitors (KIs) are generally effective, their use has a large impact on the current health care budget. Dosing strategies to reduce treatment costs are warranted. Boosting pharmacokinetic exposure of KIs metabolized by cytochrome P450 (CYP)3A4 with ritonavir might result in lower doses needed and subsequently reduces treatment costs. This study is a proof-of-concept study to evaluate if the dose of erlotinib can be reduced by co-administration with ritonavir. METHODS: In this open-label, cross-over study, we compared the pharmacokinetics of monotherapy erlotinib 150 mg once daily (QD) (control arm) with erlotinib 75 mg QD plus ritonavir 200 mg QD (intervention arm). Complete pharmacokinetic profiles at steady-state were taken up to 24 h after erlotinib intake for both dosing strategies. RESULTS: Nine patients were evaluable in this study. For the control arm, the systemic exposure over 24 h, maximum plasma concentration and minimal plasma concentration of erlotinib were 29.3 µg*h/mL (coefficient of variation (CV):58%), 1.84 µg/mL (CV:60%) and 1.00 µg/mL (CV:62%), respectively, compared with 28.9 µg*h/mL (CV:116%, p = 0.545), 1.68 µg/mL (CV:68%, p = 0.500) and 1.06 µg/mL (CV:165%, p = 0.150) for the intervention arm. Exposure to the metabolites of erlotinib (OSI-413 and OSI-420) was statistically significant lower following erlotinib plus ritonavir dosing. Similar results regarding safety in both dosing strategies were observed, no grade 3 or higher adverse event was reported. CONCLUSIONS: Pharmacokinetic exposure at a dose of 75 mg erlotinib when combined with the strong CYP3A4 inhibitor ritonavir is similar to 150 mg erlotinib. Ritonavir-boosting is a promising strategy to reduce erlotinib treatment costs and provides a rationale for other expensive therapies metabolized by CYP3A4.

Exposure-Response Analysis of Osimertinib in EGFR Mutation Positive Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients in a Real-Life Setting.

BACKGROUND: Osimertinib, an irreversible inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is an important drug in the treatment of EGFR-mutation positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Clinical trials with osimertinib could not demonstrate an exposure-efficacy relationship, while a relationship between exposure and toxicity has been found. In this study, we report the exposure-response relationships of osimertinib in a real-life setting. METHODS: A retrospective observational cohort study was performed, including patients receiving 40 - 80 mg osimertinib as ≥ 2 line therapy and from whom pharmacokinetic samples were collected during routine care. Trough plasma concentrations (Cmin,pred) were estimated and used as a measure of osimertinib exposure. A previously defined exploratory pharmacokinetic threshold of 166 µg/L was taken to explore the exposure-efficacy relationship. RESULTS: A total of 145 patients and 513 osimertinib plasma concentration samples were included. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 13.3 (95% confidence interval (CI):10.3 - 19.1) months and 9.3 (95% CI: 7.2 - 11.1) months for patients with Cmin,pred < 166 µg/L and Cmin,pred ≥ 166 µg/L, respectively (p = 0.03). In the multivariate analysis, a Cmin,pred < 166 µg/L resulted in a non-statistically significant hazard ratio of 1.10 (95% CI: 0.60 - 2.01; p = 77). Presence of a EGFR driver-mutation other than the exon 19 del or L858R mutations, led to a shorter PFS with a hazard ratio of 2.89 (95% CI: 1.18 - 7.08; p = 0.02). No relationship between exposure and toxicity was observed (p = 0.91). CONCLUSION: In our real-life cohort, no exposure-response relationship was observed for osimertinib in the current dosing scheme. The feasibility of a standard lower fixed dosing of osimertinib in clinical practice should be studied prospectively.

Therapeutic drug monitoring of oral targeted antineoplastic drugs.

PURPOSE: This review provides an overview of the current challenges in oral targeted antineoplastic drug (OAD) dosing and outlines the unexploited value of therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). Factors influencing the pharmacokinetic exposure in OAD therapy are depicted together with an overview of different TDM approaches. Finally, current evidence for TDM for all approved OADs is reviewed. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search (covering literature published until April 2020), including primary and secondary scientific literature on pharmacokinetics and dose individualisation strategies for OADs, together with US FDA Clinical Pharmacology and Biopharmaceutics Reviews and the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use European Public Assessment Reports was conducted. RESULTS: OADs are highly potent drugs, which have substantially changed treatment options for cancer patients. Nevertheless, high pharmacokinetic variability and low treatment adherence are risk factors for treatment failure. TDM is a powerful tool to individualise drug dosing, ensure drug concentrations within the therapeutic window and increase treatment success rates. After reviewing the literature for 71 approved OADs, we show that exposure-response and/or exposure-toxicity relationships have been established for the majority. Moreover, TDM has been proven to be feasible for individualised dosing of abiraterone, everolimus, imatinib, pazopanib, sunitinib and tamoxifen in prospective studies. There is a lack of experience in how to best implement TDM as part of clinical routine in OAD cancer therapy. CONCLUSION: Sub-therapeutic concentrations and severe adverse events are current challenges in OAD treatment, which can both be addressed by the application of TDM-guided dosing, ensuring concentrations within the therapeutic window.

Determination of the absolute bioavailability of oral imatinib using a stable isotopically labeled intravenous imatinib-d8 microdose.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to ascertain whether the absolute bioavailability of oral imatinib (Glivec®) during steady state plasma pharmacokinetics in cancer patients could be determined through a concomitant intravenous administration of a single 100 µg microdose of deuterium labeled imatinib (imatinib-d8). Secondly, the usefulness of liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS) was investigated for simultaneous analysis of orally and intravenously administered imatinib. METHODS: Included patients were on a stable daily dose of 400 mg oral imatinib prior to study participation. On day 1, patients received a 100 µg intravenous imatinib-d8 microdose 2.5 h after intake of the oral dose. Plasma samples were collected for 48 h. Imatinib and imatinib-d8 concentrations were simultaneously quantified using a validated LC-MS/MS assay. The absolute bioavailability was calculated by comparing the dose-normalized exposure with unlabeled and stable isotopically labeled imatinib in plasma. RESULTS: A total of six patients were enrolled. All patients had a history of gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GIST). The median absolute bioavailability of oral imatinib at steady state was 76% (range 44-106%). Imatinib and imatinib-d8 plasma concentrations were quantified in all collected plasma samples, with no samples below the limit of quantification for imatinib-d8. CONCLUSION: The absolute bioavailability of imatinib was successfully estimated at steady state plasma pharmacokinetics using the stable isotopically labeled microdose trial design. This study exhibits the use of a stable isotopically labeled intravenous microdose to determine the absolute bioavailability of an oral anticancer agent in patients with LC-MS/MS as the analytical tool.

Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Oral Anticancer Drugs: The Dutch Pharmacology Oncology Group-Therapeutic Drug Monitoring Protocol for a Prospective Study.

BACKGROUND: Oral anticancer drugs show a high interpatient variability in pharmacokinetics (PK), leading to large differences in drug exposure. For many of these drugs, exposure has been linked to efficacy and toxicity. Despite this knowledge, these drugs are still administered in a one-size-fits-all approach. Consequently, individual patients have a high probability to be either underdosed, which can lead to decreased antitumor efficacy, or overdosed, which could potentially result in increased toxicity. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), personalized dosing based on measured drug levels, could be used to circumvent underdosing and overdosing and thereby optimize treatment outcomes. METHODS: In this prospective clinical study (www.trialregister.nl; NL6695), the feasibility, tolerability, and efficacy of TDM of oral anticancer drugs will be evaluated. In total, at least 600 patients will be included for (at least) 23 different compounds. Patients starting regular treatment with one of these compounds at the approved standard dose can be included. PK sampling will be performed at 4, 8, and 12 weeks after the start of treatment and every 12 weeks thereafter. Drug concentrations will be measured, and trough concentrations (Cmin) will be calculated. In cases where Cmin falls below the predefined target and acceptable toxicity, a PK-guided intervention will be recommended. This could include emphasizing compliance, adapting concomitant medication (due to drug-drug interactions), instructing to take the drug concomitant with food, splitting intake moments, or recommending a dose increase. DISCUSSION: Despite a strong rationale for the use of TDM for oral anticancer drugs, this is currently not yet widely adopted in routine patient care. This prospective study will be a valuable contribution to demonstrate the additional value of dose optimization on treatment outcome for these drugs.

Individualized dosing of oral targeted therapies in oncology is crucial in the era of precision medicine.

PURPOSE: While in the era of precision medicine, the right drug for each patient is selected based on molecular tumor characteristics, most novel oral targeted anticancer agents are still being administered using a one-size-fits-all fixed dosing approach. In this review, we discuss the scientific evidence for dose individualization of oral targeted therapies in oncology, based on therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). METHODS: Based on literature search and our own experiences, seven criteria for drugs to be suitable candidates for TDM will be addressed: (1) absence of an easily measurable biomarker for drug effect; (2) long-term therapy; (3) availability of a validated sensitive bioanalytical method; (4) significant variability in pharmacokinetic exposure; (5) narrow therapeutic range; (6) defined and consistent exposure-response relationships; (7) feasible dose-adaptation strategies. RESULTS: All of these requirements are met for most oral targeted therapies in oncology. Also, prospective studies have already shown TDM to be feasible for imatinib, pazopanib, sunitinib, everolimus, and endoxifen. CONCLUSIONS: In order to realize the full potential of personalized medicine in oncology, patients should not only be treated with the right drug, but also at the right dose. TDM could be a suitable tool to achieve this.

Harnessing soft tissue sarcoma with low-dose pazopanib - a matter of blood levels.

BACKGROUND: Pazopanib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor indicated for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma and soft tissue sarcoma. Despite the high inter-patient variability in pharmacokinetic exposure, pazopanib is administered at a fixed dose of 800 mg once daily (QD). Pharmacokinetic exposure is linked to both efficacy and toxicity. In this case report, we illustrate the value of therapeutic drug monitoring by describing two patients with adequate pazopanib trough concentrations (Cmin) at an eight times lower than standard dose. CASE PRESENTATION: Patient A is a 69-year-old woman with metastatic leiomyosarcoma who had significant toxicities and a high Cmin on the standard dose. While dose reductions to 200 mg QD and later 200 mg every other day were made, pazopanib Cmin remained above the efficacy threshold. Patient B is a 50-year-old male with metastatic angiosarcoma and a history of Gilbert syndrome. Pazopanib treatment was initiated at the standard dose of 800 mg QD, but was reduced to 200 mg QD 1-week-on - 1-week-off due to total bilirubin elevation. Pazopanib Cmin was adequate in this patient as well. CONCLUSION: It could be valuable to measure pazopanib levels in case of dose reductions due to toxicity, as exposure could still be adequate at considerably lower than standard doses.

Relation between duration of the prodromal phase and renal damage in ANCA-associated vasculitis.

BACKGROUND: In ANCA-associated vasculitis the acute phase of the disease is often preceded by prodromal symptoms. The aim of the present study was to analyze the relation between the duration of the prodromal phase and renal damage. METHODS: Patients with ANCA-associated vasculitis and renal involvement from a retrospective single-center cohort were divided into two equal groups based on the duration of the prodromal phase. The prodromal phase was defined as the time between first vasculitis related symptoms and the date of diagnosis. Clinical characteristics at diagnosis and renal items on the vasculitis damage index at 6 months were compared between the two groups. In addition, the relation between a long prodromal phase and 3-year end-stage renal disease and mortality as a composite outcome was studied. RESULTS: A total of 72 patients were included (age 64 ± 12 years; 74% male; 96% Caucasian). At diagnosis, in patients with a prodromal phase ≤22 weeks versus >22 weeks estimated glomerular filtration rate and proteinuria did not differ significantly (35 (interquartile range 50) versus 30 (50) ml/min p = 0.84; 75% versus 87%, p = 0.21 respectively). Furthermore, Birmingham Vasculitis Activity Scores were comparable (7 (3), p = 0.71). At 6 months, a long prodromal phase was associated with proteinuria (odds ratio 5.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.47-19.62), but not with an estimated glomerular filtration rate ≤ 50 ml/min (odds ratio 0.89, 95% CI 0.33-2.37) in multivariable analyses. In addition, a long prodromal phase was associated with end-stage renal disease/mortality (hazard ratio 5.22, 95% CI 1.13-24.20). CONCLUSIONS: A long prodromal phase was associated with proteinuria and 3-year end-stage renal disease/mortality, but not with a reduced renal function at 6 months. These results underline the importance of an early diagnosis in ANCA-associated vasculitis patients in order to improve renal outcomes.

Exposure-response analyses of BRAF- and MEK-inhibitors dabrafenib plus trametinib in melanoma patients.

INTRODUCTION: Dabrafenib and trametinib are currently administered at fixed doses, at which interpatient variability in exposure is high. The aim of this study was to investigate whether drug exposure is related to efficacy and toxicity in a real-life cohort of melanoma patients treated with dabrafenib plus trametinib. PATIENTS AND METHODS: An observational study was performed in which pharmacokinetic samples were collected as routine care. Using estimated dabrafenib Area Under the concentration-time Curve and trametinib trough concentrations (Cmin), univariable and multivariable exposure-response analyses were performed. RESULTS: In total, 140 patients were included. Dabrafenib exposure was not related to either progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS). Trametinib exposure was related to survival, with Cmin ≥ 15.6 ng/mL being identified as the optimal threshold. Median OS was significantly longer in patients with trametinib Cmin ≥ 15.6 ng/mL (22.8 vs. 12.6 months, P = 0.003), with a multivariable hazard ratio of 0.55 (95% CI 0.36-0.85, P = 0.007). Median PFS in patients with trametinib Cmin levels ≥ 15.6 ng/mL (37%) was 10.9 months, compared with 6.0 months for those with Cmin below this threshold (P = 0.06). Multivariable analysis resulted in a hazard ratio of 0.70 (95% CI 0.47-1.05, P = 0.082). Exposure to dabrafenib and trametinib was not related to clinically relevant toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Overall survival of metastasized melanoma patients with trametinib Cmin levels ≥ 15.6 ng/mL is ten months longer compared to patients with Cmin below this threshold. This would theoretically provide a rationale for therapeutic drug monitoring of trametinib. Although a high proportion of patients are underexposed, there is very little scope for dose increments due to the risk of serious toxicity.

Plasma concentration guided dosing of drugs used for the treatment of childhood leukaemias: protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Childhood leukaemia is the most common type of cancer in children and represents among 25% of the diagnoses in children <15 years old. Childhood survival rates have significantly improved within the last 40 years due to a rapid advancement in therapeutic interventions. However, in high-risk groups, survival rates remain poor. Pharmacokinetic (PK) data of cancer medications in children are limited and thus current dosing regimens are based on studies with small sample sizes. In adults, large variability in PK is observed and dose individualisation (plasma concentration guided dosing) has been associated with improved clinical outcomes; whether this is true for children is still unknown. This provides an opportunity to explore this strategy in children to potentially reduce toxicities and ensure optimal dosing. This paper will provide a protocol to systematically review studies that have used dose individualisation of drugs used in the treatment of childhood leukaemias. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Systematic review methodology will be applied to identify, select and extract data from published plasma guided dosing studies conducted in a paediatric leukaemia cohort. Databases (eg, Ovid Embase, Ovid MEDLINE, Ovid Cochrane) and clinical trial registries (CENTRAL, ClinicalTrials.gov and ISRCTN) will be used to perform the systematic literature search (up until February 2021). Only full empirical studies will be included, with primary clinical outcomes (progression-free survival, toxicities, minimal residual disease status, complete cytogenetic response, partial cytogenetic response and major molecular response) being used to decide whether the study will be included. The quality of included studies will be undertaken, with a subgroup analysis where appropriate. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This systematic review will not require ethics approval as there will not be collection of primary data. Findings of this review will be made available through publications in peer-reviewed journals and conference presentations. Gaps will be identified in current literature to inform future-related research. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021225045.

Effects of the Moderate CYP3A4 Inhibitor Erythromycin on the Pharmacokinetics of Palbociclib: A Randomized Crossover Trial in Patients With Breast Cancer.

Palbociclib is an oral inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 used in the treatment of locally advanced and metastatic breast cancer, and is extensively metabolized by cytochrome P450 enzyme 3A4 (CYP3A4). A pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship between palbociclib exposure and neutropenia is well known. This study aimed to investigate the effects of the moderate CYP3A4 inhibitor erythromycin on the pharmacokinetics of palbociclib. We performed a randomized crossover trial comparing the pharmacokinetics of palbociclib monotherapy 125 mg once daily (q.d.) with palbociclib 125 mg q.d. plus oral erythromycin 500 mg three times daily for seven days. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed at steady-state for both dosing schedules. Eleven evaluable patients have been enrolled. For palbociclib monotherapy, geometric mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-24h ), maximum plasma concentration (Cmax ), and minimum plasma concentration (Cmin ) were 1.46 × 103  ng•h/mL (coefficient of variation (CV) 45.0%), 80.5 ng/mL (CV 48.5%), and 48.4 ng/mL (CV 38.8%), respectively, compared with 2.09 × 103  ng•h/mL (CV 49.3%, P = 0.000977), 115 ng/mL (CV 53.7%, P = 0.00562), and 70.7 ng/mL (CV 47.5%, P = 0.000488) when palbociclib was administered concomitantly with erythromycin. Geometric mean ratios (90% confidence intervals) of AUC0-24h , Cmax , and Cmin for palbociclib plus erythromycin vs. palbociclib monotherapy were 1.43 (1.24-1.66), 1.43 (1.20-1.69), and 1.46 (1.30-1.63). Minor differences in adverse events were observed, and only one grade ≥ 3 toxicity was observed in this short period of time. To conclude, concomitant intake of palbociclib with the moderate CYP3A4 inhibitor erythromycin resulted in an increase in palbociclib AUC0-24h and Cmax of both 43%. Therefore, a dose reduction of palbociclib to 75 mg q.d. is rational, when palbociclib and moderate CYP3A4 inhibitors are used concomitantly.

Feasibility of therapeutic drug monitoring of sorafenib in patients with liver or thyroid cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Sorafenib is a tyrosine-kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of renal cell carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, thyroid carcinoma, and desmoid fibromatosis. As high inter-individual variability exists in exposure, there is a scientific rationale to pursue therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM). We investigated the feasibility of TDM in patients on sorafenib and tried to identify sub-groups in whom pharmacokinetically (PK) guided-dosing might be of added value. METHODS: We included patients who started on sorafenib (between October 2017 and June 2020) at the recommended dose of 400 mg BID or with a step-up dosing schedule. Plasma trough levels (Ctrough) were measured at pre-specified time-points. Increasing the dose was advised if Ctrough was below the target of 3750 ng/mL and toxicity was manageable. RESULTS: A total of 150 samples from 36 patients were collected. Thirty patients (83 %) had a Ctrough below the prespecified target concentration at a certain time point during treatment. Toxicity from sorafenib hampered dosing according to target Ctrough in almost half of the patients. In 11 patients, dosing was adjusted based on Ctrough. In three patients, this resulted in an adequate Ctrough without additional toxicity four weeks after the dose increase. In the remaining eight patients, dose adjustment based on Ctrough did not result in a Ctrough above the target or caused excessive toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: TDM for sorafenib is not of added value in daily clinical practice. In most cases, toxicity restricts the possibility of dose escalations.

Safety and Tolerability of MEDI0562, an OX40 Agonist mAb, in Combination with Durvalumab or Tremelimumab in Adult Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Combination therapies targeting immunologic checkpoints have shown promise in treating multiple tumor types. We report safety and tolerability of MEDI0562, a humanized IgG1K OX40 mAb, in combination with durvalumab (anti-PD-L1), or tremelimumab (anti-CTLA-4), in adult patients with previously treated advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase I, multicenter, open-label study, patients received escalating doses of MEDI0562 (2.25, 7.5, or 22.5 mg) every 2 weeks in combination with durvalumab (1,500 mg) or tremelimumab (75 or 225 mg) every 4 weeks, intravenously, until unacceptable toxicity or progressive disease. Tumor assessments were performed every 8 weeks. The primary objective was to evaluate safety and tolerability. RESULTS: Among the 27 and 31 patients who received MEDI0562 + durvalumab or MEDI0562 + tremelimumab, 74.1% and 67.7% reported a treatment-related adverse event (AE), and 22.2% and 19.4% experienced a treatment-emergent AE that led to discontinuation, respectively. The MTD of MEDI0562 + durvalumab was 7.5 mg MEDI0562 + 1,500 mg durvalumab; the maximum administered dose of MEDI0562 + tremelimumab was 22.5 mg MEDI0562 + 225 mg tremelimumab. Three patients in the MEDI0562 + durvalumab arm had a partial response. The mean percentage of Ki67+CD4+ and Ki67+CD8+ memory T cells increased by >100% following the first dose of MEDI0562 + durvalumab or tremelimumab in all dose cohorts. A decrease in OX40+FOXP3 regulatory T cells was observed in a subset of patients with available paired biopsies. CONCLUSIONS: Following dose escalation, moderate toxicity was observed in both treatment arms, with no clear efficacy signals demonstrated.

The Right Dose: From Phase I to Clinical Practice.

To realize the full potential of promising new anticancer drugs, it is of paramount importance to administer them at the right dose. The aim of this educational article is to provide several opportunities to optimize anticancer drug dosing, focusing on oral targeted therapies. First, therapeutic drug monitoring can optimize exposure in individual patients, if the optimal concentration is known. This approach is of particular interest in regard to oral kinase inhibitors with high interindividual pharmacokinetic variability. If exposure is related to response, then therapeutic drug monitoring is potentially feasible, although the clinical utility of this approach has not yet been established. Other approaches to reduce variability include administration of more frequent, smaller doses and administration under optimal prandial conditions. However, for many drugs, the labeled dose has not been demonstrated to be the optimal dose; for such agents, the vast majority of patients may be receiving excessive doses, which results in excessive toxicity. Furthermore, administration of lower off-label doses may reduce both medical and financial toxicity. These strategies should be applied from registration studies to clinical practice, with the goal of better optimizing anticancer treatment.

Precision Dosing of Targeted Therapies Is Ready for Prime Time.

Fixed dosing of oral targeted therapies is inadequate in the era of precision medicine. Personalized dosing, based on pharmacokinetic (PK) exposure, known as therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM), is rational and supported by increasing evidence. The purpose of this perspective is to discuss whether randomized studies are needed to confirm the clinical value of precision dosing in oncology. PK-based dose adjustments are routinely made for many drugs and are recommended by health authorities, for example, for patients with renal impairment or for drug-drug interaction management strategies. Personalized dosing simply extrapolates this paradigm from selected patient populations to each individual patient with suboptimal exposure, irrespective of the underlying cause. If it has been demonstrated that exposure is related to a relevant clinical outcome, such as efficacy or toxicity, and that exposure can be optimized by PK-guided dosing, it could be logically assumed that PK-guided dosing would result in better treatment outcomes without the need for randomized confirmatory trials. We propose a path forward to demonstrate the clinical relevance of individualized dosing of molecularly-targeted anticancer drugs.

Exposure-Response Analyses of Anaplastic Lymphoma Kinase Inhibitors Crizotinib and Alectinib in Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer Patients.

Crizotinib and alectinib are anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-inhibitors indicated for the treatment of ALK-positive metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). At the currently used fixed doses, interindividual variability in exposure is high. The aim of this study was to investigate whether minimum plasma concentrations (Cmin ) of crizotinib and alectinib are related to efficacy and toxicity. An observational study was performed, in which ALK-positive NSCLC patients who were treated with crizotinib and alectinib and from whom pharmacokinetic samples were collected in routine care, were included in the study. Exposure-response analyses were explored using previously proposed Cmin thresholds of 235 ng/mL for crizotinib and 435 ng/mL for alectinib. Forty-eight crizotinib and 52 alectinib patients were included. For crizotinib, median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 5.7 vs. 17.4 months for patients with Cmin  < 235 ng/mL (48%) and ≥ 235 ng/mL, respectively (P = 0.08). In multivariable analysis, Cmin  < 235 ng/mL resulted in a hazard ratio (HR) of 1.79 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.90-3.59, P = 0.100). In a pooled analysis of all crizotinib patients (not only ALK-positive, n = 79), the HR was 2.15 (95% CI, 1.21-3.84, P = 0.009). For alectinib, mPFS was 12.6 months vs. not estimable (95% CI, 19.8-not estimable) for patients with Cmin  < 435 ng/mL (37%) and ≥ 435 ng/mL, respectively (P = 0.04). Multivariable analysis resulted in an HR of 4.29 (95% CI, 1.33-13.90, P = 0.015). In conclusion, PFS of crizotinib and alectinib treated NSCLC patients is prolonged in patients with Cmin  ≥ 235 ng/mL and 435 ng/mL, respectively. Therefore, therapeutic drug monitoring should be part of routine clinical management for these agents.

Developing a Nationwide Infrastructure for Therapeutic Drug Monitoring of Targeted Oral Anticancer Drugs: The ON-TARGET Study Protocol.

Exposure-efficacy and/or exposure-toxicity relationships have been identified for up to 80% of oral anticancer drugs (OADs). Usually, OADs are administered at fixed doses despite their high interindividual pharmacokinetic variability resulting in large differences in drug exposure. Consequently, a substantial proportion of patients receive a suboptimal dose. Therapeutic Drug Monitoring (TDM), i.e., dosing based on measured drug concentrations, may be used to improve treatment outcomes. The prospective, multicenter, non-interventional ON-TARGET study (DRKS00025325) aims to investigate the potential of routine TDM to reduce adverse drug reactions in renal cell carcinoma patients receiving axitinib or cabozantinib. Furthermore, the feasibility of using volumetric absorptive microsampling (VAMS), a minimally invasive and easy to handle blood sampling technique, for sample collection is examined. During routine visits, blood samples are collected and sent to bioanalytical laboratories. Venous and VAMS blood samples are collected in the first study phase to facilitate home-based capillary blood sampling in the second study phase. Within one week, the drug plasma concentrations are measured, interpreted, and reported back to the physician. Patients report their drug intake and toxicity using PRO-CTCAE-based questionnaires in dedicated diaries. Ultimately, the ON-TARGET study aims to develop a nationwide infrastructure for TDM for oral anticancer drugs.