Adjunction of a fish oil emulsion to cytarabine and daunorubicin induction chemotherapy in high-risk AML.

The treatment of acute myeloid leukemia (AML) with unfavorable cytogenetics treatment remains a challenge. We previously established that ex vivo exposure of AML blasts to eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), docosahexaenoic acid (DHA), or fish oil emulsion (FO) induces Nrf2 pathway activation, metabolic switch, and cell death. The FILO group launched a pilot clinical study to evaluate the feasibility, safety, and efficacy of the adjunction of a commercial FO emulsion to 3 + 7 in untreated AML with unfavorable cytogenetics. The primary objective was complete response (CR). Thirty patients were included. FO administration raised the plasma levels of eicosapentaenoic (EPA) and docosahexaenoic (DHA) acids (p < 0.001). The pharmacokinetics of cytarabine and daunorubicin were unaffected. A historical comparison to the LAM2001 trial (Lioure et al. Blood 2012) found a higher frequency of grade 3 serious adverse events, with no drug-related unexpected toxicity. The CR rate was 77%, and the partial response (PR) 10%, not significantly superior to that of the previous study (CR 72%, PR 1%). RT-qPCR analysis of Nrf2 target genes and antioxidant enzymes did not show a significant in vivo response. Overall, FO emulsion adjunction to 3 + 7 is feasible. An improvement in CR was not shown in this cohort of high-risk patients. The present data does not support the use of FO in adjunction with 3 + 7 in high-risk AML patients.ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01999413.

A successful compartmental approach for the treatment of breast cancer brain metastases.

BACKGROUND: Brain metastases are challenging daily practice in oncology and remain a compartmental problem since most anti-cancer drugs do not cross the blood-brain barrier at relevant pharmacological concentrations. METHODS: In a young woman with HER2-overexpressing breast cancer resistant to standard treatments, at the time of brain metastases progression, a ventricular reservoir was implanted for intrathecal drug injections and detailed pharmacokinetic studies. RESULTS: A first association of intrathecal trastuzumab with intravenous cisplatin was offered to the patient. For trastuzumab, the mean cerebrospinal fluid trough concentration of 53.4 mg/L reached relevant levels, enabling the stabilization of the metastases. Adding intravenous cisplatin was not beneficial, since the cerebrospinal fluid exposure was almost undetectable under 0.08 mg/L. We then offered the patient an intrathecal combination of trastuzumab and methotrexate, because of their in vitro synergic cytotoxicity. The cerebrospinal fluid peak of methotrexate was 1037 µmol/L at 2 h, and the concentrations remained above the theoretical therapeutic concentration. After 2 months of this drug combination, we obtained an excellent response on the brain metastases. CONCLUSION: Our preliminary study supports the interest of a compartmental approach through a direct administration of drugs into the cerebrospinal fluid for the treatment of breast cancer brain metastases.

A novel way to manage trastuzumab cardiotoxicity.

PURPOSE: Trastuzumab is the most widely prescribed anti-HER2 humanized monoclonal antibody. Cardiac toxicity is the only limiting toxicity of trastuzumab and it is of particular concern in patients with complete response, since the drug needs to be stopped, with a risk of disease relapse. To date, no pharmacological data on trastuzumab cardiotoxicity in patients have been made available. Here, we provide proof of concept, demonstrating that it was possible to prevent trastuzumab-induced cardiotoxicity by modifying the drug administration schedule. METHODS: In this paper, we report the case of a patient with metastatic breast cancer responding to trastuzumab, who developed severe cardiac toxicity twice using a 3-weekly regimen. Considering preclinical pharmacological data on trastuzumab cardiotoxicity, we hypothesized that a weekly schedule of trastuzumab with lower peaks of serum concentration could be safe while remaining efficient. With the patient's consent, we started a weekly combination of carboplatin (AUC2) and trastuzumab (2 mg/kg) with close monitoring of trastuzumab concentrations. RESULTS: We successfully controlled the disease for an additional 6 months with relevant trough concentrations of trastuzumab of around 50 mg/L. Another important aspect is that, with this weekly schedule, we observed no cardiac toxicity, and the left ventricular ejection fraction remained stabilized, at over 50%. CONCLUSIONS: Trastuzumab is the most widely prescribed anti-HER2 monoclonal antibody for the treatment of HER2 metastatic breast cancer, and it is the only drug that has been approved for the treatment of localized HER2 breast cancer, 1-year treatment being required after surgery. In case of cardiac toxicity, particularly in women over 60 years of age, a weekly regimen with lower peaks of concentration could be an alternative to the standard 3-weekly regimen.

Immunoassays for Measuring Serum Concentrations of Monoclonal Antibodies and Anti-biopharmaceutical Antibodies in Patients.

Monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) may be used as biopharmaceuticals to treat various diseases, ranging from oncology to inflammatory and cardiovascular affections. Trustworthy analytical methods are necessary to study their pharmacokinetics, both during their development and in post-marketing studies. Because biopharmaceuticals are macromolecules, ligand-binding assays (both immunoassays and bioassays) are methods of choice to measure their concentrations. Immunoassays are based on the capture of biopharmaceuticals by their target, which may be a circulating or membrane antigen or by an antibody recognizing their structure. Bioassays measure the activity of the biopharmaceutical in a specific in vitro test. A number of techniques have been reported, but their limits of detection and quantification vary widely. Anti-drug antibodies (ADA) against biopharmaceuticals are often formed and sometimes interfere with clinical efficacy. Accurate and reliable detection of ADA is therefore necessary. Binding of ADA is dependent on affinity and avidity, which makes quantification challenging. In this review, we discuss the benefits and limitations of each method to determine mAb levels and carefully compare ADA assays.