Population Pharmacokinetics of Sacituzumab Govitecan in Patients with Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer and Other Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Sacituzumab govitecan (SG) is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an antibody with affinity for Trop-2 coupled to SN-38 via hydrolyzable linker. SG is approved for patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) who have received two or more prior chemotherapies (at least one in a metastatic setting) and for patients with pretreated hormone receptor positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative (HER2-) metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: In these analyses, the pharmacokinetics of SG, free SN-38, and total antibody (tAB) were characterized using data from 529 patients with mTNBC or other solid tumors across two large clinical trials (NCT01631552; ASCENT, NCT02574455). Three population pharmacokinetic models were constructed using non-linear mixed-effects modeling; clinically relevant covariates were evaluated to assess their impact on exposure. Models for SG and tAB were developed independently whereas free SN-38 was sequentially generated via a first-order release process from SG. RESULTS: Pharmacokinetics of the three analytes were each described by a two-compartment model with estimated body weight-based scaling exponents for clearance and volume. Typical parameter estimates for clearance and steady-state volume of distribution were 0.133 L/h and 3.68 L for SG and 0.0164 L/h and 4.26 L for tAB, respectively. Mild-to-moderate renal impairment, mild hepatic impairment, age, sex, baseline albumin level, tumor type, UGT1A1 genotype, or Trop-2 expression did not have a clinically relevant impact on exposure for any of the three analytes. CONCLUSIONS: These analyses support the approved SG dosing regimen of 10 mg/kg as intravenous infusion on days 1 and 8 of 21-day cycles and did not identify a need for dose adjustment based on evaluated covariates or disease characteristics.

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of inhaled remdesivir in healthy participants.

Intravenous remdesivir (RDV) is US Food and Drug Administration-approved for hospitalized and nonhospitalized individuals with coronavirus disease 2019. RDV undergoes intracellular metabolic activation to form the active triphosphate, GS-443902, and other metabolites. Alternative administration routes, including localized pulmonary delivery, can lower systemic exposure and maximize exposure at the site of action. This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of inhaled RDV in healthy adults. This phase Ia, randomized, placebo-controlled study evaluated inhaled RDV in healthy participants randomized 4:1 to receive RDV or placebo as single doses (4 cohorts) or multiple once-daily doses (3 cohorts). Doses in cohorts 1-6 were administered as an aerosolized solution for inhalation through a sealed facemask; doses in cohort 7 were administered as an aerosolized solution for inhalation through a mouthpiece. Safety was assessed throughout the study. Seventy-two participants were enrolled (inhaled RDV, n = 58 and placebo, n = 14). Following single RDV doses, RDV, GS-704277, and GS-441524 plasma PK parameters indicated dose-proportional increases in area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) extrapolated to infinite time, AUC from time zero to last quantifiable concentration, and maximum observed concentration. Analyte plasma concentrations after multiple RDV doses were consistent with those for single-dose RDV. Analyte plasma exposures were lower when RDV was administered with a mouthpiece versus a sealed facemask. The most common adverse events included nausea, dizziness, and cough. Single- and multiple-dose inhaled RDV exhibited linear and dose-proportional plasma PK. Administration of RDV via inhalation was generally safe and well-tolerated.

Optimizing outcomes and managing adverse events in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer: a clinical pharmacology perspective.

INTRODUCTION: Bladder cancer (BC) is the sixth most common type of cancer with epithelial/urothelial and non-urothelial origins. Urothelial carcinoma (UC) involves neoplastic cells of epithelial origin and accounts for 90% of all BC cases. Current review aims to discuss the latest advances and challenges in the treatment of UC with an emphasis on clinical pharmacology considerations. AREAS COVERED: Data including clinical efficacy and safety outcomes as well as precautions reported in published clinical studies obtained from PubMed and package inserts were collected and summarized in the review. Recent decade saw the approval of multiple drugs for the treatment of BC in both adjuvant/neoadjuvant setting as well as for unresectable tumors. Checkpoint blockers (pembrolizumab, nivolumab, atezolizumab, and avelumab), antibody drug conjugates (enfortumab vedotin and sacituzumab govitecan) and targeted therapies (erdafitinib) are now available in first-line (cisplatin-ineligible), second-line and third-line settings along with conventional platinum-based chemotherapy. While the survival outcomes have improved especially in refractory and unresponsive patients, the response rates are relatively low and patient safety needs further optimization. EXPERT OPINION: Additional studies on combination therapies, dose adjustments in special populations and impact of anti-drug antibodies on drug exposure are needed to further improve clinical outcomes.

Evolution of preclinical characterization and insights into clinical pharmacology of checkpoint inhibitors approved for cancer immunotherapy.

Cancer immunotherapy has significantly advanced the treatment paradigm in oncology, with approvals of immuno-oncology agents for over 16 indications, many of them first line. Checkpoint inhibitors (CPIs) are recognized as an essential backbone for a successful anticancer therapy regimen. This review focuses on the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory approvals of major CPIs and the evolution of translational advances since their first approval close to a decade ago. In addition, critical preclinical and clinical pharmacology considerations, an overview of the pharmacokinetic and dose/regimen aspects, and a discussion of the future of CPI translational and clinical pharmacology as combination therapy becomes a mainstay of industrial immunotherapy development and in clinical practice are also discussed.

Real-world data prognostic model of overall survival in patients with advanced NSCLC receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 immune checkpoint inhibitors as second-line monotherapy.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: The objective of this retrospective, observational, noninterventional cohort study was to investigate prognostic factors of overall survival (OS) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) and to develop a novel prognostic model. METHODS: A total of 4049 patients with aNSCLC diagnosed between January 2011 and February 2020 who received atezolizumab, nivolumab, or pembrolizumab as second-line monotherapy were selected from a real-world deidentified database to build the cohort. Patients could not have received first-line treatment with clinical study drug(s) nor immune checkpoint inhibitors including anti-programmed cell death 1 (PD-1)/programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1), and anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4 therapies. RESULTS: Patients had a median age of 69 years; 45% were female, 75% White, 70% had stage IV at initial diagnosis, and 70% had nonsquamous histology. A Cox proportional hazards model with lasso regularization was used to build a prognostic model for OS using 18 baseline demographic and clinical factors based on the real-world data cohort. The risk-increasing prognostic factors were abnormally low albumin and chloride levels, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score ≥ 2, and abnormally high levels of alkaline phosphatase and white blood cells. The risk-decreasing prognostic factors were PD-L1 positivity, longer time from advanced diagnosis to start of first-line therapy, and higher systolic blood pressure. The performance of the model was validated using data from the OAK trial, and the c-index for the OAK trial validation cohort was 0.65 and 0.67 for the real-world data cohort. CONCLUSIONS: Based on baseline demographic and clinical factors from a real-world setting, this prognostic model was developed to discriminate the risk of death in patients with aNSCLC treated with checkpoint inhibitors as second-line monotherapy, and it performed well in the real-world data and clinical trial cohorts.

Evaluation of atezolizumab immunogenicity: Clinical pharmacology (part 1).

Baseline patient characteristics and prognostic factors are important considerations in oncology when evaluating the impact of immunogenicity on pharmacokinetics (PK) and efficacy. Here, we assessed the impact of anti-drug antibodies (ADA) on the PK of the immune checkpoint inhibitor atezolizumab (an anti-PD-L1 monoclonal antibody). We evaluated data from ≈ 4500 patients from 12 clinical trials across different tumor types, treatment settings, and dosing regimens. In our dataset, ~ 30% of patients (range, 13-54%) developed treatment-emergent ADA, and in vitro neutralizing antibodies (NAb) were seen in ~ 50% of ADA-positive (+) patients. Pooled time course data showed a trend toward lower atezolizumab exposure in ADA+ patients, which was more pronounced in ADA+/NAb+ patients. However, the atezolizumab concentration distributions overlapped, and drug concentrations exceeded 6 µg/ml, the target concentration required for receptor saturation, in greater than 95% of patients. Patients had sufficient exposure regardless of ADA status. The dose selected to allow for dosing over effects from ADA resulted in a flat exposure-response relationship. Analysis of study results by ADA titer showed that exposure and overall survival were not affected in a clinically meaningful way. High tumor burden, low albumin, and high CRP at baseline showed the greatest association with ADA development but not with subsequent NAb development. These imbalanced factors at baseline can confound analysis of ADA impact. ADA increases atezolizumab clearance minimally (9%), and its impact on exposure based on the totality of the clinical pharmacology assessment does not appear to be clinically meaningful.

Population pharmacokinetic and exploratory exposure-response analysis of the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer in the FeDeriCa study.

PURPOSE: To characterize pertuzumab pharmacokinetics (PK) in FeDeriCa (NCT03493854: fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection [PH FDC SC] versus intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab); derive individual pertuzumab exposures in the PH FDC SC arm for subsequent pertuzumab exposure-response (ER) analyses; compare observed trastuzumab PK with predicted exposures from a previous SC trastuzumab model; assess whether pertuzumab affects trastuzumab PK; evaluate pertuzumab exposure-efficacy and -safety relationships and support the approved SC dosing regimen. METHODS: Population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations were used to describe the data. Standard goodness-of-fit diagnostics and prediction-corrected visual predictive checks were used for model performance assessment. Covariates were included from previously reported models. ER analysis was conducted using logistic regression. RESULTS: SC pertuzumab PK was described adequately by a two-compartment model with first-order absorption; significant covariates included in the final model were albumin, lean body weight, and Asian region; however, these appeared not to be clinically relevant. Trastuzumab concentrations were described adequately by the previous model; there was no evidence of a pertuzumab effect on trastuzumab PK as part of PH FDC SC and higher model-predicted pertuzumab exposure was not associated with differences in pathologic complete response rate or an increased probability of selected grade ≥ 3 adverse events of interest. CONCLUSION: The approved PH FDC SC dose [loading: 1200/600 mg pertuzumab/trastuzumab (15 mL); maintenance: 600 mg pertuzumab/trastuzumab (10 mL) and 2000 U/mL recombinant human hyaluronidase every 3 weeks] provides a positive benefit-risk profile with comparable efficacy and safety to intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab.

Impact of Dose Delays and Alternative Dosing Regimens on Pertuzumab Pharmacokinetics.

PERJETA (pertuzumab), administered with Herceptin (trastuzumab), is used in the treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer. Pertuzumab is currently approved with an initial loading dose of 840 mg, followed by a 420-mg maintenance dose intravenously every 3 weeks. A reloading dose is required if there is a ≥6-week delay in treatment. In response to the potential treatment disruption due to COVID-19, the impact of dose delays and alternative dosing regimens on intravenous pertuzumab for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive breast cancer treatment is presented. Simulations were conducted by using the validated population pharmacokinetic model for pertuzumab, and included (1) 4-, 6-, and 9-week dose delays of the 840 mg/420 mg every 3 weeks dosing regimen and (2) 840 mg/420 mg every 4 weeks and 840 mg every 6 weeks alternative dosing regimens. Simulations were compared with the currently approved pertuzumab dosing regimen. The simulations in 1000 virtual patients showed that a dose reload (840 mg) is required following a dose delay of ≥6 weeks to maintain comparable Ctrough (lowest concentration before the next dose is given) levels to clinical trials. The 840 mg/420 mg every 4 weeks and 840 mg every 6 weeks alternative dosing regimens decrease median steady-state Ctrough by ≈40% compared with the approved regimen, and <90% of patients will be above the target Ctrough . Thus, the alternative 840 mg/420 mg every 4 weeks and 840 mg every 6 weeks pertuzumab dosing regimens are not recommended. Flexibility for intravenous PERJETA-based regimens is available with an alternative route of pertuzumab administration (subcutaneous vs intravenous).

Effect of Hepatic Impairment on Cobimetinib Pharmacokinetics: The Complex Interplay Between Physiological Changes and Drug Characteristics.

Cobimetinib is a kinase inhibitor indicated for use in combination with vemurafenib for treatment of unresectable/metastatic melanoma with specific BRAF mutations. Cobimetinib is extensively metabolized in liver; thus, patients with hepatic impairment (HI) might have increased cobimetinib exposure. In this study, we investigated the impact of HI on the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of cobimetinib. Subjects with normal hepatic function and mild to severe HI were enrolled. All subjects received a single oral dose of 10 mg cobimetinib, and serial blood samples were collected at specified times. Cobimetinib PK in subjects with mild and moderate HI was similar to that in those with normal liver function. However, subjects with severe HI, on average, showed ∼30% lower total AUC0-∞ and ∼2-fold higher unbound AUC0-∞ compared with those with normal hepatic function. These exposure differences can be explained by lower albumin levels observed in subjects with severe HI, the strong correlation between albumin level and the unbound fraction and the general PK variability of cobimetinib. In addition, previous studies with cobimetinib showed a lack of an exposure-response relationship for efficacy and safety. Therefore, collectively, our results suggest that the starting dose for patients with hepatic impairment can be the same as that for those with normal hepatic function.

Personalized Cancer Vaccines: Clinical Landscape, Challenges, and Opportunities.

Tremendous innovation is underway among a rapidly expanding repertoire of promising personalized immune-based treatments. Therapeutic cancer vaccines (TCVs) are attractive systemic immunotherapies that activate and expand antigen-specific CD8+ and CD4+ T cells to enhance anti-tumor immunity. Our review highlights key issues impacting TCVs in clinical practice and reports on progress in development. We review the mechanism of action, immune-monitoring, dosing strategies, combinations, obstacles, and regulation of cancer vaccines. Most trials of personalized TCVs are ongoing and represent diverse platforms with predominantly early investigations of mRNA, DNA, or peptide-based targeting strategies against neoantigens in solid tumors, with many in combination immunotherapies. Multiple delivery systems, routes of administration, and dosing strategies are used. Intravenous or intramuscular administration is common, including delivery by lipid nanoparticles. Absorption and biodistribution impact antigen uptake, expression, and presentation, affecting the strength, speed, and duration of immune response. The emerging trials illustrate the complexity of developing this class of innovative immunotherapies. Methodical testing of the multiple potential factors influencing immune responses, as well as refined quantitative methodologies to facilitate optimal dosing strategies, could help resolve uncertainty of therapeutic approaches. To increase the likelihood of success in bringing these medicines to patients, several unique development challenges must be overcome.

Confounding factors in exposure-response analyses and mitigation strategies for monoclonal antibodies in oncology.

Dose selection and optimization is an important topic in drug development to maximize treatment benefits for all patients. While exposure-response (E-R) analysis is a useful method to inform dose-selection strategy, in oncology, special considerations for prognostic factors are needed due to their potential to confound the E-R analysis for monoclonal antibodies. The current review focuses on 3 different approaches to mitigate the confounding effects for monoclonal antibodies in oncology: (i) Cox-proportional hazards modelling and case-matching; (ii) tumour growth inhibition-overall survival modelling; and (iii) multiple dose level study design. In the presence of confounding effects, studying multiple dose levels may be required to reveal the true E-R relationship. However, it is impractical for pivotal trials in oncology drug development programmes. Therefore, the strengths and weaknesses of the other 2 approaches are considered, and the favourable utility of tumour growth inhibition-overall survival modelling to address confounding in E-R analyses is described. In the broader scope of oncology drug development, this review discusses the downfall of the current emphasis on E-R analyses using data from single dose level trials and proposes that development programmes be designed to study more dose levels in earlier trials.

Application of a Two-Analyte Integrated Population Pharmacokinetic Model to Evaluate the Impact of Intrinsic and Extrinsic Factors on the Pharmacokinetics of Polatuzumab Vedotin in Patients with Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: The established two-analyte integrated population pharmacokinetic model was applied to assess the impact of intrinsic/extrinsic factors on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of polatuzumab vedotin (pola) in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (NHL) following bodyweight-based dosing. METHODS: Model simulations based on individual empirical Bayes estimates were used to evaluate the impact of intrinsic/extrinsic factors as patient subgroups on Cycle 6 exposures. Intrinsic factors included bodyweight, age, sex, hepatic and renal functions. Extrinsic factors included rituximab/obinutuzumab or bendamustine combination with pola and manufacturing process. The predicted impact on exposures along with the established exposure-response relationships were used to assess clinical relevance. RESULTS: No clinically meaningful differences in Cycle 6 pola exposures were found for the following subgroups: bodyweight 100-146 kg versus 38-<100 kg, age ≥ 65 years versus <65 years, female versus male, mild hepatic impairment versus normal, mild-to-moderate renal impairment versus normal. Co-administration of rituximab/obinutuzumab or bendamustine, and change in the pola manufacturing process, also had no meaningful impact on PK. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with NHL, bodyweight-based dosing is adequate, and no further dose adjustment is recommended for the heavier subgroup (100-146 kg). In addition, no dose adjustments are recommended for other subgroups based on intrinsic/extrinsic factors evaluated.

Impact of Physiologically Based Pharmacokinetics, Population Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacokinetics/Pharmacodynamics in the Development of Antibody-Drug Conjugates.

Antibody-drug conjugates are important molecular entities in the treatment of cancer, with 8 antibody-drug conjugates approved by the US Food and Drug Administration since 2000 and many more in early- and late-stage clinical development. These conjugates combine the target specificity of monoclonal antibodies with the potent anticancer activity of small-molecule therapeutics. The complex structure of antibody-drug conjugates poses unique challenges to pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) characterization because it requires a quantitative understanding of the PK and PD properties of multiple different molecular species (eg, conjugate, total antibody, and unconjugated payload) in different tissues. Quantitative clinical pharmacology using mathematical modeling and simulation provides an excellent approach to overcome these challenges, as it can simultaneously integrate the disposition, PK, and PD of antibody-drug conjugates and their components in a quantitative manner. In this review, we highlight diverse quantitative clinical pharmacology approaches, ranging from system models (eg, physiologically based pharmacokinetic [PBPK] modeling) to mechanistic and empirical models (eg, population PK/PD modeling for single or multiple analytes, exposure-response modeling, platform modeling by pooling data across multiple antibody-drug conjugates). The impact of these PBPK and PK/PD models to provide insights into clinical dosing justification and inform drug development decisions is also highlighted.

Asian race and origin have no clinically meaningful effects on polatuzumab vedotin pharmacokinetics in patients with relapsed/refractory B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

PURPOSE: The CD79b-targeted antibody-drug conjugate polatuzumab vedotin (pola), alone and with chemoimmunotherapy, has clinical efficacy and a tolerable safety profile in B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL). We assessed (a) whether exposure from global studies of pola is comparable to Asian patients, and (b) if the recommended pola dose is appropriate in Asian patients based on exposure. METHODS: The pharmacokinetics (PK) of pola in Asian and global populations was characterized for three analytes (antibody-conjugated monomethyl auristatin E (MMAE) [acMMAE], total antibody, and unconjugated MMAE) in five phase 1b/2 single-agent and combination studies in B-NHL patients (JO29138 [JAPICCTI-142580], DCS4968g [NCT01290549], GO27834 [NCT01691898], GO29044 [NCT01992653], and GO29365 [NCT02257567]). PK data were compared between Japanese phase 1 JO29138 (JAPICCTI-142580) and global phase 1 DCS4968g (NCT01290549) studies and between Asian and non-Asian patients in the randomized relapsed/refractory B-NHL cohorts of the phase 1b/2 study GO29365 (NCT02257567). A population PK (popPK) model was used to assess the effects of Asian race and region on acMMAE and unconjugated MMAE exposure. RESULTS: PK non-compartmental analysis (NCA) parameters for the key analyte acMMAE in the Japanese JO29138 (JAPICCTI-142580) and global phase 1 DCS4968g (NCT01290549) studies were similar. In GO29365 (NCT02257567), the phase 1b/2 combination study, mean exposure to the analytes was generally lower in Asian patients (by ~ 9.9 to 17.5%), but not to a clinically meaningful extent. Overall, the popPK model further suggested comparable PK in Asian patients with B-NHL (race or region) versus non-Asian patients. CONCLUSION: Race has no clinically meaningful effect on pola PK. These results (and observations from efficacy/safety exposure-response analyses) support no pola dose adjustments are warranted for Asian patients with DLBCL.

Exposure-safety and exposure-efficacy analyses of polatuzumab vedotin in patients with relapsed or refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Exposure-response relationships were investigated to assess the risk/benefit of polatuzumab vedotin (pola) + bendamustine-rituximab (pola + BR) in relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (R/R DLBCL). Analyses were conducted in pivotal study GO29365 (NCT02257567; BR/pola + BR/pola + BG [BG: bendamustine-obinutuzumab]; 1.8 mg/kg pola, every 3 weeks [Q3W], six cycles), and supportive studies DCS4968g (NCT01290549) and GO27834 (NCT01691898) (pola/pola + R/pola + G; 0.1-2.4 mg/kg pola Q3W; eight-cycle landmark), separately. Exposure was characterized as simulated cycle-6 AUC and Cmax for antibody-conjugated mono-methyl auristatin E (acMMAE) and unconjugated MMAE. Supportive studies showed response rate and safety risk (grade ≥2 peripheral neuropathy; grade ≥3 anemia) increased with exposure, suggesting not to dose below 1.8 mg/kg (up to eight-cycle) for balancing safety and efficacy. Pivotal study with limited exposure range showed no exposure-safety relationship and slightly positive exposure (acMMAE)-efficacy relationship for overall survival. The exposure-response analyses and the observed risk/benefit characteristics in pivotal study supported pola (1.8 mg/kg) +BR Q3W for six cycles in R/R DLBCL patients.

Pharmacokinetics of polatuzumab vedotin in combination with R/G-CHP in patients with B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma.

PURPOSE: The phase Ib/II open-label study (NCT01992653) evaluated the antibody-drug conjugate polatuzumab vedotin (pola) plus rituximab/obinutuzumab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (R/G-CHP) as first-line therapy for B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphoma (B-NHL). We report the pharmacokinetics (PK) and drug-drug interaction (DDI) for pola. METHODS: Six or eight cycles of pola 1.0-1.8 mg/kg were administered intravenously every 3 weeks (q3w) with R/G-CHP. Exposures of pola [including antibody-conjugated monomethyl auristatin E (acMMAE) and unconjugated MMAE] and R/G-CHP were assessed by non-compartmental analysis and/or descriptive statistics with cross-cycle comparisons to cycle 1 and/or after multiple cycles. Pola was evaluated as a potential victim and perpetrator of a PK drug-drug interaction with R/G-CHP. Population PK (popPK) analysis assessed the impact of prior treatment status (naïve vs. relapsed/refractory) on pola PK. RESULTS: Pola PK was similar between treatment arms and independent of line of therapy. Pola PK was dose proportional from 1.0 to 1.8 mg/kg with R/G-CHP. Geometric mean volume of distribution and clearance of acMMAE ranged from 57.3 to 95.6 mL/kg and 12.7 to 18.2 mL/kg/day, respectively. acMMAE exhibited multi-exponential decay (elimination half-life ~ 1 week). Unconjugated MMAE exhibited formation rate-limited kinetics. Exposures of pola with R/G-CHP were similar to those in the absence of CHP; exposures of R/G-CHP in the presence of pola were comparable to those in the absence of pola. CONCLUSIONS: Pola PK was well characterized with no clinically meaningful DDIs with R/G-CHP. Findings are consistent with previous studies of pola + R/G, and support pola + R/G-CHP use in previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Integrated Two-Analyte Population Pharmacokinetic Model of Polatuzumab Vedotin in Patients With Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma.

A two-analyte integrated population pharmacokinetic (PK) model that simultaneously describes concentrations of antibody-conjugated monomethyl auristatin E (acMMAE) and unconjugated MMAE following repeated administrations of polatuzumab vedotin (pola) was developed based on data from four clinical studies of pola in patients with non-Hodgkin lymphoma. A two-compartment model with a nonspecific, time-dependent linear clearance, a linear time-dependent exponentially declining clearance, and a Michaelis-Menten clearance provided a good fit of the acMMAE plasma PK profiles. All three acMMAE elimination pathways contributed to the input to the central compartment of unconjugated MMAE, which was also described by a two-compartment model. Population PK parameters, covariate effects, and interindividual variability of model parameters were estimated. The impact of clinically relevant covariates on PK exposures of each analyte were quantified and reported to support key label claims.

Clinical pharmacology of vc-MMAE antibody-drug conjugates in cancer patients: learning from eight first-in-human Phase 1 studies.

vc-MMAE antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) consist of a monoclonal antibody (mAb) covalently bound with a potent anti-mitotic toxin (MMAE) through a protease-labile valine-citrulline (vc) linker. The objective of this study was to characterize the pharmacokinetics (PK) and explore exposure-response relationships of eight vc-MMAE ADCs, against different targets and for diverse tumor indications, using data from eight first-in-human Phase 1 studies. PK parameters of the three analytes, namely antibody-conjugated MMAE (acMMAE), total antibody, and unconjugated MMAE, were estimated using non-compartmental approaches and compared across the eight vc-MMAE ADCs. Relationships between analytes were assessed by linear regression. Exposure-response relationships were explored with key efficacy (objective response rate) and safety (Grade 2+ peripheral neuropathy) endpoints. PK profiles of acMMAE, total antibody and unconjugated MMAE following the first dose of 2.4 mg/kg were comparable across the eight ADCs; the exposure differences between molecules were small relative to the inter-subject variability. acMMAE exposure was strongly correlated with total antibody exposure for all the eight ADCs, but such correlation was less evident between acMMAE and unconjugated MMAE exposure. For multiple ADCs evaluated, efficacy and safety endpoints appeared to correlate well with acMMAE exposure, but not with unconjugated MMAE over the doses tested. PK of vc-MMAE ADCs was well characterized and demonstrated remarkable similarity at 2.4 mg/kg across the eight ADCs. Results from analyte correlation and exposure-response relationship analyses suggest that measurement of acMMAE analyte alone might be adequate for vc-MMAE ADCs to support the clinical pharmacology strategy used during late-stage clinical development.