Phase IB Dose Escalation and Expansion Study of AKT Inhibitor Afuresertib with Carboplatin and Paclitaxel in Recurrent Platinum-resistant Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: Preclinically, AKT kinase inhibition restores drug sensitivity in platinum-resistant tumors. Here the pan-AKT kinase inhibitor afuresertib was given in combination with paclitaxel and carboplatin (PC) in patients with recurrent platinum-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer (PROC) and primary platinum-refractory ovarian cancer (PPROC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Part I was a combination 3+3 dose escalation study for recurrent ovarian cancer. Patients received daily continuous oral afuresertib at 50-150 mg/day with intravenous paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) and carboplatin (AUC5) every 3 weeks for six cycles followed by maintenance afuresertib at 125 mg/day until progression or toxicity. Part II was a single-arm evaluation of the clinical activity of this combination in recurrent PROC (Cohort A) or PPROC (Cohort B). Patients received oral afuresertib at the MTD defined in Part I in combination with PC for six cycles, followed by maintenance afuresertib. Primary endpoints were safety and tolerability of afuresertib in combination with PC (Part I, dose escalation), and investigator-assessed overall response rate (ORR) as per RECIST version 1.1 (Part II). RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients enrolled into Part I, and 30 into Part II. Three dose-limiting toxicities of grade 3 rash were observed, one at 125 mg and two at 150 mg afuresertib. The MTD of afuresertib in combination with PC was therefore identified as 125 mg/day. The most common (≥50%) drug-related adverse events observed in Part I of the study were nausea, diarrhea, vomiting, alopecia, fatigue, and neutropenia and, in Part II, were diarrhea, fatigue, nausea, and alopecia. The Part II ORR in the intention to treat patients was 32% [95% confidence interval (CI), 15.9-52.4] by RECIST 1.1 and 52% (95% CI, 31.3-72.2) by GCIG CA125 criteria. Median progression-free survival was 7.1 months (95% CI, 6.3-9.0 months). CONCLUSIONS: Afuresertib plus PC demonstrated efficacy in recurrent PROC with the MTD of afuresertib defined as 125 mg/day.

Durable treatment-free remission in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia in chronic phase following frontline nilotinib: 96-week update of the ENESTfreedom study.

PURPOSE: ENESTfreedom is evaluating treatment-free remission (TFR) following frontline nilotinib in patients with chronic myeloid leukemia (CML) in chronic phase. Following our primary analysis at 48 weeks, we here provide an updated 96-week analysis. METHODS: Attempting TFR required ≥ 3 years of nilotinib, a molecular response of MR4.5 [BCR-ABL1 ≤ 0.0032% on the International Scale (BCR-ABL1IS)], and sustained deep molecular response (DMR) during a 1-year consolidation phase. Patients restarted nilotinib following loss of major molecular response (MMR; BCR-ABL1IS ≤ 0.1%). RESULTS: Ninety-six weeks after stopping treatment (3.6-year median prior nilotinib duration), 93 of 190 patients (48.9%) remained in TFR. Of 88 patients who restarted nilotinib following loss of MMR, 87 regained MMR and 81 regained MR4.5 by the data cut-off. Ninety-six-week TFR rates were 61.3, 50.0, and 28.6% in patients with low, intermediate, and high Sokal risk scores at diagnosis, respectively. Patients consistently in MR4.5 during consolidation had higher TFR rates (50.6%) than patients with ≥ 1 assessment without MR4.5 during consolidation (35.0%). In a landmark analysis, 96-week TFR rates for patients with MR4.5, MR4 (BCR-ABL1IS ≤ 0.01%) but not MR4.5, and MMR but not MR4 at TFR week 12 were 82.6, 23.1, and 0%, respectively. There were no reports of disease progression or death due to CML; overall adverse event frequency decreased following TFR. Within the follow-up period, TFR did not adversely affect disease outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: These results demonstrate the feasibility and durability of TFR following frontline nilotinib and emphasize the importance of sustained DMR for TFR.

Long-term survival in patients treated with ruxolitinib for myelofibrosis: COMFORT-I and -II pooled analyses.

BACKGROUND: Myelofibrosis (MF) is associated with a variety of burdensome symptoms and reduced survival compared with age-/sex-matched controls. This analysis evaluated the long-term survival benefit with ruxolitinib, a Janus kinase (JAK)1/JAK2 inhibitor, in patients with intermediate-2 (int-2) or high-risk MF. METHODS: This was an exploratory analysis of 5-year data pooled from the phase 3 COMFORT-I and -II trials. In both trials, patients could cross over to ruxolitinib from the control group (COMFORT-I, placebo; COMFORT-II, best available therapy). All continuing patients in the control groups crossed over to ruxolitinib by the 3-year follow-up. Overall survival (OS; a secondary endpoint in both trials) was evaluated using pooled intent-to-treat data from patients randomized to ruxolitinib or the control groups. OS was also evaluated in subgroups stratified by baseline anemia and transfusion status at week 24. RESULTS: A total of 528 patients were included in this analysis; 301 were originally randomized to ruxolitinib (COMFORT-I, n = 155; COMFORT-II, n = 146) and 227 to control (n = 154 and n = 73, respectively). The risk of death was reduced by 30% among patients randomized to ruxolitinib compared with patients in the control group (median OS, 5.3 vs 3.8 years, respectively; hazard ratio [HR], 0.70 [95% CI, 0.54-0.91]; P = 0.0065). After correcting for crossover using a rank-preserving structural failure time (RPSFT) method, the OS advantage was more pronounced for patients who were originally randomized to ruxolitinib compared with patients who crossed over from control to ruxolitinib (median OS, 5.3 vs 2.3 years; HR [ruxolitinib vs RPSFT], 0.35 [95% CI, 0.23-0.59]). An analysis of OS censoring patients at the time of crossover also demonstrated that ruxolitinib prolonged OS compared with control (median OS, 5.3 vs 2.4 years; HR [ruxolitinib vs censored at crossover], 0.53 [95% CI, 0.36-0.78]; P = 0.0013). The survival benefit with ruxolitinib was observed irrespective of baseline anemia status or transfusion requirements at week 24. CONCLUSIONS: These findings support ruxolitinib treatment for patients with int-2 or high-risk MF, regardless of anemia or transfusion status. Further analyses will be important for exploring ruxolitinib earlier in the disease course to assess the effect on the natural history of MF. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers, NCT00952289 and NCT00934544 .

The use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents with ruxolitinib in patients with myelofibrosis in COMFORT-II: an open-label, phase 3 study assessing efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib versus best available therapy in the treatment of myelofibrosis.

BACKGROUND: Anemia is considered a negative prognostic risk factor for survival in patients with myelofibrosis. Most patients with myelofibrosis are anemic, and 35-54 % present with anemia at diagnosis. Ruxolitinib, a potent inhibitor of Janus kinase (JAK) 1 and JAK2, was associated with an overall survival benefit and improvements in splenomegaly and patient-reported outcomes in patients with myelofibrosis in the two phase 3 COMFORT studies. Consistent with the ruxolitinib mechanism of action, anemia was a frequently reported adverse event. In clinical practice, anemia is sometimes managed with erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESAs). This post hoc analysis evaluated the safety and efficacy of concomitant ruxolitinib and ESA administration in patients enrolled in COMFORT-II, an open-label, phase 3 study comparing the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib with best available therapy for treatment of myelofibrosis. Patients were randomized (2:1) to receive ruxolitinib 15 or 20 mg twice daily or best available therapy. Spleen volume was assessed by magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography scan. RESULTS: Thirteen of 146 ruxolitinib-treated patients had concomitant ESA administration (+ESA). The median exposure to ruxolitinib was 114 weeks in the +ESA group and 111 weeks in the overall ruxolitinib arm; the median ruxolitinib dose intensity was 33 mg/day for each group. Six weeks before the first ESA administration, 10 of the 13 patients had grade 3/4 hemoglobin abnormalities. These had improved to grade 2 in 7 of the 13 patients by 6 weeks after the first ESA administration. The rate of packed red blood cell transfusions per month within 12 weeks before and after first ESA administration remained the same in 1 patient, decreased in 2 patients, and increased in 3 patients; 7 patients remained transfusion independent. Reductions in splenomegaly were observed in 69 % of evaluable patients (9/13) following first ESA administration. CONCLUSIONS: Concomitant use of an ESA with ruxolitinib was well tolerated and did not affect the efficacy of ruxolitinib. Further investigations evaluating the effects of ESAs to alleviate anemia in ruxolitinib-treated patients are warranted (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier, NCT00934544; July 6, 2009).

A pooled analysis of overall survival in COMFORT-I and COMFORT-II, 2 randomized phase III trials of ruxolitinib for the treatment of myelofibrosis.

Ruxolitinib, a potent Janus kinase 1/2 inhibitor, resulted in rapid and durable improvements in splenomegaly and disease-related symptoms in the 2 phase III COMFORT studies. In addition, ruxolitinib was associated with prolonged survival compared with placebo (COMFORT-I) and best available therapy (COMFORT-II). We present a pooled analysis of overall survival in the COMFORT studies using an intent-to-treat analysis and an analysis correcting for crossover in the control arms. Overall, 301 patients received ruxolitinib (COMFORT-I, n=155; COMFORT-II, n=146) and 227 patients received placebo (n=154) or best available therapy (n=73). After a median three years of follow up, intent-to-treat analysis showed that patients who received ruxolitinib had prolonged survival compared with patients who received placebo or best available therapy [hazard ratio=0.65; 95% confidence interval (95%CI): 0.46-0.90; P=0.01]; the crossover-corrected hazard ratio was 0.29 (95%CI: 0.13-0.63). Both patients with intermediate-2- or high-risk disease showed prolonged survival, and patients with high-risk disease in the ruxolitinib group had survival similar to that of patients with intermediate-2-risk disease in the control group. The Kaplan-Meier estimate of overall survival at week 144 was 78% in the ruxolitinib arm, 61% in the intent-to-treat control arm, and 31% in the crossover-adjusted control arm. While larger spleen size at baseline was prognostic for shortened survival, reductions in spleen size with ruxolitinib treatment correlated with longer survival. These findings are consistent with previous reports and support that ruxolitinib offers a survival benefit for patients with myelofibrosis compared with conventional therapies. (clinicaltrials.gov identifiers: COMFORT-I, NCT00952289; COMFORT-II, NCT00934544).

A multinational, open-label, phase 2 study of ruxolitinib in Asian patients with myelofibrosis: Japanese subset analysis.

Ruxolitinib is a potent Janus kinase (JAK) 1/JAK2 inhibitor that has demonstrated rapid and durable improvements in splenomegaly and symptoms and a survival benefit in 2 phase 3 trials in patients with myelofibrosis. Ruxolitinib was well tolerated and effectively reduced splenomegaly and symptom burden in Asian patients with myelofibrosis in the Asian multinational, phase 2 Study A2202. We present a subset analysis of Japanese patients (n = 30) in Study A2202. At data cutoff, 22 patients were ongoing; 8 discontinued, mainly due to adverse events (n = 4). At week 24, 33 % of patients achieved ≥35 % reduction from baseline in spleen volume; 56.0 % achieved ≥50 % reduction from baseline in total symptom score, as measured by the 7-day Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form v2.0. The most common adverse events were anemia (63 %), thrombocytopenia (40 %), nasopharyngitis (37 %), decreased platelet counts (30 %), and diarrhea (30 %). Dose reductions or interruptions due to hemoglobin decreases were more frequent in Japanese patients; no loss of efficacy and no discontinuations due to hematologic abnormalities were observed. Ruxolitinib was well tolerated in Japanese patients and provided substantial reductions in splenomegaly and myelofibrosis-related symptoms similar to those observed in the overall Asian population and phase 3 COMFORT studies.

Efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib in Asian patients with myelofibrosis.

Myelofibrosis is characterized by progressive cytopenias, bone marrow fibrosis, splenomegaly and severe constitutional symptoms. In the phase 3 Controlled Myelofibrosis Study with Oral JAK Inhibitor Treatment (COMFORT) studies, ruxolitinib, a potent Janus kinase 1 (JAK1)/JAK2 inhibitor, provided substantial improvements in splenomegaly, symptoms, quality-of-life measures and overall survival compared with placebo or best available therapy. No assessments of the efficacy and safety of ruxolitinib have been conducted in Asian patients. Here, we describe results from an open-label, single-arm, phase 2 trial evaluating ruxolitinib in Asian patients with myelofibrosis (n = 120). The primary endpoint was met, with 31.7% of patients achieving a ≥ 35% reduction from baseline spleen volume at week 24. As measured by the 7-day Myelofibrosis Symptom Assessment Form v2.0, 49% of patients achieved a ≥ 50% reduction from baseline in total symptom score. Adverse events were consistent with those seen in the COMFORT studies. Ruxolitinib was well tolerated in Asian patients with myelofibrosis and provided substantial reductions in splenomegaly and improvements in symptoms.

Eribulin mesylate versus ixabepilone in patients with metastatic breast cancer: a randomized Phase II study comparing the incidence of peripheral neuropathy.

Peripheral neuropathy is a common toxicity associated with tubulin-targeted chemotherapeutic agents. This Phase II study compares the incidence and severity of neuropathy associated with eribulin mesylate or ixabepilone in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). The primary objective was to assess the incidence of neuropathy; the study was designed to detect a difference in neuropathy rate of 35 % for eribulin versus 63 % for ixabepilone (odds ratio 0.316, 80 % power, 0.05 two-sided significance level). Eligibility criteria included: MBC; prior taxane therapy; at least one chemotherapy for advanced disease; no or minimal pre-existing neuropathy (Grade 0 or 1). The intent-to-treat population comprised 104 patients randomized (1:1) to eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m(2), 2-5 min intravenous on days 1 and 8) or ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2), 3 h intravenous on day 1) on a 21-day cycle. 101 patients in the safety population received a median of 5.0 eribulin and 3.5 ixabepilone cycles. Incidence of neuropathy (any grade) was 33.3 and 48.0 %, and peripheral neuropathy was 31.4 and 44.0 % for eribulin and ixabepilone, respectively. After controlling for pre-existing neuropathy and number of prior chemotherapies, these differences were not significant. Compared with ixabepilone, fewer patients receiving eribulin discontinued treatment due to neuropathy (3.9 vs. 18.0 %) or adverse events (AEs) in general (11.8 vs. 32.0 %). Time to onset of neuropathy was 35.9 weeks for eribulin and 11.6 weeks for ixabepilone, and time to resolution was 48 versus 10 weeks, respectively; other AEs were comparable. Objective responses were 15.4 versus 5.8 % and clinical benefit rates were 26.9 versus 19.2 %. In conclusion, after controlling for pre-existing neuropathy and number of prior chemotherapies, the differences in the incidence of neuropathy with eribulin and ixabepilone were not statistically significant. Onset of neuropathy tended to occur later with eribulin and resolve later.