A Phase 0/I Pharmacokinetic and Pharmacodynamics and Safety and Tolerability Study of Letrozole in Combination with Standard Therapy in Recurrent High-Grade Gliomas.

PURPOSE: High-grade gliomas (HGG) carry a poor prognosis, with glioblastoma accounting for almost 50% of primary brain malignancies in the elderly. Unfortunately, despite the use of multiple treatment modalities, the prognosis remains poor in this population. Our preclinical studies suggest that the presence of aromatase expression, encoded by CYP19A1, is significantly upregulated in HGGs. Remarkably, we find that letrozole (LTZ), an FDA-approved aromatase inhibitor, has marked activity against HGGs. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase 0/I single-center clinical trial (NCT03122197) to assess the tumoral availability, pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and tolerability of LTZ in recurrent patients with HGG. Planned dose cohorts included 2.5, 5, 10, 12.5, 15, 17.5, and 20 mg of LTZ administered daily pre- and postsurgery or biopsy. Tumor samples were assayed for LTZ content and relevant biomarkers. The recommended phase 2 dose (R2PD) was determined as the dose that resulted in predicted steady-state tumoral extracellular fluid (ECF; Css,ecf) >2 µmol/L and did not result in ≥33% dose-limiting adverse events (AE) assessed using CTCAE v5.0. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients were enrolled. Common LTZ-related AEs included fatigue, nausea, musculoskeletal, anxiety, and dysphoric mood. No DLTs were observed. The 15 mg dose achieved a Css,ecf of 3.6 ± 0.59 µmol/L. LTZ caused dose-dependent inhibition of estradiol synthesis and modulated DNA damage pathways in tumor tissues as evident using RNA-sequencing analysis. CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of safety, brain tumoral PK, and mechanistic data, 15 mg daily is identified as the RP2D for future trials.

Demonstrating Bioequivalence for Two Dose Strengths of Niraparib and Abiraterone Acetate Dual-Action Tablets Versus Single Agents: Utility of Clinical Study Data Supplemented with Modeling and Simulation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The combination of niraparib and abiraterone acetate (AA) plus prednisone is under investigation for the treatment of patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) and metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC). Regular-strength (RS) and lower-strength (LS) dual-action tablets (DATs), comprising niraparib 100 mg/AA 500 mg and niraparib 50 mg/AA 500 mg, respectively, were developed to reduce pill burden and improve patient experience. A bioequivalence (BE)/bioavailability (BA) study was conducted under modified fasting conditions in patients with mCRPC to support approval of the DATs. METHODS: This open-label randomized BA/BE study (NCT04577833) was conducted at 14 sites in the USA and Europe. The study had a sequential design, including a 21-day screening phase, a pharmacokinetic (PK) assessment phase comprising three periods [namely (1) single-dose with up to 1-week run-in, (2) daily dose on days 1-11, and (3) daily dose on days 12-22], an extension where both niraparib and AA as single-agent combination (SAC; reference) or AA alone was continued from day 23 until discontinuation, and a 30-day follow-up phase. Patients were randomly assigned in a parallel-group design (four-sequence randomization) to receive a single oral dose of niraparib 100 mg/AA 1000 mg as a LS-DAT or SAC in period 1, and patients continued as randomized into a two-way crossover design during periods 2 and 3 where they received niraparib 200 mg/AA 1000 mg once daily as a RS-DAT or SAC. The design was powered on the basis of crossover assessment of RS-DAT versus SAC. During repeated dosing (periods 2 and 3, and extension phase), all patients also received prednisone/prednisolone 5 mg twice daily. Plasma samples were collected for measurement of niraparib and abiraterone plasma concentrations. Statistical assessment of the RS-DAT and LS-DAT versus SAC was performed on log-transformed pharmacokinetic parameters data from periods 2 and 3 (crossover) and from period 1 (parallel), respectively. Additional paired analyses and model-based bioequivalence assessments were conducted to evaluate the similarity between the LS-DAT and SAC. RESULTS: For the RS-DAT versus SAC, the 90% confidence intervals (CI) of geometric mean ratios (GMR) for maximum concentration at a steady state (Cmax,ss) and area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0-24 h at a steady state (AUC 0-24h,ss) were respectively 99.18-106.12% and 97.91-104.31% for niraparib and 87.59-106.69 and 86.91-100.23% for abiraterone. For the LS-DAT vs SAC, the 90% CI of GMR for AUC0-72h of niraparib was 80.31-101.12% in primary analysis, the 90% CI of GMR for Cmax,ss and AUC 0-24h,ss of abiraterone was 85.41-118.34% and 86.51-121.64% respectively, and 96.4% of simulated LS-DAT versus SAC BE trials met the BE criteria for both niraparib and abiraterone. CONCLUSIONS: The RS-DAT met BE criteria (range 80%-125%) versus SAC based on 90% CI of GMR for Cmax,ss and AUC 0-24h,ss. The LS-DAT was considered BE to SAC on the basis of the niraparib component meeting the BE criteria in the primary analysis for AUC 0-72h; abiraterone meeting the BE criteria in additional paired analyses based on Cmax,ss and AUC 0-24h,ss; and the percentage of simulated LS-DAT versus SAC BE trials meeting the BE criteria for both. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT04577833.

Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Quizartinib Combination Therapy With Standard Induction and Consolidation Chemotherapy in Patients With Newly Diagnosed Acute Myeloid Leukemia: Results from Two Phase 1 Trials in Japan and China.

Quizartinib is a potent, oral, second-generation, selective type II FMS-like receptor tyrosine kinase 3 (FLT3) inhibitor. It has shown improved overall survival in a randomized, multinational, Phase 3 (QuANTUM-First) study in patients with FLT3-internal tandem duplication (ITD)-positive newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. We conducted 2 Phase 1b studies in Japan and China to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and efficacy of quizartinib in combination with standard induction and consolidation chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia. Quizartinib was started at a dose level of 20 mg/day and then escalated to 40 mg/day, the dose used in the Phase 3 study. Seven patients were enrolled according to the 3 + 3 dose-escalation method in each study, including 3 patients who were FLT3-ITD positive. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed at dose levels up to 40 mg/day in both studies. Grade 3 or higher, quizartinib-related, treatment-emergent adverse events included febrile neutropenia, hematologic toxicities, and infections. QT prolongation on electrocardiogram was observed in 5 patients. The pharmacokinetics of quizartinib and its metabolite AC886 were similar between the studies and consistent with previous findings in the United States. We confirmed the tolerability of Japanese and Chinese patients to the dose of quizartinib and chemotherapy regimens used in the QuANTUM-First study.

Pharmacokinetics (PK) of Tiragolumab in First-in-Human Study in Patients with Mixed Solid Tumors (GO30103).

Tiragolumab is a first-in-class, fully human IgG1/kappa anti-TIGIT monoclonal antibody that blocks the binding of TIGIT to CD155 (the poliovirus receptor). We summarize the pharmacokinetics (PK) data from the phase 1a/1b GO30103 study of Q3W (every 3 weeks) sequential dosing of tiragolumab (2, 8, 30, 100, 400, 600, or 1200 mg) followed by atezolizumab (1200 mg), Q4W (every 4 weeks) sequential dosing (tiragolumab 840 mg followed by atezolizumab 1680 mg), and Q4W co-infusion (tiragolumab 840 mg plus atezolizumab 1680 mg). Serum samples were collected at multiple time points following tiragolumab and atezolizumab intravenous infusion in patients with solid tumors for PK and immunogenicity assessment. The serum PK profile of tiragolumab appeared to be biphasic, with a rapid distribution phase followed by a slower elimination phase when administered alone or in combination with atezolizumab. In phase 1a, across doses of tiragolumab ranging from 2 to 1200 mg (cycle 1), the geometric mean (GM), coefficient of variation (CV%), serum tiragolumab Cmax ranged from 0.682 to 270 µg/mL (18.6% to 36.5%) and Cmin ranged from 0.0125 to 75.3 µg/mL (0.0% to 24.2%). The GM systemic exposure (area under the plasma drug concentration-time curve, AUC0-21) ranged from 310 to 2670 µg day/mL (20.5% to 27.0%); interindividual variability in AUC0-21 ranged from 20.5% to 43.9%. Tiragolumab exposure increased in an approximately dose-proportional manner when administered alone or with atezolizumab at doses ≥100 mg. Postbaseline, 4/207 patients (1.9%) were positive for treatment-emergent antidrug antibodies (ADA) against tiragolumab, each at a single time point. Tiragolumab combined with atezolizumab demonstrated desirable PK properties, with no drug-drug interactions or immunogenicity liability. There were no meaningful differences in tiragolumab or atezolizumab exposure between the Q4W co-infusion and sequential dosing cohorts. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02794571 (date of registration June 6, 2016).

Efficacy and safety of abemaciclib alone and with PI3K/mTOR inhibitor LY3023414 or galunisertib versus chemotherapy in previously treated metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Pancreatic ductal adenocarcinomas (PDAC) are characterized by frequent cell cycle pathways aberrations. This study evaluated safety and efficacy of abemaciclib, a cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor, as monotherapy or in combination with PI3K/mTOR dual inhibitor LY3023414 or TGFß inhibitor galunisertib versus standard of care (SOC) chemotherapy in patients with pretreated metastatic PDAC. METHODS: This Phase 2 open-label study enrolled patients with metastatic PDAC who progressed after 1-2 prior therapies. Patients were enrolled in a safety lead-in (abemaciclib plus galunisertib) followed by a 2-stage randomized design. Stage 1 randomization was planned 1:1:1:1 for abemaciclib, abemaciclib plus LY3023414, abemaciclib plus galunisertib, or SOC gemcitabine or capecitabine. Advancing to Stage 2 required a disease control rate (DCR) difference ≥0 in abemaciclib-containing arms versus SOC. Primary objectives for Stages 1 and 2 were DCR and progression-free survival (PFS), respectively. Secondary objectives included response rate, overall survival, safety, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: One hundred and six patients were enrolled. Abemaciclib plus galunisertib did not advance to Stage 1 for reasons unrelated to safety or efficacy. Stage 1 DCR was 15.2% with abemaciclib monotherapy, 12.1% with abemaciclib plus LY3023414, and 36.4% with SOC. Median PFS was 1.7 months (95% CI: 1.4-1.8), 1.8 months (95% CI: 1.3-1.9), and 3.3 months (95% CI: 1.1-5.7), respectively. No arms advanced to Stage 2. No new safety signals were identified. CONCLUSION: In patients with pretreated metastatic PDAC, abemaciclib-based therapy did not improve DCRs or PFS compared with SOC chemotherapy. No treatment arms advanced to Stage 2. Abemaciclib remains investigational in patients with PDAC.

Phase 1 trial of bemcentinib (BGB324), a first-in-class, selective AXL inhibitor, with docetaxel in patients with previously treated advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: AXL, a transmembrane receptor tyrosine kinase, is highly expressed and associated with poor prognosis in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Bemcentinib (BGB324), a selective orally bioavailable small molecule AXL inhibitor, synergizes with docetaxel in preclinical models. We performed a phase I trial of bemcentinib plus docetaxel in previously treated advanced NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Escalation of two dose levels of bemcentinib (200 mg load × 3 days then 100 mg daily, or 400 mg load × 3 days then 200 mg daily) in combination with docetaxel (60 or 75 mg/m2 every 3 weeks) followed a 3+3 study design. Due to hematologic toxicity, prophylactic G-CSF was added. Bemcentinib monotherapy was administered for one week prior to docetaxel initiation to assess pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic effects alone and in combination. Plasma protein biomarker levels were measured. RESULTS: 21 patients were enrolled (median age 62 years, 67% male). Median treatment duration was 2.8 months (range 0.7-10.9 months). The main treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (86%, 76% ≥G3), diarrhea (57%, 0% ≥G3), fatigue (57%, 5% ≥G3), and nausea (52%, 0% ≥G3). Neutropenic fever occurred in 8 (38%) patients. The maximum tolerated dose was docetaxel 60 mg/m2 with prophylactic G-CSF support plus bemcentinib 400 mg load × 3 days followed by 200 mg daily thereafter. Bemcentinib and docetaxel pharmacokinetics resembled prior monotherapy data. Among 17 patients evaluable for radiographic response, 6 (35%) patients had partial response and 8 (47%) patients had stable disease as best response. Bemcentinib administration was associated with modulation of proteins involved in protein kinase B signaling, reactive oxygen species metabolism, and other processes. CONCLUSION: Bemcentinib plus docetaxel with G-CSF support demonstrates anti-tumor activity in previously treated, advanced NSCLC. The role of AXL inhibition in the treatment of NSCLC remains under investigation.

A phase Ia/Ib study of novel anti-ErbB3 monoclonal antibody, barecetamab (ISU104) in refractory solid cancers and monotherapy or in combination with cetuximab in recurrent or metastatic head and neck cancer.

We evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and antitumor activity of barecetamab monotherapy and combination cetuximab therapy in patients with advanced solid cancers, especially head and neck cancer (HNC). Part 1 was a 3 + 3 dose-escalation study in which 15 patients received barecetamab at 1, 3, 5, 10 and 20 mg/kg intravenously (IV) on days 1 and 28 and weekly in patients with advanced solid cancer. Part 2 was a dose-expansion study including two patient groups with advanced HNC, including six patients receiving barecetamab at 20 mg/kg IV every 3 weeks and 12 patients receiving barecetamab and cetuximab (400 mg/m2 on day 1 followed by 250 mg/m2 every week). No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. Maximum serum target engagement was reached with trough levels of doses ≥3 mg/kg IV weekly. Common adverse drug reactions were diarrhea, stomatitis, dermatitis acneiform and decreased appetite. One durable complete response of more than 17 months was observed, and the overall response and disease control rates were 36.4% (4/11) and 81.1% (9/11), respectively, in the combination therapy group. In conclusion, DLT was not observed in barecetamab at 1 to 20 mg/kg. The recommended phase II dose was determined to be 20 mg/kg triweekly. Barecetamab and in cetuximab combination was well tolerated and demonstrated meaningful antitumor effects.

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.

Model-based prediction of effective target exposure for MEN1611 in combination with trastuzumab in HER2-positive advanced or metastatic breast cancer patients.

MEN1611 is a novel orally bioavailable PI3K inhibitor currently in clinical development for patients with HER2-positive (HER2+) PI3KCA mutated advanced/metastatic breast cancer (BC) in combination with trastuzumab (TZB). In this work, a translational model-based approach to determine the minimum target exposure of MEN1611 in combination with TZB was applied. First, pharmacokinetic (PK) models for MEN1611 and TZB in mice were developed. Then, in vivo tumor growth inhibition (TGI) data from seven combination studies in mice xenograft models representative of the human HER2+ BC non-responsive to TZB (alterations of the PI3K/AkT/mTOR pathway) were analyzed using a PK-pharmacodynamic (PD) TGI model for co-administration of MEN1611 and TZB. The established PK-PD relationship was used to quantify the minimum effective MEN1611 concentration, as a function of TZB concentration, needed for tumor eradication in xenograft mice. Finally, a range of minimum effective exposures for MEN1611 were extrapolated to patients with BC, considering the typical steady-state TZB plasma levels in patients with BC following three alternative regimens (i.v. 4 mg/kg loading dose +2 mg/kg q1w, i.v. 8 mg/kg loading dose +6 mg/kg q3w or s.c. 600 mg q3w). A threshold of about 2000 ng·h/ml for MEN1611 exposure associated with a high likelihood of effective antitumor activity in a large majority of patients was identified for the 3-weekly and the weekly i.v. schedule for TZB. A slightly lower exposure (i.e., 25% lower) was found for the 3-weekly s.c. schedule. This important outcome confirmed the adequacy of the therapeutic dose administered in the ongoing phase 1b B-PRECISE-01 study in patients with HER2+ PI3KCA mutated advanced/metastatic BC.

Population pharmacokinetics and exposure-response analyses of daratumumab plus pomalidomide/dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma.

AIM: A population pharmacokinetic (PPK) model was developed to characterize pharmacokinetics (PK) of subcutaneous or intravenous daratumumab administration in a new indication (i.e., combination with pomalidomide and dexamethasone [D-Pd] in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma [RRMM]). Analyses were conducted to explore exposure-response (E-R) relationships for efficacy and select treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). METHODS: The PPK analysis included pooled data from the D-Pd cohorts of the phase 3 APOLLO and phase 1b EQUULEUS studies. Covariates were evaluated in the PPK model. Model-predicted exposures to daratumumab were compared between covariate subgroups of interest and used to investigate relationships between daratumumab exposure and efficacy and safety in APOLLO. RESULTS: The PPK analysis included 1146 daratumumab PK samples from 239 patients (APOLLO, n = 140; EQUULEUS, n = 99). Observed concentration-time data of daratumumab were well described by a two-compartment PPK model with first-order absorption and parallel linear and nonlinear elimination pathways. Treatment with D-Pd provided similar daratumumab PK characteristics versus historical daratumumab monotherapy. The E-R dataset contained data from 290 APOLLO patients (D-Pd, n = 140; Pd, n = 150). The PK-efficacy relationship of daratumumab supported improved progression-free survival for patients in the D-Pd group vs. the Pd group. Additionally, TEAEs did not increase with increasing PK exposure in the D-Pd group. CONCLUSIONS: The PPK and E-R analyses support the daratumumab subcutaneous 1800 mg dosing regimen in combination with Pd for treatment of patients with RRMM. No dose adjustment is recommended in this indication for any of the investigated factors, none of which had clinically relevant effects on daratumumab PK.

Efficacy and Safety of Trametinib Monotherapy or in Combination With Dabrafenib in Pediatric BRAF V600-Mutant Low-Grade Glioma.

PURPOSE: BRAF V600 mutations occur in many childhood cancers, including approximately 20% of low-grade gliomas (LGGs). Here, we describe a phase I/II study establishing pediatric dosing and pharmacokinetics of trametinib with or without dabrafenib, as well as efficacy and safety in a disease-specific cohort with BRAF V600-mutant LGG; other cohorts will be reported elsewhere. METHODS: This is a four-part, phase I/II study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02124772) in patients age < 18 years with relapsed/refractory malignancies: trametinib monotherapy dose finding (part A) and disease-specific expansion (part B), and dabrafenib + trametinib dose finding (part C) and disease-specific expansion (part D). The primary objective assessed in all patients in parts A and C was to determine pediatric dosing on the basis of steady-state pharmacokinetics. Disease-specific efficacy and safety (across parts A-D) were secondary objectives. RESULTS: Overall, 139 patients received trametinib (n = 91) or dabrafenib + trametinib (n = 48). Trametinib dose-limiting toxicities in > 1 patient (part A) included mucosal inflammation (n = 3) and hyponatremia (n = 2). There were no dose-limiting toxicities with combination therapy (part C). The recommended phase II dose of trametinib, with or without dabrafenib, was 0.032 mg/kg once daily for patients age < 6 years and 0.025 mg/kg once daily for patients age ≥ 6 years; dabrafenib dosing in the combination was as previously identified for monotherapy. In 49 patients with BRAF V600-mutant glioma (LGG, n = 47) across all four study parts, independently assessed objective response rates were 15% (95% CI, 1.9 to 45.4) for monotherapy (n = 13) and 25% (95% CI, 12.1 to 42.2) for combination (n = 36). Adverse event-related treatment discontinuations were more common with monotherapy (54% v 22%). CONCLUSION: The trial design provided efficient evaluation of pediatric dosing, safety, and efficacy of single-agent and combination targeted therapy. Age-based and weight-based dosing of trametinib with or without dabrafenib achieved target concentrations with manageable safety and demonstrated clinical efficacy and tolerability in BRAF V600-mutant LGG.

A phase I trial of metformin in combination with vincristine, irinotecan, and temozolomide in children with relapsed or refractory solid and central nervous system tumors: A report from the national pediatric cancer foundation.

BACKGROUND: Patients with relapsed and refractory solid and central nervous system (CNS) tumors have poor outcomes and need novel therapeutic options. Vincristine, irinotecan, and temozolomide (VIT) is a common chemotherapy regimen in relapsed pediatric tumors with an established toxicity profile. Metformin shows preclinical anti-cancer activity through multiple pathways. METHODS: The objective of this Phase I trial was to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) of metformin in combination with VIT in children with relapsed and refractory solid and CNS tumors. A 3 + 3 design was used to test the addition of metformin at five dose levels (666, 999, 1333, 1666, and 2000 mg/m2 /day). Therapy toxicity, pharmacokinetics, and radiologic response to treatment were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty-six patients (median age 13 years, range 2-18 years) were enrolled with 22 evaluable for toxicity. The most common diagnoses were Ewing sarcoma (n = 8), rhabdomyosarcoma (n = 3) and atypical teratoid/rhabdoid tumor (n = 3). The MTD was exceeded at Dose Level 5 due to two dose-limiting toxicities; both were Grade 3 diarrhea requiring prolonged hospitalization and intravenous fluids. The MTD was not determined due to study closure with less than six patients enrolled at Dose Level 4. Frequently observed toxicities were gastrointestinal (most notably diarrhea) and hematologic. Amongst 16 patients evaluable for best overall response, there was one complete response (Ewing sarcoma), three partial responses (Ewing sarcoma, glioblastoma multiforme, and alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma), and five patients with stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of VIT with metformin was not determined due to premature study closure. We recommend an RP2D of Dose Level 4, 1666 mg/m2 /day. Radiographic responses were seen in multiple tumor types. Further evaluation for efficacy could be investigated in a Phase II trial.

Phase Ia/b, Open-Label, Multicenter Study of AZD4635 (an Adenosine A2A Receptor Antagonist) as Monotherapy or Combined with Durvalumab, in Patients with Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: To evaluate AZD4635, an adenosine A2A receptor antagonist, as monotherapy or in combination with durvalumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In phase Ia (dose escalation), patients had relapsed/refractory solid tumors; in phase Ib (dose expansion), patients had checkpoint inhibitor-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) or colorectal carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer with prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 exposure, or other solid tumors (checkpoint-naïve or prior anti-PD-1/PD-L1 exposure). Patients received AZD4635 monotherapy (75-200 mg once daily or 125 mg twice daily) or in combination with durvalumab (AZD4635 75 or 100 mg once daily). The primary objective was safety; secondary objectives included antitumor activity and pharmacokinetics; exploratory objectives included evaluation of an adenosine gene signature in patients with mCRPC. RESULTS: As of September 8, 2020, 250 patients were treated (AZD4635, n = 161; AZD4635+durvalumab, n = 89). In phase Ia, DLTs were observed with monotherapy (125 mg twice daily; n = 2) and with combination treatment (75 mg; n = 1) in patients receiving nanosuspension. The most common treatment-related adverse events included nausea, fatigue, vomiting, decreased appetite, dizziness, and diarrhea. The RP2D of the AZD4635 capsule formulation was 75 mg once daily, as monotherapy or in combination with durvalumab. The pharmacokinetic profile was dose-proportional, and exposure was adequate to cover target with 100 mg nanosuspension or 75 mg capsule once daily. In patients with mCRPC receiving monotherapy or combination treatment, tumor responses (2/39 and 6/37, respectively) and prostate-specific antigen responses (3/60 and 10/45, respectively) were observed. High versus low blood-based adenosine signature was associated with median progression-free survival of 21 weeks versus 8.7 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: AZD4635 monotherapy or combination therapy was well tolerated. Objective responses support additional phase II combination studies in patients with mCRPC.

A phase 1b study of crenigacestat (LY3039478) in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin or gemcitabine and carboplatin in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Notch signaling plays an integral role in development and tissue homeostasis. Inhibition of Notch signaling has been identified as a reasonable target for oncotherapy. Crenigacestat (LY3039478) is a potent Notch inhibitor that decreases Notch signaling and its downstream biologic effects. METHODS: I6F-MC-JJCD was a multicenter, nonrandomized, open-label, phase 1b study with 5 separate, parallel dose escalations in patients with advanced or metastatic cancer from a variety of solid tumors followed by a dose-confirmation phase in pre-specified tumor types. This manuscript reports on 2 of 5 groups. The primary objective was to determine the recommended phase 2 dose of crenigacestat combined with other anticancer agents (gemcitabine/cisplatin or gemcitabine/carboplatin). Secondary objectives included evaluation of safety, tolerability, preliminary efficacy, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Patients (N = 31) received treatment between November 2016 and July 2019. Dose-limiting toxicities occurred in 6 patients. The recommended phase 2 dose for crenigacestat was 50 mg TIW in Part 1 (combined with gemcitabine/cisplatin) and not established in Part 2 (combined with gemcitabine/carboplatin) due to poor tolerability. Patients had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), and most had Grade ≥ 3 TEAEs. Over 50% of the patients experienced gastrointestinal disorders (Grade ≥ 3). No patient had complete response; 5 patients had a partial response. Disease control rates were 62.5% (Part 1) and 60.0% (Part 2). CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that the Notch inhibitor, crenigacestat, combined with different anticancer agents (gemcitabine, cisplatin, and carboplatin) was poorly tolerated and resulted in disappointing clinical activity in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors. CLINICALTRIALS: gov Identification Number: NCT02784795.

Pharmacokinetics and Exposure-Response Analysis of Venetoclax + Obinutuzumab in Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia: Phase 1b Study and Phase 3 CLL14 Trial.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to investigate pharmacokinetics (PK) and exposure-response parameters of the 400 mg once-daily venetoclax dose regimen in combination with obinutuzumab, which was approved for the first-line (1L) treatment of chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) based on data from the phase 3 CLL14 study and the phase 1b dose-finding GP28331 study. METHODS: Parameter estimates and uncertainty, which were estimated by a previously developed population PK (popPK) model, were used as informative priors for this analysis. They were re-estimated, and then used to evaluate additional covariate effects, describe venetoclax PK when administered with obinutuzumab, and provide empirical Bayes estimates of PK parameters and exposure. Exposure-progression-free survival (PFS) and exposure-safety relationships were assessed using data from CLL14, with steady-state nominal venetoclax exposure (CmeanSS,nominal) as the predictor variable. Exposure-safety analyses were conducted using logistic regression for selected treatment-emergent grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs (SAEs). Dose intensities were summarized by tertiles of CmeanSS,nominal. RESULTS: PK data from 274 patients (CLL14, n = 194; GP28331, n = 80) were included. The final model provided good fit of the observed data. Obinutuzumab co-administration, history of prior treatments, and disease severity at baseline had no appreciable influence on venetoclax steady-state exposure. No significant correlations were observed between venetoclax exposure and PFS, or between venetoclax exposure and the probability of treatment-emergent grade ≥ 3 neutropenia, grade ≥ 3 thrombocytopenia, grade ≥ 3 infections, and SAEs. Median dose intensities for venetoclax and obinutuzumab remained similar across venetoclax exposure tertiles. CONCLUSION: PopPK and exposure-efficacy, exposure-safety, and exposure-tolerability analyses support the 400 mg once-daily venetoclax dose plus obinutuzumab for 1L treatment in patients with CLL. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers NCT02242942 and NCT02339181.

Targeting wild-type TP53 using AMG 232 in combination with MAPK inhibition in Metastatic Melanoma; a phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: Targeting the MDM2-p53 interaction using AMG 232 is synergistic with MAPK inhibitors (MAPKi) in preclinical melanoma models. We postulated that AMG 232 plus MAPKi is safe and more effective than MAPKi alone in TP53-wild type, MAPKi-naïve metastatic melanoma. METHODS: Patients were treated with increasing (120 mg, 180 mg, 240 mg) oral doses of AMG 232 (seven-days-on, 15-days-off, 21-day cycle) plus dabrafenib (D) and trametinib (T) (Arm 1, BRAFV600-mutant) or T alone (Arm 2, BRAFV600-wild type). Patients were treated for seven days with AMG 232 alone before adding T±D. Safety and efficacy were assessed using CTCAE v4.0 and RECIST v1.1 criteria, respectively. Pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis was performed at baseline and steady-state levels for AMG 232. RESULTS: 31 patients were enrolled. Ten and 21 patients were enrolled in Arm 1 and Arm 2, respectively. The most common AMG 232-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea (87%), diarrhea (77%), and fatigue (74%). Seven patients (23%) were withdrawn from the study due to AMG 232-related AEs. Three dose-limiting AEs occurred (Arm 1, 180 mg, nausea; Arm 2, 240 mg, grade 3 pulmonary embolism; Arm 2, 180 mg, grade 4 thrombocytopenia). AMG 232 PK exposures were not altered when AMG 232 was combined with T±D. Objective responses were seen in 8/10 (Arm 1) and 3/20 (Arm 2) evaluable patients. The median progression-free survival for Arm 1 and Arm 2 was 19.0 months-not reached and 2.8 months, respectively. CONCLUSION: The maximum tolerated dose of AMG 232 for both arms was 120 mg. AMG 232 plus T±D exhibited a favorable PK profile. Although objective responses occurred in both arms, adding AMG 232 to T±D did not confer additional clinical benefit.

Safety and Tolerability of Carboplatin and Paclitaxel in Cancer Patients with HIV (AMC-078), an AIDS Malignancy Consortium (AMC) Study.

BACKGROUND: Persons living with human immunodeficiency virus are an underserved population for evidence-based cancer treatment. Paclitaxel and carboplatin (PCb) is an active regimen against a variety of solid tumors, including several seen in excess in patients with HIV infection. We performed a pilot trial to evaluate the safety of full-dose PCb in people living with human immunodeficiency virus and cancer. METHODS: Eligible patients, stratified by concurrent antiretroviral therapy (ART) that included CYP3A4 inhibitors or not, received paclitaxel (175 mg/m2) in combination with carboplatin (target AUC 6) intravenously every 3 weeks for up to 6 cycles. RESULTS: Sixteen evaluable patients received 64 cycles of PCb, including 6 patients treated with CYP3A4 inhibiting ART (ritonavir). The adverse event profile was consistent with the known toxicity profile of PCb, with no differences between the 2 strata. There were 4 partial responses (25%, 95% CI: 7%-52%), and overall, CD4+ lymphocyte count was similar after completion of therapy (median: 310/µL) compared with baseline values (median: 389/µL). Pharmacokinetic studies in 6 patients revealed no significant differences in Cmax or AUCinf for paclitaxel between the 2 cohorts. CONCLUSION: Full doses of PCb chemotherapy are tolerable when given concurrently with ART in people living with human immunodeficiency virus with cancer, including patients receiving CYP3A4 inhibitors. CLINICALTRIALS.GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT01249443.

Integration of DNA sequencing with population pharmacokinetics to improve the prediction of irinotecan exposure in cancer patients.

BACKGROUND: Irinotecan (CPT-11) is an anticancer agent widely used to treat adult solid tumours. Large interindividual variability in the clearance of irinotecan and SN-38, its active and toxic metabolite, results in highly unpredictable toxicity. METHODS: In 217 cancer patients treated with intravenous irinotecan single agent or in combination, germline DNA was used to interrogate the variation in 84 genes by next-generation sequencing. A stepwise analytical framework including a population pharmacokinetic model with SNP- and gene-based testing was used to identify demographic/clinical/genetic factors that influence the clearance of irinotecan and SN-38. RESULTS: Irinotecan clearance was influenced by rs4149057 in SLCO1B1, body surface area, and co-administration of 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin/bevacizumab. SN-38 clearance was influenced by rs887829 in UGT1A1, pre-treatment total bilirubin, and EGFR rare variant burden. Within each UGT1A1 genotype group, elevated pre-treatment total bilirubin and/or presence of at least one rare variant in EGFR resulted in significantly lower SN-38 clearance. The model reduced the interindividual variability in irinotecan clearance from 38 to 34% and SN-38 clearance from 49 to 32%. CONCLUSIONS: This new model significantly reduced the interindividual variability in the clearance of irinotecan and SN-38. New genetic factors of variability in clearance have been identified.

Population pharmacokinetic and exposure-response analyses of elotuzumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

PURPOSE: Elotuzumab plus pomalidomide/dexamethasone (E-Pd) demonstrated efficacy and safety in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The clinical pharmacology of elotuzumab [± lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Ld)] was characterized previously. These analyses describe elotuzumab population pharmacokinetics (PPK), the effect of Pd, and assess elotuzumab exposure-response relationships for efficacy and safety in patients with RRMM. METHODS: A previously established PPK model was updated with E-Pd data from the phase 2 ELOQUENT-3 study (NCT02654132). The dataset included 8180 serum concentrations from 440 patients with RRMM from 5 clinical trials. Elotuzumab PK parameter estimates were used to generate individual daily time-varying average concentrations (daily Cavg) for multi-variable time-to-event exposure-response analyses of progression-free survival (PFS) and time to the first occurrence of grade 3 + adverse events (AEs) in RRMM. RESULTS: Elotuzumab PK were well-described by a two-compartment model with parallel linear and Michaelis-Menten elimination from the central compartment (Vmax) and non-renewable target-mediated elimination from the peripheral compartment (Kint). Co-administration with Pd resulted in a 19% and 51% decrease in elotuzumab linear clearance and Kint, respectively, versus Ld; steady-state exposures were similar. Vmax increased with increasing serum M-protein. Hazard ratios (95% confidence intervals) for daily Cavg were 0.9983 (0.9969-0.9997) and 0.9981 (0.9964-0.9998) for PFS and grade 3 + AEs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The PPK model adequately described the data and was appropriate for determining exposures for exposure-response analyses. There were no clinically relevant differences in elotuzumab exposures between Pd and Ld backbones. In ELOQUENT-3, increasing elotuzumab daily Cavg prolonged PFS without increasing grade 3 + AEs.