Nivolumab plus Cabozantinib versus Sunitinib for Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus cabozantinib as compared with those of sunitinib in the treatment of previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma are not known. METHODS: In this phase 3, randomized, open-label trial, we randomly assigned adults with previously untreated clear-cell, advanced renal-cell carcinoma to receive either nivolumab (240 mg every 2 weeks) plus cabozantinib (40 mg once daily) or sunitinib (50 mg once daily for 4 weeks of each 6-week cycle). The primary end point was progression-free survival, as determined by blinded independent central review. Secondary end points included overall survival, objective response as determined by independent review, and safety. Health-related quality of life was an exploratory end point. RESULTS: Overall, 651 patients were assigned to receive nivolumab plus cabozantinib (323 patients) or sunitinib (328 patients). At a median follow-up of 18.1 months for overall survival, the median progression-free survival was 16.6 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 12.5 to 24.9) with nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 8.3 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 9.7) with sunitinib (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.64; P<0.001). The probability of overall survival at 12 months was 85.7% (95% CI, 81.3 to 89.1) with nivolumab plus cabozantinib and 75.6% (95% CI, 70.5 to 80.0) with sunitinib (hazard ratio for death, 0.60; 98.89% CI, 0.40 to 0.89; P = 0.001). An objective response occurred in 55.7% of the patients receiving nivolumab plus cabozantinib and in 27.1% of those receiving sunitinib (P<0.001). Efficacy benefits with nivolumab plus cabozantinib were consistent across subgroups. Adverse events of any cause of grade 3 or higher occurred in 75.3% of the 320 patients receiving nivolumab plus cabozantinib and in 70.6% of the 320 patients receiving sunitinib. Overall, 19.7% of the patients in the combination group discontinued at least one of the trial drugs owing to adverse events, and 5.6% discontinued both. Patients reported better health-related quality of life with nivolumab plus cabozantinib than with sunitinib. CONCLUSIONS: Nivolumab plus cabozantinib had significant benefits over sunitinib with respect to progression-free survival, overall survival, and likelihood of response in patients with previously untreated advanced renal-cell carcinoma. (Funded by Bristol Myers Squibb and others; CheckMate 9ER ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03141177.).

An Exploratory Analysis of the "Was It Worth It?" Questionnaire as a Novel Metric to Capture Patient Perceptions of Cancer Treatment.

OBJECTIVES: Asking "Was it worth it?" (WIWI) potentially captures the patient perception of a treatment's benefit weighed against its harms. This exploratory analysis evaluates the WIWI questionnaire as a metric of patients' perspectives on the worthwhileness of cancer treatment. METHODS: A 3-item WIWI questionnaire was assessed at end of treatment in patients with cancer on the COMET-2 trial (NCT01522443). WIWI items were evaluated to determine their association with quality of life (QOL), treatment duration, end-of-treatment reason, patient-reported adverse events (AEs), and disease response. RESULTS: A total of 65 patients completed the questionnaire; 40 (62%), 16 (25%), and 9 (14%) patients replied yes, uncertain, and no to "Was it worthwhile for you to receive the cancer treatment given in this study?" (item 1), respectively; 39 (60%), 12 (18%), and 14 (22%) to "If you had to do it over again, would you choose to have this cancer treatment?"; and 40 (62%), 14 (22%), and 11 (17%) to "Would you recommend this cancer treatment to others?" Patients responding yes to item 1 remained on treatment longer than those responding uncertain or no (mean 23.0 vs 11.3 weeks, P<.001). Patients responding uncertain/no to item 1 discontinued treatment because of AEs more frequently than those responding yes (36% vs 7.5%, P=.004) and demonstrated meaningful decline in QOL from baseline (-2.5 vs -0.2 mean change, P<.001). Associations between WIWI responses and most patient-reported AEs or treatment efficacy did not reach statistical significance. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who responded affirmatively on WIWI items remained on therapy longer, were less likely to stop treatment because of AEs, and demonstrated superior QOL. The WIWI may inform clinical practice, oncology research, and value frameworks.

Cabozantinib in Patients with Advanced and Progressing Hepatocellular Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib inhibits tyrosine kinases, including vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1, 2, and 3, MET, and AXL, which are implicated in the progression of hepatocellular carcinoma and the development of resistance to sorafenib, the standard initial treatment for advanced disease. This randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial evaluated cabozantinib as compared with placebo in previously treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. METHODS: A total of 707 patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive cabozantinib (60 mg once daily) or matching placebo. Eligible patients had received previous treatment with sorafenib, had disease progression after at least one systemic treatment for hepatocellular carcinoma, and may have received up to two previous systemic regimens for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival and the objective response rate. RESULTS: At the second planned interim analysis, the trial showed significantly longer overall survival with cabozantinib than with placebo. Median overall survival was 10.2 months with cabozantinib and 8.0 months with placebo (hazard ratio for death, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.63 to 0.92; P=0.005). Median progression-free survival was 5.2 months with cabozantinib and 1.9 months with placebo (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.52; P<0.001), and the objective response rates were 4% and less than 1%, respectively (P=0.009). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 68% of patients in the cabozantinib group and in 36% in the placebo group. The most common high-grade events were palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (17% with cabozantinib vs. 0% with placebo), hypertension (16% vs. 2%), increased aspartate aminotransferase level (12% vs. 7%), fatigue (10% vs. 4%), and diarrhea (10% vs. 2%). CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with previously treated advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, treatment with cabozantinib resulted in longer overall survival and progression-free survival than placebo. The rate of high-grade adverse events in the cabozantinib group was approximately twice that observed in the placebo group. (Funded by Exelixis; CELESTIAL ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01908426 .).

Comparison of weekly and daily recall of pain as an endpoint in a randomized phase 3 trial of cabozantinib for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Scant evidence reveals whether the use of weekly versus daily pain ratings leads to meaningful differences when measuring pain as a clinical trial outcome. We compared the ability of weekly ratings and descriptors of daily ratings to evaluate pain as an endpoint in a randomized phase 3 drug trial. METHODS: Participants (n = 119) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer were randomized to treatment arms and rated their pain on the average and at its worst during a baseline week and at weeks 3, 6, and 12 of study treatment. For each reporting period, participants rated their pain daily for 7 days. On day 7, participants rated their pain over the prior 7 days. We estimated mean differences and intraclass correlation coefficients of the weekly ratings and the mean and the maximum daily ratings. We compared the ability of the weekly ratings and the daily rating descriptors to detect change in pain and evaluated the agreement of the weekly rating and the mean daily rating of pain at its worst to detect treatment response. RESULTS: For both pain constructs, the weekly rating was consistently higher than the mean daily rating and lower than the maximum daily rating yet was moderately to highly correlated with both daily rating descriptors (intraclass correlation coefficient range = 0.55-0.94). The weekly rating and the daily rating descriptors consistently detected change in pain for the study sample and participant subgroups. Substantial agreement existed between the weekly rating and the mean daily rating of pain at its worst when used with trial protocol opioid criteria to detect treatment response (Cohen's κ = 0.71). CONCLUSION: Use of daily over weekly ratings delivered no added benefit in evaluating pain in this clinical trial. This study is the first to compare weekly and daily recall to measure pain as an endpoint in a randomized phase 3 drug trial, and the pattern of differences in ratings that we observed is consistent with other recent evaluations of weekly and daily symptom reporting.

Composite grading algorithm for the National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE).

BACKGROUND: The Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events is an item library designed for eliciting patient-reported adverse events in oncology. For each adverse event, up to three individual items are scored for frequency, severity, and interference with daily activities. To align the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events with other standardized tools for adverse event assessment including the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, an algorithm for mapping individual items for any given adverse event to a single composite numerical grade was developed and tested. METHODS: A five-step process was used: (1) All 179 possible Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events score combinations were presented to 20 clinical investigators to subjectively map combinations to single numerical grades ranging from 0 to 3. (2) Combinations with <75% agreement were presented to investigator committees at a National Clinical Trials Network cooperative group meeting to gain majority consensus via anonymous voting. (3) The resulting algorithm was refined via graphical and tabular approaches to assure directional consistency. (4) Validity, reliability, and sensitivity were assessed in a national study dataset. (5) Accuracy for delineating adverse events between study arms was measured in two Phase III clinical trials (NCT02066181 and NCT01522443). RESULTS: In Step 1, 12/179 score combinations had <75% initial agreement. In Step 2, majority consensus was reached for all combinations. In Step 3, five grades were adjusted to assure directional consistency. In Steps 4 and 5, composite grades performed well and comparably to individual item scores on validity, reliability, sensitivity, and between-arm delineation. CONCLUSION: A composite grading algorithm has been developed and yields single numerical grades for adverse events assessed via the Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, and can be useful in analyses and reporting.

Cabozantinib versus Everolimus in Advanced Renal-Cell Carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib is an oral, small-molecule tyrosine kinase inhibitor that targets vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) as well as MET and AXL, each of which has been implicated in the pathobiology of metastatic renal-cell carcinoma or in the development of resistance to antiangiogenic drugs. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial evaluated the efficacy of cabozantinib, as compared with everolimus, in patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy. METHODS: We randomly assigned 658 patients to receive cabozantinib at a dose of 60 mg daily or everolimus at a dose of 10 mg daily. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Secondary efficacy end points were overall survival and objective response rate. RESULTS: Median progression-free survival was 7.4 months with cabozantinib and 3.8 months with everolimus. The rate of progression or death was 42% lower with cabozantinib than with everolimus (hazard ratio, 0.58; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.75; P<0.001). The objective response rate was 21% with cabozantinib and 5% with everolimus (P<0.001). A planned interim analysis showed that overall survival was longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus (hazard ratio for death, 0.67; 95% CI, 0.51 to 0.89; P=0.005) but did not cross the significance boundary for the interim analysis. Adverse events were managed with dose reductions; doses were reduced in 60% of the patients who received cabozantinib and in 25% of those who received everolimus. Discontinuation of study treatment owing to adverse events occurred in 9% of the patients who received cabozantinib and in 10% of those who received everolimus. CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free survival was longer with cabozantinib than with everolimus among patients with renal-cell carcinoma that had progressed after VEGFR-targeted therapy. (Funded by Exelixis; METEOR ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01865747.).

Cabozantinib: an Active Novel Multikinase Inhibitor in Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Clear cell renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is characterized by inactivation of the von Hippel-Lindau (VHL) tumor suppressor gene. VHL loss drives tumor angiogenesis and accounts for the clinical activity of VEGF receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs), the first-line standard of care for advanced RCC. Within the last year, three new second-line treatments have received FDA approval for use after anti-angiogenic therapy: the immune checkpoint inhibitor nivolumab, the TKI cabozantinib, and the combination of the TKI lenvatinib and the mTOR inhibitor everolimus. Cabozantinib inhibits VEGFRs, MET, and AXL, kinases that promote tumorigenesis, angiogenesis, metastasis, and drug resistance. Compared with everolimus, cabozantinib has shown statistically significant improvements in the three key efficacy endpoints of overall survival, progression-free survival, and objective response rate in patients with RCC who were previously treated with a VEGFR TKI. Herein, we summarize the translational research and clinical development that led to approval of cabozantinib as second-line therapy in RCC.

Cabozantinib versus everolimus in advanced renal cell carcinoma (METEOR): final results from a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cabozantinib is an oral inhibitor of tyrosine kinases including MET, VEGFR, and AXL. The randomised phase 3 METEOR trial compared the efficacy and safety of cabozantinib versus the mTOR inhibitor everolimus in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma who progressed after previous VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitor treatment. Here, we report the final overall survival results from this study based on an unplanned second interim analysis. METHODS: In this open-label, randomised phase 3 trial, we randomly assigned (1:1) patients aged 18 years and older with advanced or metastatic clear-cell renal cell carcinoma, measurable disease, and previous treatment with one or more VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors to receive 60 mg cabozantinib once a day or 10 mg everolimus once a day. Randomisation was done with an interactive voice and web response system. Stratification factors were Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center risk group and the number of previous treatments with VEGFR tyrosine-kinase inhibitors. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival as assessed by an independent radiology review committee in the first 375 randomly assigned patients and has been previously reported. Secondary endpoints were overall survival and objective response in all randomly assigned patients assessed by intention-to-treat. Safety was assessed per protocol in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. The study is closed for enrolment but treatment and follow-up of patients is ongoing for long-term safety evaluation. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01865747. FINDINGS: Between Aug 8, 2013, and Nov 24, 2014, 658 patients were randomly assigned to receive cabozantinib (n=330) or everolimus (n=328). The median duration of follow-up for overall survival and safety was 18·7 months (IQR 16·1-21·1) in the cabozantinib group and 18·8 months (16·0-21·2) in the everolimus group. Median overall survival was 21·4 months (95% CI 18·7-not estimable) with cabozantinib and 16·5 months (14·7-18·8) with everolimus (hazard ratio [HR] 0·66 [95% CI 0·53-0·83]; p=0·00026). Cabozantinib treatment also resulted in improved progression-free survival (HR 0·51 [95% CI 0·41-0·62]; p<0·0001) and objective response (17% [13-22] with cabozantinib vs 3% [2-6] with everolimus; p<0·0001) per independent radiology review among all randomised patients. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were hypertension (49 [15%] in the cabozantinib group vs 12 [4%] in the everolimus group), diarrhoea (43 [13%] vs 7 [2%]), fatigue (36 [11%] vs 24 [7%]), palmar-plantar erythrodysaesthesia syndrome (27 [8%] vs 3 [1%]), anaemia (19 [6%] vs 53 [17%]), hyperglycaemia (3 [1%] vs 16 [5%]), and hypomagnesaemia (16 [5%] vs none). Serious adverse events grade 3 or worse occurred in 130 (39%) patients in the cabozantinib group and in 129 (40%) in the everolimus group. One treatment-related death occurred in the cabozantinib group (death; not otherwise specified) and two occurred in the everolimus group (one aspergillus infection and one pneumonia aspiration). INTERPRETATION: Treatment with cabozantinib increased overall survival, delayed disease progression, and improved the objective response compared with everolimus. Based on these results, cabozantinib should be considered as a new standard-of-care treatment option for previously treated patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma. Patients should be monitored for adverse events that might require dose modifications. FUNDING: Exelixis Inc.

Evaluating Treatment Tolerability Using the Toxicity Index With Patient-Reported Outcomes Data.

CONTEXT: Summarizing longitudinal symptomatic adverse events during clinical trials is necessary for understanding treatment tolerability. The Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) provides insight for capturing treatment tolerability within trials. Tolerability summary measures, such as the maximum score, are often used to communicate the potential negative symptoms both in the medical literature and directly to patients. Commonly, the proportions of present and severe symptomatic adverse events are used and reported between treatment arms among adverse event types. The toxicity index is also a summary measure previously applied to clinician-reported CTCAE data. OBJECTIVES: Apply the toxicity index to PRO-CTCAE data from the COMET-2 trial alongside the maximum score, then present and discuss considerations for using the toxicity index as a summary measure for communicating tolerability to patients and clinicians. METHODS: Proportions of maximum PRO-CTCAE severity levels and median toxicity index were computed by arm using all trial data and adjusting for baseline symptoms. RESULTS: Group-wise statistical differences were similar whether using severity level proportions or the toxicity index. The impact of adjusting for baseline symptoms was equivalently seen when comparing arms using severity rates or the toxicity index. CONCLUSION: The toxicity index is a useful method when ranking patients from those with the least to most symptomatic adverse event burden. This study showed the toxicity index can be applied to PRO-CTCAE data. Though as a tolerability summary measure, further study is needed to provide a clear clinical or patient-facing interpretation of the toxicity index.

From XenoMouse technology to panitumumab, the first fully human antibody product from transgenic mice.

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies have shown limited efficacy and safety owing to immunogenicity of mouse sequences in humans. Among the approaches developed to overcome these hurdles were transgenic mice genetically engineered with a 'humanized' humoral immune system. One such transgenic system, the XenoMouse, has succeeded in recapitulating the human antibody response in mice, by introducing nearly the entire human immunoglobulin loci into the germ line of mice with inactivated mouse antibody machinery. XenoMouse strains have been used to generate numerous high-affinity, fully human antibodies to targets in multiple disease indications, many of which are progressing in clinical development. However, validation of the technology has awaited the recent regulatory approval of panitumumab (Vectibix), a fully human antibody directed against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), as treatment for people with advanced colorectal cancer. The successful development of panitumumab represents a milestone for mice engineered with a human humoral immune system and their future applications.

Assessment of Adverse Events From the Patient Perspective in a Phase 3 Metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer Clinical Trial.

Importance: Standard adverse event (AE) reporting in oncology clinical trials has historically relied on clinician grading, which prior research has shown can lead to underestimation of rates of symptomatic AEs. Industry sponsors are beginning to implement in trials the National Cancer Institute's Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), which was developed to allow patients to self-report symptomatic AEs and improve the quality of symptomatic AE detection. Objectives: To evaluate the feasibility of implementing PRO-CTCAE in a prespecified correlative analysis of the phase 3 COMET-2 trial and enumerate statistically significant between-group differences in symptomatic AEs using PRO-CTCAE and the CTCAE. Design, Setting, and Participants: This correlative study of 119 men in the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 COMET-2 trial with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer who had undergone at least 2 prior lines of systemic treatment was conducted from March 2012 to July 2014. Participants completed PRO-CTCAE items using an automated telephone system from home prior to treatment and every 3 weeks during treatment. Statistical analysis was performed from May 2018 to June 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: The proportion of patients who completed expected PRO-CTCAE self-reports was computed as a measure of feasibility. Results: Among the 119 men in the study (median age, 65 years [range, 44-80 years]), 534 of 587 (91.0%) expected PRO-CTCAE self-reports were completed, with consistently high rates of completion throughout participation. Rates of self-report adherence were similar between groups (cabozantinib s-maleate, 286 of 317 [90.2%]; and mitoxantrone hydrochloride-prednisone, 248 of 270 [91.9%]). Of 12 measured, patient-reported PRO-CTCAE symptomatic AEs, 4 reached statistical significance when comparing the proportion of patients with at least 1 postbaseline score greater than 0 between groups (differences ranged from 20.1% to 34.1% with higher proportions in the cabozantinib group; all P < .05), and use of a method for accounting for preexisting symptoms at baseline yielded 7 AEs with statistically significant differences between groups (differences ranged from 20.5% to 41.2% with higher proportions in the cabozantinib group; all P < .05). In the same analysis using investigator-reported CTCAE data, no statistically significant differences were found between groups for any symptomatic AEs. Conclusions and Relevance: PRO-CTCAE data collection was feasible and improved the accuracy of symptomatic AE detection in a phase 3 cancer trial. This analysis adds to mounting evidence of the feasibility and value of patient-reported AEs in oncology, which should be considered for inclusion in cancer trials that incorporate AE evaluation. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01522443.

Dose and schedule study of panitumumab monotherapy in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

PURPOSE: This phase 1 study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and activity of panitumumab, a fully human, IgG2 monoclonal antibody that targets the epidermal growth factor receptor in patients with previously treated epidermal growth factor receptor-expressing advanced solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Sequential cohorts were enrolled to receive four i.v. infusions of panitumumab monotherapy at various doses and schedules. Safety was continuously monitored. Serum samples for pharmacokinetic, immunogenicity, and chemistry assessments were drawn at preset intervals. Tumor response was assessed at week 8. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients received panitumumab. Median (range) age was 61 years (32-79 years), and 72 (75%) patients were male. Tumor types were 41% colorectal cancer, 22% prostate, 16% renal, 15% non-small cell lung, 3% pancreatic, 3% esophageal/gastroesophageal, and 1% anal. The overall incidence of grade 3 or 4 adverse events was 32% and 7%, respectively. The incidence of skin-related toxicities was dose dependent. No maximum tolerated dose was reached. No human anti-panitumumab antibodies were detected. No investigator-determined panitumumab infusion-related reactions were reported. Serum panitumumab concentrations were similar in the 2.5 mg/kg weekly, 6.0 mg/kg every 2 weeks, and 9.0 mg/kg every 3 weeks dose cohorts. Five of 39 patients (13%) with colorectal cancer had a confirmed partial response, and 9 of 39 patients (23%) with colorectal cancer had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: Panitumumab was well tolerated with comparable exposure and safety profiles for the weekly, every 2 weeks, and every 3 weeks administration schedules. Rash and dry skin occurred more frequently in the dose cohorts receiving > or =2.5 mg/kg weekly dose. Panitumumab has single-agent antitumor activity, most notably in patients with advanced colorectal cancer.

Volumetric response quantified using T1 subtraction predicts long-term survival benefit from cabozantinib monotherapy in recurrent glioblastoma.

Background: To overcome challenges with traditional response assessment in anti-angiogenic agents, the current study uses T1 subtraction maps to quantify volumetric radiographic response in monotherapy with cabozantinib, an orally bioavailable tyrosine kinase inhibitor with activity against vascular endothelial growth factor receptor 2 (VEGFR2), hepatocyte growth factor receptor (MET), and AXL, in an open-label, phase II trial in patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) (NCT00704288). Methods: A total of 108 patients with adequate imaging data and confirmed recurrent GBM were included in this retrospective study from a phase II multicenter trial of cabozantinib monotherapy (XL184-201) at either 100 mg (N = 87) or 140 mg (N = 21) per day. Contrast enhanced T1-weighted digital subtraction maps were used to define volume of contrast-enhancing tumor at baseline and subsequent follow-up time points. Volumetric radiographic response (>65% reduction in contrast-enhancing tumor volume from pretreatment baseline tumor volume sustained for more than 4 wk) was tested as an independent predictor of overall survival (OS). Results: Volumetric response rate for all therapeutic doses was 38.9% (41.4% and 28.6% for 100 mg and 140 mg doses, respectively). A log-linear association between baseline tumor volume and OS (P = 0.0006) and a linear correlation between initial change in tumor volume and OS (P = 0.0256) were observed. A significant difference in OS was observed between responders (median OS = 20.6 mo) and nonresponders (median OS = 8.0 mo) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.3050, P < 0.0001). Multivariable analyses showed that continuous measures of baseline tumor volume (HR = 1.0233, P < 0.0001) and volumetric response (HR = 0.2240, P < 0.0001) were independent predictors of OS. Conclusions: T1 subtraction maps provide value in determining response in recurrent GBM treated with cabozantinib and correlated with survival benefit.

Baseline pretreatment contrast enhancing tumor volume including central necrosis is a prognostic factor in recurrent glioblastoma: evidence from single and multicenter trials.

BACKGROUND: The prognostic significance of baseline contrast enhancing tumor prior to second- or third-line therapy in recurrent glioblastoma (GBM) for overall survival (OS) remains controversial, particularly in the context of repeated surgical resection and/or use of anti-angiogenic therapy. In the current study, we examined recurrent GBM patients from both single and multicenter clinical trials to test whether baseline enhancing tumor volume, including central necrosis, is a significant prognostic factor for OS in recurrent GBM. METHODS: Included were 497 patients with recurrent GBM from 4 data sources: 2 single-center sites (University of Toronto, University of California Los Angeles) and 2 phase II multicenter trials (AVF3708G, Bevacizumab ± Irinotecan, NCT00345163; XL184-201, Cabozantinib, NCT00704288). T1 subtraction maps were used to define volume of contrast enhancing tumor, including central necrosis. Cox multivariable and univariate analyses were used to evaluate the relationship between tumor volume prior to second- or third-line therapy and OS. RESULTS: Both continuous measures of baseline tumor volume and tumors dichotomized into large (≥15cc) and small (<15cc) tumors were significant predictors of OS (P<.0001), independently of age and treatment. Univariate analysis demonstrated significant OS differences (P<.05) between large (≥15cc) and small (<15cc) tumors in patients under all therapeutic scenarios. Only patients treated with cabozantinib who previously failed anti-angiogenic therapy did not show an OS dependence on baseline tumor volume. CONCLUSIONS: Baseline tumor volume is a significant prognostic factor in recurrent GBM. Clinical trial treatment arms must have a balanced distribution of tumor size, and tumor size should be considered when interpreting therapeutic efficacy.

Diffusion MRI Phenotypes Predict Overall Survival Benefit from Anti-VEGF Monotherapy in Recurrent Glioblastoma: Converging Evidence from Phase II Trials.

Purpose: Anti-VEGF therapies remain controversial in the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma (GBM). In the current study, we demonstrate that recurrent GBM patients with a specific diffusion MR imaging signature have an overall survival (OS) advantage when treated with cediranib, bevacizumab, cabozantinib, or aflibercept monotherapy at first or second recurrence. These findings were validated using a separate trial comparing bevacizumab with lomustine.Experimental Design: Patients with recurrent GBM and diffusion MRI from the monotherapy arms of 5 separate phase II clinical trials were included: (i) cediranib (NCT00035656); (ii) bevacizumab (BRAIN Trial, AVF3708g; NCT00345163); (iii) cabozantinib (XL184-201; NCT00704288); (iv) aflibercept (VEGF Trap; NCT00369590); and (v) bevacizumab or lomustine (BELOB; NTR1929). Apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) histogram analysis was performed prior to therapy to estimate "ADCL," the mean of the lower ADC distribution. Pretreatment ADCL, enhancing volume, and clinical variables were tested as independent prognostic factors for OS.Results: The coefficient of variance (COV) in double baseline ADCL measurements was 2.5% and did not significantly differ (P = 0.4537). An ADCL threshold of 1.24 µm2/ms produced the largest OS differences between patients (HR ∼ 0.5), and patients with an ADCL > 1.24 µm2/ms had close to double the OS in all anti-VEGF therapeutic scenarios tested. Training and validation data confirmed that baseline ADCL was an independent predictive biomarker for OS in anti-VEGF therapies, but not in lomustine, after accounting for age and baseline enhancing tumor volume.Conclusions: Pretreatment diffusion MRI is a predictive imaging biomarker for OS in patients with recurrent GBM treated with anti-VEGF monotherapy at first or second relapse. Clin Cancer Res; 23(19); 5745-56. ©2017 AACR.

Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling of pegfilgrastim in healthy subjects.

This analysis was conducted to characterize the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of pegfilgrastim and to develop a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model to describe the granulopoietic effects of pegfilgrastim and the homeostatic regulation of pegfilgrastim clearance in healthy subjects. Pegfilgrastim serum concentration data and differential white cell counts were obtained from an open-label, single-dose, dose escalation study. Healthy subjects (8 subjects/dose group) received a single subcutaneous dose of 30, 60, 100, or 300 microg/kg pegfilgrastim. Pegfilgrastim exhibited nonlinear pharmacokinetics; clearance decreased with increasing dose. A dose-dependent increase in absolute neutrophil count with an increase in the percentage of band cells was observed. A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model was developed that adequately described the nonlinear pharmacokinetics of pegfilgrastim, feedback regulation of pegfilgrastim clearance by neutrophils, and the differential effects of pegfilgrastim on neutrophil populations in blood.

Safety, pharmacokinetics, and activity of ABX-EGF, a fully human anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody in patients with metastatic renal cell cancer.

PURPOSE: To determine the antitumor activity of ABX-EGF, a fully human monoclonal antibody to the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFr), in previously treated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, and to characterize its toxicity, immunogenicity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The antitumor activity, as well as the toxicity, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and immunogenicity of ABX-EGF, were assessed. RESULTS: Eighty-eight patients were treated with ABX-EGF doses of 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, or 2.5 mg/kg weekly with no loading dose. EGFr immunostaining was performed on 76 tumor biopsy specimens (86%), and 69 (91%) scored positive. Major responses occurred in three patients, and two patients had minor responses. Forty-four patients (50%) also had stable disease at their first 8-week assessment, and the median progression-free survival (PFS) was 100 days (95% CI, 58 to 140 days). Low hemoglobin and high alkaline phosphatase predicted for short PFS. The principal toxicity, an acneiform rash, occurred in 68%, 95%, 87%, and 100% of patients who received at least three doses of ABX-EGF at 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, and 2.5 mg/kg/wk, respectively. A trend indicated that the severity of the rash may relate to PFS. No human antihuman antibodies were detected. ABX-EGF pharmacokinetics fit a model that incorporated both linear and saturable EGFr-mediated clearance mechanisms, and interindividual variability was low. At 2.5 mg/kg/wk, ABX-EGF concentrations throughout treatment exceeded those estimated to saturate nonlinear clearance and inhibit xenograft growth by 90%. CONCLUSION: ABX-EGF was generally well tolerated. The objective response rate was low in previously treated patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Although skin rash may be a pharmacodynamic marker of drug action, its potential as a surrogate marker of clinical benefit requires further evaluation.

Preclinical and clinical evaluations of ABX-EGF, a fully human anti-epidermal growth factor receptor antibody.

The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a transmembrane glycoprotein, with an extracellular ligand-binding domain and intracellular tyrosine kinase domain. Ligand binding induces EGFR dimerization and autophosphorylation on several tyrosine residues in the intracellular domain, leading to mitogenic signal transduction. EGFR overexpression correlates with a poor prognosis and is often associated with malignant transformation in a variety of epithelial cancers. ABX-EGF is a high-affinity (dissociation constant K(D) = 5 x 10(-11) M) fully human IgG2 monoclonal antibody against human EGFR. ABX-EGF binds EGFR and blocks receptor binding of EGF and transforming growth factor-alpha, inhibiting EGFR tyrosine phosphorylation and tumor cell activation. ABX-EGF prevents tumor formation and eradicates large, established A431 tumors in xenograft models. Tumor growth inhibition occurs at relatively low doses, without concomitant chemotherapy or radiotherapy. When combined with chemotherapeutic agents, ABX-EGF has resulted in additive antitumor activity. A Phase I clinical trial has demonstrated activity in several tumor types, and the results from a Phase II trial for renal cell cancer also showed modest activity. Therapy was generally well tolerated without statistically significant adverse events. Monoclonal antibody blockade of EGFR represents a new and exciting direction in cancer therapy.

Population pharmacokinetic evaluation of a fully human IgG monoclonal antibody in patients with inflammatory diseases.

ABX-IL8 is a fully human IgG2 monoclonal antibody generated using transgenic mouse technology (Xenomouse®) that binds to human Interleukin-8 with high affinity and specificity. The objective of this study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetic (PK) properties of ABX-IL8 in patients with active inflammatory diseases. Patients with psoriasis and rheumatoid arthritis received single or multiple short intravenous infusions of ABX-IL8 or placebo. Serum concentrations of ABX-IL8, baseline serum IgG and IgG2 concentrations and Anti-Drug Antibody (ADA) response to ABX-IL8 were determined using relevant immunoassays. Pharmacokinetic analyses of the serum ABX-IL8 concentration-time data were performed. Following single-dose administration of ABX-IL8, dose proportional increases in drug exposure were observed. Consistent with the disposition properties of the endogenous IgG antibodies, ABX-IL8 appeared to be primarily distributed into the plasma compartment and the extra-vascular fluid and the steady-sate volume of distribution (61 ± 14 to 71 ± 14 mL/kg) was comparable to that for the endogenous antibodies. Following the multiple-dose administration, PK properties of the antibody were linear with dose and time. Steady-state clearance (2.6 ± 1.1 to 2.7 ± 1.4 mL/day/kg) was similar to that observed following the single dose administration and no ADA response was detected throughout the study. PK variability and serum exposure to ABX-IL8 following administration of the fixed doses were comparable to those observed following administration of the weight-adjusted doses; the impact of body weight on clearance was minimal and this correlation did not translate into requirements for body weight-adjusted dosing. Additionally, age and disease type (psoriasis or RA) had no impact on ABX-IL8 pharmacokinetics.

A phase 2/3 multicenter randomized clinical trial of ABX-CBL versus ATG as secondary therapy for steroid-resistant acute graft-versus-host disease.

Treatment for steroid-resistant acute graft-versus-host disease (GVHD) has had limited success. ABX-CBL is a hybridoma-generated murine IgM monoclonal antibody against the CD147 antigen, weakly expressed on human leukocytes and up-regulated on activated lymphocytes. A prospective, multicenter, open-label, randomized clinical trial comparing ABX-CBL to antithymocyte globulin (ATG) for treatment of steroid-resistant acute GVHD was conducted in 95 patients at 21 centers. Forty-eight patients received ABX-CBL daily for 14 consecutive days followed by up to 6 weeks of ABX-CBL twice weekly. Forty-seven patients received equine ATG, 30 mg/kg every other day for a total of 6 doses with additional courses as needed. By day 180, overall improvement was similar in the patients receiving ABX-CBL and in those receiving ATG (56% versus 57%, P = .91). Patient survival at 18 months was less favorable on ABX-CBL than on ATG (35% versus 45%), with the 95% confidence interval ruling out that ABX-CBL provides at least a 10.4% improvement. Data from this trial suggest that ABX-CBL does not offer an improvement over ATG in the treatment of acute steroid-resistant GVHD. This prospective, multicenter, randomized clinical trial for steroid-resistant acute GVHD serves as a model for future evaluation of new agents.