Phase I study of continuous olaparib capsule dosing in combination with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel (Part 1).

Background The PARP inhibitor olaparib has shown acceptable toxicity at doses of up to 400 mg twice daily (bid; capsule formulation) with encouraging signs of antitumor activity. Based on its mode of action, olaparib may sensitize tumor cells to DNA-damaging agents. This Phase I trial (NCT00516724) evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK) and preliminary efficacy of olaparib combined with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel. Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors received olaparib (capsule bid) plus carboplatin (Part A), carboplatin and paclitaxel (Part B), or paclitaxel (Part C). In each part of the study, different drug doses were given to define the most appropriate dose/drug combination to use in further studies. Safety assessments included evaluation of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; cycle 1 only), adverse events (AEs) and physical examinations. PK assessments of olaparib, carboplatin and paclitaxel were performed. Tumor responses (RECIST) were assessed every two cycles. Results Fifty-seven patients received treatment. DLTs were reported in two patients (both receiving olaparib 100 mg bid and carboplatin AUC 4; Part A, cohort 2): grade 1 thrombocytopenia with grade 2 neutropenia lasting for 16 days, and grade 2 neutropenia lasting for 7 days. Non-hematologic AEs were predominantly grade 1-2 and included fatigue (70%) and nausea (40%). Bone marrow suppression, mainly neutropenia (51%) and thrombocytopenia (25%), frequently led to dose modifications. Conclusions Olaparib in combination with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel resulted in increased hematologic toxicities, making it challenging to establish a dosing regimen that could be tolerated for multiple cycles without dose modifications.

Phase I study of intermittent olaparib capsule or tablet dosing in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel (part 2).

Background In the first part of this extensive phase I study (NCT00516724), continuous olaparib twice daily (bid) with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel resulted in myelosuppression and dose modifications. Here, we report the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of intermittent olaparib dosing combined with carboplatin and paclitaxel. Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors (part D) and enriched for ovarian and breast cancer (part E) received olaparib (capsule and tablet formulations) using intermittent schedules (2 to 10 days of a 21-day cycle) combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel. Safety assessments included evaluation of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; cycle 1 only), adverse events (AEs), and physical examinations. Pharmacokinetic assessments of olaparib capsule and tablet combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel were performed. Tumor responses (RECIST) were assessed every 2 cycles. Results In total, 132 heavily pre-treated patients were included. One DLT of grade 3 elevated alanine aminotransferase lasting for 8 days was reported (olaparib tablet 100 mg bid days 3-12, carboplatin area under the curve 4 and paclitaxel 175 mg/m2). The most common hematological AEs were neutropenia (47%) and thrombocytopenia (39%), which frequently led to dose modifications. Non-hematological AEs were predominantly grade 1-2, including alopecia (89%) and fatigue (84%). Overall objective response rate was 46%. Conclusions Discontinuous dosing of olaparib resulted in significant myelosuppression leading to dose interruptions and/or delays. Anti-tumor activity was encouraging in patients enriched with BRCA-mutated breast and ovarian cancer. The most appropriate olaparib tablet dose for use in further studies evaluating olaparib in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel is 50 mg bid (days 1-5).

A Phase I Dose-Escalation Study of the Safety and Pharmacokinetics of Pictilisib in Combination with Erlotinib in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

BACKGROUND: Epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) are involved in the proliferation and survival of many cancer types. Enhanced antitumor activity may be achieved through combined inhibition of these pathways. We report results for pictilisib (GDC-0941, a class I pan-PI3K inhibitor) plus erlotinib (an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor) in patients with advanced solid tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A 3 + 3 dose-escalation study was carried out at a starting daily dose of 60 mg pictilisib on days 1-21 of a 28-day cycle and 150 mg erlotinib from day 2 of cycle 1. The primary objectives of the study were to assess safety and tolerability, identify dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), estimate the maximum tolerated dose, and identify the recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Evaluation of a dose-expansion cohort at the RP2D was performed. RESULTS: Fifty-seven patients were treated in the study. All patients experienced at least one adverse event (AE). Grade ≥3 AEs, serious AEs, and deaths were reported in 38 (66.7%), 19 (33.3%), and 4 (7.0%) patients, respectively. DLTs occurred in nine patients across eight cohorts and the RP2D was determined to be 340 mg pictilisib on a "5 days on, 2 days off" schedule plus 100 mg erlotinib. Two patients (3.5%) experienced partial response and 19 (33.3%) had stable disease. CONCLUSION: Combining pictilisib with erlotinib in patients with advanced solid tumors is feasible; however, antitumor activity is limited. Additional studies may identify patients likely to benefit from combined inhibition of EGFR and PI3K pathways. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Combining drugs targeting different signaling pathways in cancer growth and survival could overcome drug resistance and improve antitumor activity. In this first-in-human study for the combination, addition of the PI3K inhibitor pictilisib to the EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib resulted in toxicity that led to dose and schedule modifications to identify a tolerable recommended phase II dose of 340 mg pictilisib on a "5 days on, 2 days off" schedule plus 100 mg erlotinib daily. The limited antitumor activity observed, however, suggests that additional studies are needed to identify patients most likely to benefit from combined EGFR and PI3K inhibition.

Long-term safety and anti-tumour activity of olaparib monotherapy after combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with advanced breast, ovarian or fallopian tube cancer.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib (AZD2281), a PARP-1/2 inhibitor, has been extensively investigated in clinical trials. However, limited clinical data are available about its long-term safety and anti-tumour activity. METHODS: Patients had first participated in a phase I study of olaparib combined with carboplatin and/or paclitaxel. They continued with olaparib monotherapy in their best interest if they failed to tolerate the combination due to the treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Safety data were collected by physical examination and regular laboratory evaluations. Disease evaluations were performed by CT scan. RESULTS: At data cutoff, 21 patients were included; 10 with breast, 9 with ovarian and 2 with fallopian tube cancer of whom 16 patients had a BRCA mutation (13 BRCA1; 3 BRCA2). TRAEs were mostly haematological and most prominent shortly after switching from combination to monotherapy, probably due to carry-over effects of chemotherapy. Over time, both severity and frequency of TRAEs decreased. Responses to olaparib were durable with a median treatment duration of 52 (range 7-183) weeks. In total, nine (43%) patients were still on study at data cutoff. CONCLUSION: Continued long-term daily olaparib was found to be safe and tolerable. Encouragingly, patients who showed a favourable response on earlier combination therapy maintained this response on olaparib monotherapy.

First-in-Human Phase I Study of GSK2126458, an Oral Pan-Class I Phosphatidylinositol-3-Kinase Inhibitor, in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumor Malignancies.

PURPOSE: GSK2126458 (GSK458) is a potent inhibitor of PI3K (α, ß, γ, and δ), with preclinical studies demonstrating broad antitumor activity. We performed a first-in-human phase I study in patients with advanced solid tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients received oral GSK458 once or twice daily in a dose-escalation design to define the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Expansion cohorts evaluated pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity in histologically and molecularly defined cohorts. RESULTS: One hundred and seventy patients received doses ranging from 0.1 to 3 mg once or twice daily. Dose-limiting toxicities (grade 3 diarrhea,n= 4; fatigue and rash,n= 1) occurred in 5 patients (n= 3 at 3 mg/day). The MTD was 2.5 mg/day (MTD with twice daily dosing undefined). The most common grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events included diarrhea (8%) and skin rash (5%). Pharmacokinetic analyses demonstrated increased duration of drug exposure above target level with twice daily dosing. Fasting insulin and glucose levels increased with dose and exposure of GSK458. Durable objective responses (ORs) were observed across multiple tumor types (sarcoma, kidney, breast, endometrial, oropharyngeal, and bladder cancer). Responses were not associated withPIK3CAmutations (OR rate: 5% wild-type vs. 6% mutant). CONCLUSIONS: Although the MTD of GSK458 was 2.5 mg once daily, twice-daily dosing may increase duration of target inhibition. Fasting insulin and glucose levels served as pharmacodynamic markers of drug exposure. Select patients achieved durable responses; however,PIK3CAmutations were neither necessary nor predictive of response. Combination treatment strategies and novel biomarkers may be needed to optimally target PI3K.

Effect of inhibition of the FGFR-MAPK signaling pathway on the development of ocular toxicities.

By the introduction of molecularly targeted anti-cancer drugs, that are designed to intervene with specific pathways aberrant in cancers with distinct mutations, the type of adverse events encountered has changed greatly compared to the adverse events profile of classical chemotherapeutic agents. Ocular toxicities, such as serous retinal detachment and retinal vein occlusion, are observed in the treatment with several protein kinase inhibitors, such as MEK inhibitors. This review discusses the pathophysiology, diagnosis and advice for clinical management of these toxicities, and focuses on the current understanding of the underlying molecular mechanisms. Some ocular toxicities can be considered a class effect and a direct result of intervening with the MAPK pathway. Effective recording and monitoring will contribute to increased understanding of the prevalence and of adequate management of these ocular toxicities, but further research is warranted to elucidate the exact underlying mechanisms and to optimize treatment of these undesirable toxicities.