Reviewing the role of healthy volunteer studies in drug development.

BACKGROUND: With the exception of genotoxic oncology drugs, first-in-human, Phase 1 clinical studies of investigational drugs have traditionally been conducted in healthy volunteers (HVs). The primary goal of these studies is to investigate the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of a novel drug candidate, determine appropriate dosing, and document safety and tolerability. MAIN BODY: When tailored to specific study objectives, HV studies are beneficial to manufacturers and patients alike and can be applied to both non-oncology and oncology drug development. Enrollment of HVs not only increases study accrual rates for dose-escalation studies but also alleviates the ethical concern of enrolling patients with disease in a short-term study at subtherapeutic doses when other studies (e.g. Phase 2 or Phase 3 studies) may be more appropriate for the patient. The use of HVs in non-oncology Phase 1 clinical trials is relatively safe but nonetheless poses ethical challenges because of the potential risks to which HVs are exposed. In general, most adverse events associated with non-oncology drugs are mild in severity, and serious adverse events are rare, but examples of severe toxicity have been reported. The use of HVs in the clinical development of oncology drugs is more limited but is nonetheless useful for evaluating clinical pharmacology and establishing an appropriate starting dose for studies in cancer patients. During the development of oncology drugs, clinical pharmacology studies in HVs have been used to assess pharmacokinetics, drug metabolism, food effects, potential drug-drug interactions, effects of hepatic and renal impairment, and other pharmacologic parameters vital for clinical decision-making in oncology. Studies in HVs are also being used to evaluate biosimilars versus established anticancer biologic agents. CONCLUSION: A thorough assessment of toxicity and pharmacology throughout the drug development process is critical to ensure the safety of HVs. With the appropriate safeguards, HVs will continue to play an important role in future drug development.

Safety and antitumour activity of durvalumab plus tremelimumab in non-small cell lung cancer: a multicentre, phase 1b study.

BACKGROUND: PD-L1 and CTLA-4 immune checkpoints inhibit antitumour T-cell activity. Combination treatment with the anti-PD-L1 antibody durvalumab and the anti-CTLA-4 antibody tremelimumab might provide greater antitumour activity than either drug alone. We aimed to assess durvalumab plus tremelimumab in patients with advanced squamous or non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: We did a multicentre, non-randomised, open-label, phase 1b study at five cancer centres in the USA. We enrolled immunotherapy-naive patients aged 18 years or older with confirmed locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC. We gave patients durvalumab in doses of 3 mg/kg, 10 mg/kg, 15 mg/kg, or 20 mg/kg every 4 weeks, or 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks, and tremelimumab in doses of 1 mg/kg, 3 mg/kg, or 10 mg/kg every 4 weeks for six doses then every 12 weeks for three doses. The primary endpoint of the dose-escalation phase was safety. Safety analyses were based on the as-treated population. The dose-expansion phase of the study is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02000947. FINDINGS: Between Oct 28, 2013, and April 1, 2015, 102 patients were enrolled into the dose-escalation phase and received treatment. At the time of this analysis (June 1, 2015), median follow-up was 18·8 weeks (IQR 11-33). The maximum tolerated dose was exceeded in the cohort receiving durvalumab 20 mg/kg every 4 weeks plus tremelimumab 3 mg/kg, with two (30%) of six patients having a dose-limiting toxicity (one grade 3 increased aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase and one grade 4 increased lipase). The most frequent treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events were diarrhoea (11 [11%]), colitis (nine [9%]), and increased lipase (eight [8%]). Discontinuations attributable to treatment-related adverse events occurred in 29 (28%) of 102 patients. Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 37 (36%) of 102 patients. 22 patients died during the study, and three deaths were related to treatment. The treatment-related deaths were due to complications arising from myasthenia gravis (durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 4 weeks plus tremelimumab 1 mg/kg), pericardial effusion (durvalumab 20 mg/kg every 4 weeks plus tremelimumab 1 mg/kg), and neuromuscular disorder (durvalumab 20 mg/kg every 4 weeks plus tremelimumab 3 mg/kg). Evidence of clinical activity was noted both in patients with PD-L1-positive tumours and in those with PD-L1-negative tumours. Investigator-reported confirmed objective responses were achieved by six (23%, 95% CI 9-44) of 26 patients in the combined tremelimumab 1 mg/kg cohort, comprising two (22%, 95% CI 3-60) of nine patients with PD-L1-positive tumours and four (29%, 95% CI 8-58) of 14 patients with PD-L1-negative tumours, including those with no PD-L1 staining (four [40%, 95% CI 12-74] of ten patients). INTERPRETATION: Durvalumab 20 mg/kg every 4 weeks plus tremelimumab 1 mg/kg showed a manageable tolerability profile, with antitumour activity irrespective of PD-L1 status, and was selected as the dose for phase 3 studies, which are ongoing. FUNDING: MedImmune.

Phase II clinical trial of cediranib in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy and toxicity of cediranib, a highly potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases, in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) previously treated with docetaxel-based therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study used a Simon two-stage trial design, which required at least two of 12 patients in the first cohort to be progression-free at 6 months. We enrolled a total of 35 evaluable patients who all received cediranib 20 mg orally daily. In a second cohort, 23 additional patients received prednisone 10 mg daily with cediranib. Endpoints included tumour response, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), vascular permeability via dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI), and toxicity. RESULTS: A total of 59 patients were enrolled, of whom 67% had received two or more previous chemotherapy regimens. Six of 39 patients with measurable disease had confirmed partial responses and one had an unconfirmed partial response. At 6 months, 43.9% of patients were progression-free; the median PFS and OS periods for all patients were 3.7 months and 10.1 months, respectively. We found that the DCE-MRI variables baseline transport constant (Ktrans ) and rate constant at day 28 were significantly associated with PFS in univariate analyses, but only baseline Ktrans remained significant when considered jointly. The most frequent toxicities were hypertension, fatigue, anorexia and weight loss; the addition of prednisone reduced the incidence of constitutional toxicities. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrated that cediranib was generally well tolerated with some anti-tumour activity in highly pretreated patients with metastatic CRPC who had progressive disease after docetaxel-based therapy.