BETA PRIME: Phase I study of AdAPT-001 as monotherapy and combined with a checkpoint inhibitor in superficially accessible, treatment-refractory solid tumors.

AdAPT-001 is an investigational therapy consisting of a replicative type 5 adenovirus armed with a TGF-ß receptor-immunoglobulin Fc fusion trap, designed to neutralize isoforms 1 and 3 of the profibrotic and immunosuppressive cytokine, TGF-ß. In preclinical studies with an immunocompetent mouse model, AdAPT-001 eradicated directly treated 'cold' tumors as well as distant untreated tumors, and, from its induction of systemic CD8+ T cell-mediated antitumor immunity, protected the mice from rechallenge with tumor cells. AdAPT-001 also sensitized resistant tumors to checkpoint blockade. This manuscript describes the rationale and design of the first-in-human phase I, dose-escalation and dose-expansion study of AdAPT-001 alone and in combination with a checkpoint inhibitor in adults with treatment-refractory superficially accessible solid tumors.

The purpose of this study is to find out more about the experimental oncolytic virus called AdAPT-001 that has been designed to selectively eliminate cancer cells. The virus is also designed to make a particular protein called a TGF-ß trap, which neutralizes TGF-ß, an overproduced chemical in cancer cells that puts the immune system into a comatose state. This article discusses a clinical trial called BETA PRIME for patients with no other standard treatment options. The trial will explore different doses of AdAPT-001 both alone and in combination with an approved checkpoint inhibitor or another immunotherapy, which blocks the 'off' signal on immune cells, to determine the safest and best dose. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT04673942 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Safety and activity of RRx-001 in patients with advanced cancer: a first-in-human, open-label, dose-escalation phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: Epigenetic alterations have been strongly associated with tumour formation and resistance to chemotherapeutic drugs, and epigenetic modifications are an attractive target in cancer research. RRx-001 is activated by hypoxia and induces the generation of reactive oxygen and nitrogen species that can epigenetically modulate DNA methylation, histone deacetylation, and lysine demethylation. The aim of this phase 1 study was to assess the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetics of RRx-001. METHODS: In this open-label, dose-escalation, phase 1 study, we recruited adult patients (aged >18 years) with histologically or cytologically confirmed diagnosis of advanced, malignant, incurable solid tumours from University of California at San Diego, CA, USA, and Sarah Cannon Research Institute, Nashville, TN, USA. Key eligibility criteria included evaluable disease, Eastern Cooperative Group performance status of 2 or less, an estimated life expectancy of at least 12 weeks, adequate laboratory parameters, discontinuation of all previous antineoplastic therapies at least 6 weeks before intervention, and no residual side-effects from previous therapies. Patients were assigned to receive intravenous infusions of RRx-001 at increasing doses (10 mg/m(2), 16·7 mg/m(2), 24·6 mg/m(2), 33 mg/m(2), 55 mg/m(2), and 83 mg/m(2)) either once or twice-weekly for at least 4 weeks, with at least three patients per dose cohort and allowing a 2-week observation period before dose escalation. Samples for safety and pharmacokinetics analysis, including standard chemistry and haematological panels, were taken on each treatment day. The primary objective was to assess safety, tolerability, and dose-limiting toxic effects of RRx-001, to determine single-dose pharmacokinetics, and to identify a recommended dose for phase 2 trials. All analyses were done per protocol. Accrual is complete and follow-up is still on-going. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01359982. FINDINGS: Between Oct 10, 2011, and March 18, 2013, we enrolled 25 patients and treated six patients in the 10 mg/m(2) cohort, three patients in the 16·7 mg/m(2) cohort, three patients in the 24·6 mg/m(2) cohort, four patients in the 33 mg/m(2) cohort, three patients in the 55 mg/m(2), and six patients in the 83 mg/m(2) cohort. Pain at the injection site, mostly grade 1 and grade 2, was the most common adverse event related to treatment, experienced by 21 (84%) patients. Other common drug-related adverse events included arm swelling or oedema (eight [32%] patients), and vein hardening (seven [28%] patients). No dose-limiting toxicities were observed. Time constraints related to management of infusion pain from RRx-001 resulted in a maximally feasible dose of 83 mg/m(2). Of the 21 evaluable patients, one (5%) patient had a partial response, 14 (67%) patients had stable disease, and six (29%) patients had progressive disease; all responses were across a variety of tumour types. Four patients who had received RRx-001 were subsequently rechallenged with a treatment that they had become refractory to; all four responded to the rechallenge. INTERPRETATION: RRx-001 is a well-tolerated novel compound without clinically significant toxic effects at the tested doses. Preliminary evidence of activity is promising and, on the basis of all findings, a dose of 16·7 mg/m(2) was recommended as the targeted dose for phase 2 trials. FUNDING: EpicentRx (formerly RadioRx).

Hypothesis: AdAPT-001 and pseudoprogression - when seeing is not necessarily believing.

The purpose of this commentary is to highlight the high occurrence of clinical pseudoprogression and delayed responses that have been observed to date with the locally injected oncolytic adenovirus, AdAPT-001, currently in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial (NCT04673942) for the treatment of treatment-refractory tumors. Not surprisingly, these have led to confusion about response assessment and whether to continue patients on treatment. AdAPT-001 carries a transforming growth factor (TGF)-beta trap (TGF-ß), which sequesters TGF-ß, a cytokine that potently regulates inflammation, fibrosis, and immunosuppression in cancer. Pseudoprogression (PsP) or progression prior to response or stabilization, has been widely recognized with radiotherapy for primary brain tumors and immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs). PsP has also been described and documented in the context of oncolytic virotherapy but perhaps to a lesser extent. However, repeated intratumoral injections with these immunostimulatory agents may induce a more intense immune response and release more antigenic epitopes than with ICIs, for example, which are strictly T-cell directed rather than also tumor-directed like AdAPT-001.

BETA prime: a first-in-man phase 1 study of AdAPT-001, an armed oncolytic adenovirus for solid tumors.

AdAPT-001 is an oncolytic adenovirus (OAV) with a transforming growth factor beta (TGF-ß) trap, which neutralizes the immunosuppressive and profibrotic cytokine, TGF-ß. The aim or purpose of this phase 1 study was to assess the safety and tolerability and, secondarily, the efficacy of AdAPT-001 after single intratumoral injection (IT) (Part 1) and multidose IT injection (Part 2) in patients with superficially accessible, advanced refractory solid tumors. Part 1 enrolled 9 patients with a 3 + 3 single dose-escalation safety run-in involving 2.5 × 1011, 5.0 × 1011, 1.0 × 1012 viral particles (vps). No dose-limiting toxicities or treatment-related serious adverse events (SAEs) were seen. In Part 2, a dose-expansion phase, 19 patients received AdAPT-001 at 1.0 × 1012 vps until disease progression according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors or RECIST 1.1. The overall responses to treatment included confirmed partial responses (3), durable stable disease ≥ 6 months (5), and progressive disease (13). AdAPT-001 is well tolerated. Evidence of an anti-tumor effect was seen in both injected and uninjected lesions. The recommended Phase 2 dose was 1.0 × 1012 vp administered by intratumoral injection once every 2 weeks. Combination of AdAPT-001 with a checkpoint inhibition is enrolling.

Patent and Marketing Exclusivities 101 for Drug Developers.

Despite an ever-increasing need for newer, safer, more effective, and more affordable therapies to treat a multitude of diseases and conditions, drug development takes too long, costs too much, and is too uncertain to be undertaken without the conferment of exclusionary rights or entry barriers to motivate and sustain investment in it. These entry barriers take the form of patents that protect intellectual property and marketing exclusivity provisions that are provided by statute. This review focuses on the basic ins and outs of regulatory and patent exclusivities for which new chemical entities (NCEs), referring to never-before approved drugs with an entirely new active ingredient, are eligible and uses RRx-001, a small molecule aerospace-derived NCE in development for the treatment of cancer, radiation toxicity, and diseases of the NLR family pyrin domain containing 3 (NLRP3) inflammasome, as a "real world" example. This is intended as a '101-type' of primer; its aim is to help developers of original pharmaceuticals navigate the maze of patents, other IP regulations, and statutory exclusivities in major markets so that they can make proper use of them.

Case Report of AdAPT-001-Mediated Sensitization to a Previously Failed Checkpoint Inhibitor in a Metastatic Chordoma Patient.

Chordoma is a rare, but aggressive bone tumor with a high recurrence rate that primarily arises at the cranial and caudal ends of the axial skeleton. Systemic chemotherapies are not effective against the tumor, and outside of surgical resection and radiation, no approved options are available. Prognosis depends on the extent of surgical resection, with the more the better, and adjuvant radiotherapy. Herein is presented the first-ever case of a recurrent chordoma patient that responded to the combination of one dose of an experimental TGF-beta trap carrying oncolytic adenovirus, known as AdAPT-001, followed by immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy, despite prior progression on an anti-PD-1. This case report highlights the potential of AdAPT-001 as a treatment modality in combination with checkpoint inhibition for recurrent chordoma.

Data Management 101 for drug developers: A peek behind the curtain.

In drug development a frequently used phrase is "data-driven". Just as high-test gas fuels a car, so drug development "runs on" high-quality data; hence, good data management practices, which involve case report form design, data entry, data capture, data validation, medical coding, database closure, and database locking, are critically important. This review covers the essentials of clinical data management (CDM) for the United States. It is intended to demystify CDM, which means nothing more esoteric than the collection, organization, maintenance, and analysis of data for clinical trials. The review is written with those who are new to drug development in mind and assumes only a passing familiarity with the terms and concepts that are introduced. However, its relevance may also extend to experienced professionals that feel the need to brush up on the basics. For added color and context, the review includes real-world examples with RRx-001, a new molecular entity in phase III and with fast-track status in head and neck cancer, and AdAPT-001, an oncolytic adenovirus armed with a transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-ß) trap in a phase I/II clinical trial with which the authors, as employees of the biopharmaceutical company, EpicentRx, are closely involved. An alphabetized glossary of key terms and acronyms used throughout this review is also included for easy reference.

ROCKET: Phase II Randomized, Active-controlled, Multicenter Trial to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of RRx-001 + Irinotecan vs. Single-agent Regorafenib in Third/Fourth Line Colorectal Cancer.

INTRODUCTION: RRx-001 is a novel cysteine-targeted alkylating agent that releases nitric oxide (NO). The primary biological activities of this hybrid molecule include macrophage repolarizing and vascular normalization. The purpose of this clinical trial (ROCKET) (NCT02096354) was to compare the safety and efficacy of the combination therapy RRx-001 + irinotecan vs. regorafenib in third/fourth line colorectal cancer that previously received treatment with irinotecan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 34 patients were randomized (24 to RRx-001 + irinotecan (RxI) and 10 to single-agent regorafenib (RegI)) and were the basis for the intention-to-treat analysis (ITT, comprising all 34 patients). RRx-001 treatment was administered as an up-to-2-month "primer" followed by irinotecan for patients randomized to the RRx-001 arm (24). The efficacy and safety data are presented for the 34 patients in the (ITT) efficacy analysis. Therapy consisted of intravenous administration of RRx-001 at 4 mg once weekly for up to 2 months, at which point RRx-001 was discontinued, followed by intravenous infusion of irinotecan at 180 mg/m2 on day 1 in a 21-day cycle vs. 160 mg oral regorafenib daily for 3/4 weeks followed at progression, if applicable, by irinotecan 180 mg/m2 on day 1 in a 21-day cycle. There were 3 patients (3/24 = 12.5%) with prior single agent irinotecan on the RRx-001 randomized arm and 2 (2/10 = 20%) on the regorafenib randomized arm. Numerous patients had irinotecan combination therapies prior to randomized treatment. There were 15 patients on RRx-001 arm that received irinotecan post-RRx-001 in the randomized trial. There were 5 PRs on RRx-001 plus irinotecan leading to an overall response of 20.8% (5/24). There were 37.5% (9/24) of RRx-001 randomized patients with KRAS mutant type while 60% (6/10) regorafenib randomized patients were of KRAS type mutant. There were only 4 patients with available QOL and Edmonton Symptom Assessment System, an insufficient sample size to allow for any meaningful analysis. RESULTS: Median patient follow-up was approximately 14.5 months (SD 4.5 months). Median overall survival was 8.6 months for RxI and 4.7 months for RegI. Median progression free survival was 6.1 months for RxI vs. 1.7 months for RegI (a statistically significant result, 2-sided log-rank test, P = .0030). The toxicity profile of RxI was substantially improved compared with RegI. CONCLUSION: The results of this trial demonstrate improved efficacy of RxI compared with RegI in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer after previous treatment with irinotecan, and late-stage clinical development in this indication is planned on the strength of the observed "signal" accompanied by a sufficient safety profile.

Subset analysis of safety and efficacy in asian patients treated with RRx-001 across three clinical trials.

RRx-001, a CD47 antagonist via its inhibition of MYC and the γ-subtype of the peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor (PPAR) has been associated to date with minimal toxicity. The aim of this post-hoc analysis was to evaluate the toxicity and efficacy of RRx-001 in Asian patients since RRx-001, in the context of multiple Phase 3 studies, will be administered in China and Chinese territories as well as potentially throughout the rest of Asia. Patients received 4 mg of RRx-001 in three different antitumor clinical trials with chemotherapy and/or radiation and a retrospective subset efficacy and toxicity analysis was conducted for patients with Asian ancestry in comparison to patients with other ethnic backgrounds. The toxicity and efficacy data from these studies were similar between Asians and the rest of the treated patients. While the sample sizes are too small to draw definitive conclusions, at a dose of 4 mg, when RRx-001 is combined with chemotherapy, no apparent differences in terms of safety and efficacy are observed in cancer patients with Asian ancestry.

Going viral: a review of replication-selective oncolytic adenoviruses.

Oncolytic viruses have had a tumultuous course, from the initial anecdotal reports of patients having antineoplastic effects after natural viral infections a century ago to the development of current cutting-edge therapies in clinical trials. Adenoviruses have long been the workhorse of virotherapy, and we review both the scientific and the not-so-scientific forces that have shaped the development of these therapeutics from wild-type viral pathogens, turning an old foe into a new friend. After a brief review of the mechanics of viral replication and how it has been modified to engineer tumor selectivity, we give particular attention to ONYX-015, the forerunner of virotherapy with extensive clinical testing that pioneered the field. The findings from those as well as other oncolytic trials have shaped how we now view these viruses, which our immune system has evolved to vigorously attack, as promising immunotherapy agents.

Confirmatory Trials in the Evaluation of Anticancer Medicinal Products in Man--PFS2: A Measure of Therapeutic Action-At-A-Distance.

Overall survival (OS) has emerged as the definitive regulatory "be-all, end-all" for the demonstration of benefit in cancer clinical trials. The reason and the rationale for why this is so are easily appreciated: literally a "test of time," OS is a seemingly unambiguous, agenda-free end point, independent of bias-prone variables such as the frequency and methods of assessment, clinical evaluation, and the definition of progression. However, by general consensus, OS is an imperfect end point for several reasons: First, it may often be impractical because of the length, cost, and the size of clinical trials. Second, OS captures the impact of subsequent therapies, both beneficial (i.e., active) and detrimental, on survival but it does not take into account the contribution of subsequent therapies by treatment arm; the postprogression period is treated as an unknown black box (no information about the potential influence of next-line therapies on the outcome) under the implicit assumption that the clinical trial treatment is the only clinical variable that matters: what OS explicitly measures is the destination, that is, the elapsed time between the date of randomization (or intention to treat) and the date of death, not the journey, that is, what transpires in-between. In long-term maintenance strategies, patients receive treatment in temporally separated but mutually interdependent and causally linked sequences that exert a "field of influence" akin to action-at-a-distance forces like gravity, electricity, and magnetism on both the tumor and each other. Hence, in this setting, a new end point, PFS2, is required to measure this field of influence. This article reviews the definition and use in clinical trials of PFS2 and makes the case for its potential applicability as a preferred end point to measure the mutual influence of individual regimens in long-term maintenance strategies with resensitizing agents in particular.