Eftozanermin alfa (ABBV-621) monotherapy in patients with previously treated solid tumors: findings of a phase 1, first-in-human study.

Eftozanermin alfa (eftoza), a second-generation tumor necrosis factor-related apoptosis-inducing ligand receptor (TRAIL-R) agonist, induces apoptosis in tumor cells by activation of death receptors 4/5. This phase 1 dose-escalation/dose-optimization study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and preliminary activity of eftoza in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients received eftoza 2.5-15 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 or day 1/day 8 every 21 days in the dose-escalation phase, and 1.25-7.5 mg/kg once-weekly (QW) in the dose-optimization phase. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were evaluated during the first treatment cycle to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Pharmacodynamic effects were evaluated in circulation and tumor tissue. A total of 105 patients were enrolled in the study (dose-escalation cohort, n = 57; dose-optimization cohort, n = 48 patients [n = 24, colorectal cancer (CRC); n = 24, pancreatic cancer (PaCA)]). In the dose-escalation cohort, seven patients experienced DLTs. MTD and RP2D were not determined. Most common treatment-related adverse events were increased alanine aminotransferase and aspartate aminotransferase levels, nausea, and fatigue. The one treatment-related death occurred due to respiratory failure. In the dose-optimization cohort, three patients (CRC, n = 2; PaCA, n = 1) had a partial response. Target engagement with regard to receptor saturation, and downstream apoptotic pathway activation in circulation and tumor were observed. Eftoza had acceptable safety, evidence of pharmacodynamic effects, and preliminary anticancer activity. The 7.5-mg/kg QW regimen was selected for future studies on the basis of safety findings, pharmacodynamic effects, and biomarker modulations. (Trial registration number: NCT03082209 (registered: March 17, 2017)).

A systematic review of economic analyses of psychological interventions and therapies in health-related settings.

BACKGROUND: This review aims to synthesise evidence on the economic impact of psychological interventions and therapies when applied to a broad range of physical health conditions. METHODS: The following bibliographic databases were searched for relevant articles: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid) and PsycINFO (Ebsco). As this review was intended to update an earlier review, the date range for the search was restricted to between January 2012 and September 2018. Reference lists from the review articles were also searched for relevant articles. Study quality was evaluated using the Scottish Intercollegiate Network Guidelines (SIGN) appraisal checklists for both economic studies and Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs). When the economic analyses did not provide sufficient detail for quality evaluation, the original RCT papers were sought and these were also evaluated. Half of the papers were quality rated by a second author. Initial agreement was high and all disagreements were resolved by discussion. RESULTS: This yielded 1408 unique articles, reduced to 134 following screening of the title and abstract. The full texts of the remaining articles were reviewed by at least one team member and all exclusions were discussed and agreed by the team. This left 46 original research articles, alongside five systematic reviews. Fifty-seven per cent of the articles were deemed to be of high quality, with the remainder of acceptable quality. Fifteen different medical conditions were covered, with chronic pain (10 articles) and cancer (9 articles) being the two most investigated health conditions. Three quarters of the papers reviewed showed evidence for the cost-effectiveness of psychological interventions in physical health, with the clearest evidence being in the field of chronic pain and cancer. CONCLUSIONS: This paper provides a comprehensive integration of the research on the cost-effectiveness of psychological therapies in physical health. Whilst the evidence for cost-effectiveness in chronic pain and cancer is encouraging, some health conditions require further study. Clearly, as the primary research is international, and was therefore conducted across varying health care systems, caution must be exercised when applying the results to counties outside of those covered. Despite this, the results are of potential relevance to service providers and funders.

Targeting BCL2 with Venetoclax in Relapsed Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia.

BACKGROUND: New treatments have improved outcomes for patients with relapsed chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL), but complete remissions remain uncommon. Venetoclax has a distinct mechanism of action; it targets BCL2, a protein central to the survival of CLL cells. METHODS: We conducted a phase 1 dose-escalation study of daily oral venetoclax in patients with relapsed or refractory CLL or small lymphocytic lymphoma (SLL) to assess safety, pharmacokinetic profile, and efficacy. In the dose-escalation phase, 56 patients received active treatment in one of eight dose groups that ranged from 150 to 1200 mg per day. In an expansion cohort, 60 additional patients were treated with a weekly stepwise ramp-up in doses as high as 400 mg per day. RESULTS: The majority of the study patients had received multiple previous treatments, and 89% had poor prognostic clinical or genetic features. Venetoclax was active at all dose levels. Clinical tumor lysis syndrome occurred in 3 of 56 patients in the dose-escalation cohort, with one death. After adjustments to the dose-escalation schedule, clinical tumor lysis syndrome did not occur in any of the 60 patients in the expansion cohort. Other toxic effects included mild diarrhea (in 52% of the patients), upper respiratory tract infection (in 48%), nausea (in 47%), and grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (in 41%). A maximum tolerated dose was not identified. Among the 116 patients who received venetoclax, 92 (79%) had a response. Response rates ranged from 71 to 79% among patients in subgroups with an adverse prognosis, including those with resistance to fludarabine, those with chromosome 17p deletions (deletion 17p CLL), and those with unmutated IGHV. Complete remissions occurred in 20% of the patients, including 5% who had no minimal residual disease on flow cytometry. The 15-month progression-free survival estimate for the 400-mg dose groups was 69%. CONCLUSIONS: Selective targeting of BCL2 with venetoclax had a manageable safety profile and induced substantial responses in patients with relapsed CLL or SLL, including those with poor prognostic features. (Funded by AbbVie and Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01328626.).

Efficacy of venetoclax as targeted therapy for relapsed/refractory t(11;14) multiple myeloma.

Venetoclax is a selective, orally bioavailable BCL-2 inhibitor that induces cell death in multiple myeloma (MM) cells, particularly in those harboring t(11;14), which express high levels of BCL-2 relative to BCL-XL and MCL-1. In this phase 1 study, patients with relapsed/refractory MM received venetoclax monotherapy. After a 2-week lead-in with weekly dose escalation, daily venetoclax was given at 300, 600, 900, or 1200 mg in dose-escalation cohorts and 1200 mg in the safety expansion. Dexamethasone could be added on progression during treatment. Sixty-six patients were enrolled (30, dose-escalation cohorts; 36, safety expansion). Patients received a median of 5 prior therapies (range, 1-15); 61% were bortezomib and lenalidomide double refractory, and 46% had t(11;14). Venetoclax was generally well tolerated. Most common adverse events included mild gastrointestinal symptoms (nausea [47%], diarrhea [36%], vomiting [21%]). Cytopenias were the most common grade 3/4 events, with thrombocytopenia (32%), neutropenia (27%), anemia (23%), and leukopenia (23%) reported. The overall response rate (ORR) was 21% (14/66), and 15% achieved very good partial response or better (≥VGPR). Most responses (12/14 [86%]) were reported in patients with t(11;14). In this group, ORR was 40%, with 27% of patients achieving ≥VGPR. Biomarker analysis confirmed that response to venetoclax correlated with higher BCL2:BCL2L1 and BCL2:MCL1 mRNA expression ratios. Venetoclax monotherapy at a daily dose up to 1200 mg has an acceptable safety profile and evidence of single-agent antimyeloma activity in patients with relapsed/refractory MM, predominantly in patients with t(11;14) abnormality and those with a favorable BCL2 family profile. Registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov: #NCT01794520.

Safety and preliminary efficacy of venetoclax with decitabine or azacitidine in elderly patients with previously untreated acute myeloid leukaemia: a non-randomised, open-label, phase 1b study.

BACKGROUND: Elderly patients (aged ≥65 years) with acute myeloid leukaemia have poor outcomes and no effective standard-of-care therapy exists. Treatment with hypomethylating agents such as azacitidine and decitabine is common, but responses are modest and typically short-lived. The oral anti-apoptotic B-cell lymphoma 2 protein inhibitor, venetoclax, has shown promising single-agent activity in patients with relapsed or refractory acute myeloid leukaemia and preclinical data suggested synergy between hypomethylating agents and venetoclax, which led to this combination phase 1b study. METHODS: Previously untreated patients aged 65 years and over with acute myeloid leukaemia who were ineligible for standard induction therapy were enrolled into this non-randomised, open-label, phase 1b study. Patients were required to have an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 and either intermediate-risk or poor-risk cytogenetics. Patients were enrolled into one of three groups for the dose-escalation phase of this study: group A (venetoclax and intravenous decitabine 20 mg/m2 [days 1-5 of each 28-day cycle]), group B (venetoclax and subcutaneous or intravenous azacitidine 75 mg/m2 [days 1-7 of each 28-day cycle]), and group C (a venetoclax and decitabine substudy with the oral CYP3A inhibitor posaconazole, 300 mg twice on cycle 1, day 21, and 300 mg once daily from cycle 1, days 22-28, to assess its effect on venetoclax pharmacokinetics). Dose escalation followed a standard 3 + 3 design with at least three evaluable patients enrolled per cohort; daily target doses of venetoclax for groups A and B were 400 mg (cohort 1), 800 mg (cohorts 2 and 3), and 1200 mg (cohort 4), and 400 mg for group C. The primary endpoints were the safety and pharmacokinetics of venetoclax plus decitabine or azacitidine, and to determine the maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose. Secondary endpoints included the preliminary anti-leukaemic activity of venetoclax with decitabine or azacitidine through the analysis of overall response, duration of response, and overall survival. We analysed safety, pharmacokinetics, and anti-leukaemic activity in all patients who received one or more venetoclax doses. The expansion phase of the study is ongoing but is closed to accrual. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02203773. FINDINGS: 57 patients were enrolled in the study. 23 patients in group A and 22 patients in group B were enrolled between Nov 19, 2014, and Dec 15, 2015, and 12 patients in group C were enrolled between June 14, 2015, and Jan 16, 2016. As of data cutoff on June 15, 2016, the most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were thrombocytopenia (27 [47%] of 57 patients; nine in group A, 13 in group B, and five in group C), febrile neutropenia (24 [42%] of 57; 11 in group A, ten in group B, and three in group C), and neutropenia (23 [40%] of 57; 12 in group A, eight in group B, and three in group C). The most common serious treatment-emergent adverse event in groups A and B was febrile neutropenia (seven [30%] of 23 patients vs seven [32%] of 22), whereas in group C it was lung infection (four [33%] of 12 patients). 49 (86%) of 57 patients had treatment-related adverse events; the most common in groups A and B included nausea (12 [52%] patients vs seven [32%] patients), fatigue (six [26%] patients vs seven [32%]), and decreased neutrophil count (six [26%] patients vs six [27%]), whereas in group C the most common were nausea (seven [58%] of 12 patients), leucopenia (six [50%]), vomiting (five [42%]), and decreased platelet count (five [42%]). The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The recommended phase 2 dose was 400 mg once a day or 800 mg with an interrupted dosing schedule (safety expansion). In total, four (7%) of 57 patients had died within 30 days of the first venetoclax dose caused by sepsis (group B), bacteraemia (group A), lung infection (group C), and respiratory failure (group A). Tumour lysis syndrome was not observed. Decitabine and azacitidine did not substantially affect venetoclax exposures. Overall, 35 (61%; 95% CI 47·6-74·0) of 57 patients achieved complete remission or complete remission with incomplete marrow recovery. In groups A and B, 27 (60%; 95% CI 44·3-74·3) of 45 patients had complete remission or complete remission with incomplete marrow recovery. INTERPRETATION: Venetoclax plus hypomethylating agent therapy seems to be a novel, well-tolerated regimen with promising activity in this underserved patient population. Evaluation of expansion cohorts is ongoing at 400 mg and 800 mg doses using both hypomethylating agent combinations. FUNDING: AbbVie and Genentech.

A phase 1 study of PARP-inhibitor ABT-767 in advanced solid tumors with BRCA1/2 mutations and high-grade serous ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer.

Purpose This phase 1 study examined safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), and efficacy of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor ABT-767 in patients with advanced solid tumors and BRCA1/2 mutations or with high-grade serous ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Methods Patients received ABT-767 monotherapy orally until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Dose was escalated from 20 mg once daily to 500 mg twice daily (BID). Dose-limiting toxicities, recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), food effect, objective response rate, and biomarkers predicting response were determined. Results Ninety-three patients were treated with ABT-767; 80 had a primary diagnosis of ovarian cancer. ABT-767 demonstrated dose-proportional PK up to 500 mg BID and half-life of ~2 h. Food had no effect on ABT-767 bioavailability. Most common grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events were nausea, fatigue, decreased appetite, and anemia. Anemia showed dose-dependent increase. RP2D was 400 mg BID. Objective response rate by RECIST 1.1 was 21% (17/80) in all evaluable patients and 20% (14/71) in evaluable patients with ovarian cancer. Response rate by RECIST 1.1 and/or CA-125 was 30% (24/80) in patients with ovarian cancer. Mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2, homologous recombination deficiency (HRD), and platinum sensitivity were associated with tumor response. Median progression-free survival was longer for HRD positive (6.7 months) versus HRD negative patients (1.8 months) with ovarian cancer. Conclusions ABT-767 had an acceptable safety profile up to the established RP2D of 400 mg BID and dose-proportional PK. Patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation, HRD positivity, and platinum sensitivity were more sensitive to ABT-767.

Metabolism and Disposition of a Novel B-Cell Lymphoma-2 Inhibitor Venetoclax in Humans and Characterization of Its Unusual Metabolites.

Venetoclax (ABT-199), a B-cell lymphoma-2 (Bcl-2) protein inhibitor, is currently in clinical development for the treatment of hematologic malignancies. We characterized the absorption, metabolism, and excretion of venetoclax in humans. After a single oral dose of [14C]venetoclax to healthy volunteers, the recovery of total radioactive dose was 100%, with feces being the major route of elimination of the administered dose, whereas urinary excretion was minimal (<0.1%). The extent of absorption was estimated to be at least 65%. Venetoclax was primarily cleared by hepatic metabolism (∼66% of the administered dose). ∼33% of the administered dose was recovered as the parent drug and its nitro reduction metabolite M30 [2-((1H-pyrrolo[2,3-b]pyridin-5-yl)oxy)-N-((3-amino-4-(((tetrahydro-2H-pyran-4-yl)methyl)amino)phenyl)sulfonyl)-4-(4-((4'-chloro-5,5-dimethyl-3,4,5,6-tetrahydro-[1,1'-biphenyl]-2-yl)methyl)piperazin-1-yl)benzamide] (13%) in feces. Biotransformation of venetoclax in humans primarily involves enzymatic oxidation on the dimethyl cyclohexenyl moiety, followed by sulfation and/or nitro reduction. Nitro reduction metabolites were likely formed by gut bacteria. Unchanged venetoclax was the major drug-related material in circulation, representing 72.8% of total plasma radioactivity. M27 (oxidation at the 6 position of cyclohexenyl ring followed by cyclization at the α-carbon of piperazine ring; 4-[(10aR,11aS)-7-(4-chlorophenyl)-9,9-dimethyl-1,3,4,6,8,10,10a,11a-octahydropyrazino[2,1-b][1,3]benzoxazin-2-yl]-N-[3-nitro-4-(tetrahydropyran-4-ylmethylamino)phenyl]sulfonyl-2-(1H-pyrrolo[2,3-b]pyridin-5-yloxy)benzamide) was identified as a major metabolite, representing 12% of total drug-related material. M27 was primarily formed by cytochrome P450 isoform 3A4 (CYP3A4). Steady-state plasma concentrations of M27 in human and preclinical species used for safety testing suggested that M27 is a disproportionate human metabolite. M27 is not expected to have clinically relevant on- or off-target pharmacologic activities.

Pharmacokinetics of venetoclax in patients with 17p deletion chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Venetoclax is a first-in-class orally available, B-cell lymphoma (BCL)-2 inhibitor indicated for the treatment of patients with relapsed/refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) harboring the 17p deletion. We used a novel approach for evaluating venetoclax pharmacokinetics using only sparse sampling in 155 patients enrolled in a phase 2, multicenter, open-label study in CLL patients with the 17p deletion. Patients received venetoclax doses within 30 min after the completion of breakfast or the first meal of the day, with no specific recommendations for the fat content in the meal. Blood samples for venetoclax assay were collected during the ramp-up period and on day 1 of weeks 8, 12, 16, 24, and every 12 weeks thereafter. The mean postdose (8 h) plasma venetoclax concentrations increased with increasing weekly venetoclax dose during the ramp-up period to reach 1.89 µg/ml on week 5 day 1 at the 400 mg dose. The mean predose concentration at the 400 mg dose ranged between 0.69 and 0.99 µg/ml across visits between weeks 8 and 120. Repeated-measures analysis detected no statistical significance (P≥0.05) for the mean predose concentrations at any of the times tested from weeks 8 to 24. The study shows that the pharmacokinetic profile of venetoclax in CLL patients with the 17p deletion is comparable to the overall CLL as well as non-Hodgkin's lymphoma patient populations. Furthermore, no specific recommendation in terms of fat content in the meal is needed for the intake of venetoclax in patients with CLL.

Evaluation of Drug-Drug Interactions between Direct-Acting Anti-Hepatitis C Virus Combination Regimens and the HIV-1 Antiretroviral Agents Raltegravir, Tenofovir, Emtricitabine, Efavirenz, and Rilpivirine.

The three direct-acting antiviral agent (3D) regimen is a novel combination of direct-acting antiviral agents (DAAs) that has proven effective for the treatment of hepatitis C virus (HCV) infection. Given the potential for coadministration in patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection, possible drug interactions with antiretroviral drugs must be carefully considered. Four phase 1, multiple-dose pharmacokinetic studies were conducted in healthy volunteers (n = 66). The 3D regimen of 150/100 mg daily paritaprevir/ritonavir, 25 mg daily ombitasvir, and 400 mg twice-daily dasabuvir was administered alone or in combination with 200 mg daily of emtricitabine and 300 mg daily of tenofovir disoproxil fumarate (tenofovir DF), 25 mg daily of rilpivirine, or 400 mg of raltegravir twice daily. A 2-DAA regimen of 150/100 mg daily paritaprevir/ritonavir and 400 mg of dasabuvir twice daily was also studied in combination with efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF at 600/200/300 mg daily, respectively (Atripla; Bristol-Myers Squibb). Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined from plasma drug concentrations. No clinically significant drug interactions were observed (≤32% change in exposure) between the 3D regimen and that of emtricitabine plus tenofovir DF. Raltegravir exposure was increased up to 134% when the drug was coadministered with the 3D regimen. Although coadministration with rilpivirine was well tolerated in healthy volunteers, observed elevations in rilpivirine exposures may increase the potential for adverse drug reactions. Concomitant use of the 2-DAA regimen and efavirenz/emtricitabine/tenofovir DF was discontinued owing to poor tolerability and adverse events. No dose adjustment is required during coadministration of raltegravir, tenofovir DF, or emtricitabine with the 3D regimen. Rilpivirine is not recommended and efavirenz is contraindicated for coadministration with the 3D regimen.

Veliparib in combination with whole brain radiation therapy in patients with brain metastases: results of a phase 1 study.

Veliparib, a potent, oral PARP inhibitor, potentiates the antitumor activity of radiation therapy and crosses the blood-brain barrier. This was a phase 1 dose-escalation study evaluating the safety, and secondarily the antitumor activity of veliparib in combination with whole brain radiation therapy (WBRT) in patients with brain metastases, in order to power future trials. Patients with brain metastases from primary solid tumors were treated with WBRT (30.0 or 37.5 Gy in 10 or 15 fractions) and veliparib (escalating doses of 10-300 mg, orally BID). Safety and tumor response were assessed. Observed survival was compared to predicted survival based on a published nomogram. Eighty-one patients (median age 58 years) were treated. The most common primary tumor types were non-small cell lung (NSCLC; n = 34) and breast cancer (n = 25). The most common AEs deemed possibly related to veliparib (AEs, ≥15 %) were fatigue (30 %), nausea (22 %), and decreased appetite (15 %). Fatigue (5 %), hypokalemia and hyponatremia (3 % each) were the only Grade 3/4 AEs deemed possibly related to veliparib observed in ≥2 patients. Although this was an uncontrolled study, preliminary efficacy results were better than predicted: the median survival time (MST, 95 % CI) for the NSCLC subgroup was 10.0 mo (3.9-13.5) and for the breast cancer subgroup was 7.7 mo (2.8-15.0) compared to a nomogram-model-predicted MST of 3.5 mo (3.3-3.8) and 4.9 mo (4.2-5.5). The addition of veliparib to WBRT did not identify new toxicities when compared to WBRT alone. Based on encouraging safety and preliminary efficacy results, a randomized, controlled phase 2b study is ongoing.

Phase Ib Study of Telisotuzumab Vedotin in Combination With Erlotinib in Patients With c-Met Protein-Expressing Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: Overexpression of c-Met protein and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations can co-occur in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC), providing strong rationale for dual targeting. Telisotuzumab vedotin (Teliso-V), a first-in-class antibody-drug conjugate targeting c-Met, has shown a tolerable safety profile and antitumor activity as monotherapy. Herein, we report the results of a phase Ib study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02099058) evaluating Teliso-V plus erlotinib, an EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI), in patients with c-Met-positive (+) NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This study evaluated Teliso-V (2.7 mg/kg once every 21 days) plus erlotinib (150 mg once daily) in adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) with c-Met+ NSCLC. Later enrollment required presence of an EGFR-activating mutation (EGFR-M+) and progression on a prior EGFR TKI. End points included safety, pharmacokinetics, objective response rate (ORR), and progression-free survival (PFS). The efficacy-evaluable population consisted of c-Met+ patients (confirmed histology [H]-score ≥ 150) who had at least one postbaseline scan; c-Met+ patients with H-scores ≥ 225 were classified as c-Met high. RESULTS: As of January 2020, 42 patients were enrolled (N = 36 efficacy-evaluable). Neuropathies were the most common any-grade adverse events reported, with 24 of 42 patients (57%) experiencing at least one event. The pharmacokinetic profile of Teliso-V plus erlotinib was similar to Teliso-V monotherapy. Median PFS for all efficacy-evaluable patients was 5.9 months (95% CI, 2.8 to not reached). ORR for EGFR-M+ patients (n = 28) was 32.1%. Of EGFR-M+ patients, those who were c-Met high (n = 15) had an ORR of 52.6%. Median PFS was 6.8 months for non-T790M+ and for those whose T790M status was unknown, versus 3.7 months for T790M+. CONCLUSION: Teliso-V plus erlotinib showed encouraging antitumor activity and acceptable toxicity in EGFR TKI-pretreated patients with EGFR-M+, c-Met+ NSCLC.

A Phase 1b Study of Telisotuzumab Vedotin in Combination With Nivolumab in Patients With NSCLC.

INTRODUCTION: Telisotuzumab vedotin (Teliso-V) is an anti-c-Met-directed antibody-drug conjugate that has exhibited antitumor activity as monotherapy in NSCLC. Its potential activity combined with programmed cell death protein-1 inhibitors has not been previously evaluated. METHODS: In a phase 1b study (NCT02099058), adult patients (≥18 y) with advanced NSCLC received combination therapy with Teliso-V (1.6, 1.9, or 2.2 mg/kg, every 2 wk) plus nivolumab (3 mg/kg, 240 mg, or per locally approved label). The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability; secondary objectives included the evaluation of antitumor activity. RESULTS: As of January 2020, a total of 37 patients received treatment with Teliso-V (safety population) in combination with nivolumab; 27 patients (efficacy population) were c-Met immunohistochemistry-positive. Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) status was evaluated in the efficacy population (PD-L1-positive [PD-L1+]: n = 15; PD-L1-negative [PD-L1-]: n = 9; PD-L1-unknown: n = 3). The median age was 67 years and 74% (20 of 27) of patients were naive to immune checkpoint inhibitors. The most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events were fatigue (27%) and peripheral sensory neuropathy (19%). The pharmacokinetic profile of Teliso-V plus nivolumab was similar to Teliso-V monotherapy. The objective response rate was 7.4%, with two patients (PD-L1+, c-Met immunohistochemistry H-score 190, n = 1; PD-L1-, c-Met H-score 290, n = 1) having a confirmed partial response. Overall median progression-free survival was 7.2 months (PD-L1+: 7.2 mo; PD-L1-: 4.5 mo; PD-L1-unknown: not reached). CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with Teliso-V plus nivolumab was well tolerated in patients with c-Met+ NSCLC with limited antitumor activity.

Veliparib Plus Carboplatin and Paclitaxel Versus Investigator's Choice of Standard Chemotherapy in Patients With Advanced Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: This open-label Phase III trial (NCT02264990) evaluated the PARP inhibitor, veliparib, combined with carboplatin/paclitaxel versus chemotherapy alone for first-line treatment of patients with advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLC). A 52-gene expression classifier (LP52) previously shown to identify patients more likely to respond to veliparib was evaluated as a planned correlative analysis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Adult current or former smokers with advanced non-squamous NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to veliparib (120 mg daily for 7 days/cycle) with carboplatin and paclitaxel or to investigators' choice of platinum doublet chemotherapy (up to 6, 21-day cycles), with optional pemetrexed maintenance. Prospective analysis of the LP52 signature was conducted using a clinical Qiagen/HTG assay. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) in LP52+ patients. RESULTS: Overall, 595 patients received veliparib + carboplatin/paclitaxel (n = 298) or chemotherapy alone (n = 297); 13% (n = 40) in each arm were LP52+. The primary endpoint was not met; median OS was 11.2 months with veliparib + carboplatin/paclitaxel versus 9.2 months with chemotherapy alone in the LP52+ subgroup (hazard ratio [HR] 0.644, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.396-1.048; P = .113). In the overall population, median OS was 12.1 months in both arms (HR 0.986, 95% CI: 0.827-1.176; P = .846). No new safety signals were observed. CONCLUSION: In patients with non-squamous NSCLC, there was no significant improvement in OS with veliparib + carboplatin/paclitaxel versus chemotherapy alone, although a trend toward improved OS in the LP52+ population suggests this subgroup may benefit from veliparib. Statistical power was limited due to the small sample size.

Veliparib and nivolumab in combination with platinum doublet chemotherapy in patients with metastatic or advanced non-small cell lung cancer: A phase 1 dose escalation study.

OBJECTIVES: Both combinations of the PARP inhibitor veliparib plus platinum doublet chemotherapy (CT), and the programmed death receptor-1 (PD-1) inhibitor nivolumab plus CT have demonstrated encouraging efficacy for treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This phase 1 dose-escalation study (NCT02944396) evaluated the quadruple combination of veliparib with nivolumab and doublet CT in patients with unresectable advanced/metastatic NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled into five dosing cohorts: patients received veliparib 120 mg twice daily (BID) combined with nivolumab 360 mg, carboplatin AUC 6 mg/mL∙min, and paclitaxel 200 mg/m2 (C/PAC) or veliparib 80/120/200/240 mg BID in combination with nivolumab 360 mg, carboplatin AUC 6 mg/mL∙min, and pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 (C/PEM). Primary objective was to identify the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of veliparib + nivolumab + CT. Safety, tolerability, and efficacy of this combination were also assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled: 6 patients received veliparib 120 mg BID + nivolumab + C/PAC and 19 received veliparib (80-240 mg BID) + nivolumab + C/PEM. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported, and the RP2Ds were veliparib 120 mg BID + nivolumab + C/PAC, and veliparib 240 mg BID + nivolumab + C/PEM. The most common any-grade adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (56%), nausea (52%), and anemia (48%). Grade 3/4 AEs included anemia (32%) and neutropenia (24%), and the most frequent serious AE was malignant neoplasm progression (12%). Veliparib exhibited approximately dose proportional kinetics in the dose range 80-240 mg BID combined with nivolumab and C/PEM, with no effects on pemetrexed pharmacokinetics. Overall, the confirmed objective response rate was 40%, and best overall response was 64%. CONCLUSION: Veliparib combined with nivolumab and platinum doublet CT was tolerated in patients with advanced/metastatic NSCLC, and no evidence of drug-drug interaction was observed. Although preliminary, this quadruple therapy may have promising antitumor activity.

Veliparib in Combination with Carboplatin and Etoposide in Patients with Treatment-Naïve Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Phase 2 Randomized Study.

PURPOSE: This study investigated the efficacy and safety of oral PARP inhibitor veliparib, plus carboplatin and etoposide in patients with treatment-naïve, extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to veliparib [240 mg twice daily (BID) for 14 days] plus chemotherapy followed by veliparib maintenance (400 mg BID; veliparib throughout), veliparib plus chemotherapy followed by placebo (veliparib combination only), or placebo plus chemotherapy followed by placebo (control). Patients received 4-6 cycles of combination therapy, then maintenance until unacceptable toxicity/progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) with veliparib throughout versus control. RESULTS: Overall (N = 181), PFS was improved with veliparib throughout versus control [hazard ratio (HR), 0.67; 80% confidence interval (CI), 0.50-0.88; P = 0.059]; median PFS was 5.8 and 5.6 months, respectively. There was a trend toward improved PFS with veliparib throughout versus control in SLFN11-positive patients (HR, 0.6; 80% CI, 0.36-0.97). Median overall survival (OS) was 10.1 versus 12.4 months in the veliparib throughout and control arms, respectively (HR, 1.43; 80% CI, 1.09-1.88). Grade 3/4 adverse events were experienced by 82%, 88%, and 68% of patients in the veliparib throughout, veliparib combination-only and control arms, most commonly hematologic. CONCLUSIONS: Veliparib plus platinum chemotherapy followed by veliparib maintenance demonstrated improved PFS as first-line treatment for ED-SCLC with an acceptable safety profile, but there was no corresponding benefit in OS. Further investigation is warranted to define the role of biomarkers in this setting.

Veliparib in Combination With Platinum-Based Chemotherapy for First-Line Treatment of Advanced Squamous Cell Lung Cancer: A Randomized, Multicenter Phase III Study.

PURPOSE: Squamous non-small-cell lung cancer (sqNSCLC) is genetically complex with evidence of DNA damage. This phase III study investigated the efficacy and safety of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor veliparib in combination with conventional chemotherapy for advanced sqNSCLC (NCT02106546). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients age ≥ 18 years with untreated, advanced sqNSCLC were randomly assigned 1:1 to carboplatin and paclitaxel with veliparib 120 mg twice daily (twice a day) or placebo twice a day for up to six cycles. The primary end point was overall survival (OS) in the veliparib arm versus the control arm in current smokers, based on phase II findings. Archival tumor samples were provided for biomarker analysis using a 52-gene expression histology classifier (LP52). RESULTS: Overall, 970 patients were randomly assigned to carboplatin and paclitaxel plus either veliparib (n = 486) or placebo (n = 484); 57% were current smokers. There was no significant OS benefit with veliparib in current smokers, with median OS 11.9 versus 11.1 months (hazard ratio [HR], 0.905; 95% CI, 0.744 to 1.101; P = .266). In the overall population, OS favored veliparib; median OS was 12.2 versus 11.2 months (HR, 0.853; 95% CI, 0.747 to 0.974), with no difference in progression-free survival (median 5.6 months per arm). In patients with biomarker-evaluable tumor samples (n = 360), OS favored veliparib in the LP52-positive population (median 14.0 v 9.6 months; HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.49 to 0.89), but favored placebo in the LP52-negative population (median 11.0 v 14.4 months; HR, 1.33; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.86). No new safety signals were observed in the experimental arm. CONCLUSION: In current smokers with advanced sqNSCLC, there was no therapeutic benefit of adding veliparib to first-line chemotherapy. The LP52 signature may identify a subgroup of patients likely to derive benefit from veliparib with chemotherapy.

Development and testing of a checklist to assess compliance with the faculty of pain medicine's core standards for pain management services: experience in a new national tertiary pain service.

INTRODUCTION: The Faculty of Pain Medicine recently published the first UK-focused Core Standards for Pain Management Services (CSPMS). We present an audit checklist tool developed to map compliance to the CSPMS, which offers a practical method of auditing any pain management service against the standards. METHODS: The checklist tool was developed and its utility was field-tested in the Scottish National Residential Pain Management Programme (SNRPMP), a newly established service offering residential service to people in Scotland. RESULTS: The checklist tool developed provides an easy and practical approach to evaluating any pain service against the national standards. Its application to evaluate the SNRPMP indicates that the service meets the majority of CSPMS standards and highlights aspects of the service requiring improvement. CONCLUSION: The layout of the developed checklist tool offers an alternative format for the structuring of the national standards in possible future revisions. The audit checklist tool enables evaluation of services with a numerical score, enabling monitoring of their compliance with national standards as well as comparisons between pain services.

Safety and pharmacokinetics of veliparib extended-release in patients with advanced solid tumors: a phase I study.

The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1/2 inhibitor veliparib is active against tumors deficient in homologous DNA damage repair. The pharmacokinetics and safety of veliparib extended-release (ER) were evaluated in patients with advanced solid tumors. This phase I study assessed veliparib-ER up to 800 mg once daily or 600 mg twice daily. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) were assessed in cycle 1 and safety/tolerability during continuous administration (28-day cycles). Seventy-one patients (n = 53 ovarian, n = 17 breast, n = 1 prostate carcinoma) received veliparib; 50 had deleterious breast cancer susceptibility (BRCA) gene mutations. Single-dose veliparib-ER 200 mg (fasting) led to 58% lower peak concentration and similar area under the concentration-time curve compared with veliparib immediate-release (IR). Three patients experienced DLTs (grade 2: asthenia; grade 3: nausea/vomiting, seizure). RP2D and MTD for veliparib-ER were 400 mg BID. The most frequent adverse events (AEs) were nausea (78.9%) and vomiting (50.7%). The most common grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs were as follows: thrombocytopenia (7.0%), nausea, and anemia (4.2% each). Overall, 12 (27.3%) patients with ovarian and 10 (62.5%) patients with breast carcinoma had a partial response. Veliparib-ER, versus veliparib-IR, exhibited an improved pharmacokinetic profile and was well tolerated in patients with ovarian and BRCA-mutated breast cancers.

Pharmacokinetics of Venetoclax, a Novel BCL-2 Inhibitor, in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia or Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma.

Venetoclax is a selective BCL-2 inhibitor that is approved in the United States for the treatment of patients with chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) with 17p deletion who have received at least 1 prior therapy. The aim of this analysis was to characterize venetoclax pharmacokinetics in the plasma and urine of patients with hematological malignancies and evaluate the effect of dose proportionality, accumulation, weak and moderate CYP3A inhibitors, as well as low- and high-fat meals on venetoclax pharmacokinetics. Patients received a once-daily venetoclax dose of 20 to 1200 mg. Pharmacokinetic parameters were estimated using noncompartmental methods. Venetoclax peak exposures were achieved at 5 to 8 hours under low-fat conditions, and the mean terminal-phase elimination half-life ranged between 14.1 and 18.2 hours at different doses. Venetoclax steady-state exposures showed minimal accumulation and increased proportionally over the dose range of 300 to 900 mg. Low-fat and high-fat meals increased venetoclax exposures by approximately 4-fold relative to the fasting state. Moderate CYP3A inhibitors increased venetoclax exposures by 40% to 60%, whereas weak CYP3A inhibitors had no effect. A negligible amount of venetoclax was excreted in the urine. In summary, venetoclax exhibits a pharmacokinetic profile that is compatible with once-daily dosing with food regardless of fat content. Concomitant use of venetoclax with moderate CYP3A inhibitors should be avoided or venetoclax dose should be reduced during the venetoclax initiation and ramp-up phase in CLL patients. Renal excretion plays a minimal role in the elimination of venetoclax.