Phase II Trials of Iniparib (BSI-201) in Combination with Gemcitabine and Carboplatin in Patients with Recurrent Ovarian Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Iniparib (BSI-201), a novel anticancer agent thought to have poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitory activity and synergy with both gemcitabine and carboplatin (GC) was evaluated in 2 cohorts with GC. METHODS: Parallel multicenter, single-arm, phase II studies using a Simon two-stage design. Eligible patients had a histological diagnosis of epithelial ovarian carcinoma, fallopian tube cancer, or primary peritoneal carcinoma and demonstration of platinum-sensitive (≥6 months [mo]) or -resistant disease (relapse 2-6 mo post-platinum). Carboplatin (AUC 4 IV day 1), gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 IV days 1 and 8), and iniparib (5.6 mg/kg IV days 1, 4, 8, and 11) were given on a 21-day cycle. RESULTS: The overall response rate (ORR RECIST 1.0) in platinum sensitive disease was 66% (95% CI, 49-80) with a higher response rate in the 15 pts with germline BRCA mutations (gBRCAmut) (73%). Median PFS was 9.9 (95% CI, 8.2-11.3) months. In the platinum resistant population the ORR was 26% (95% CI, 14-42), however in the 11 pts for whom BRCA mutation was present, the best overall response was PR in 5 (46%). Median PFS was 6.8 months (range, 5.7-7.7 months). Notably, among the 17 CA-125-response-evaluable patients who did not achieve tumor response, 7 (41.2%) patients had a CA125 response, and 93% has clinical benefit (CR + PR + SD). The GCI combination was generally well tolerated despite a high incidence of thrombocytopenia and neutropenia, with no new toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: Given the subsequent lack of efficacy demonstrated for iniparib in breast cancer, these are studies of GC and demonstrate a higher than traditionally appreciated activity in patients with platinum-sensitive and -resistant recurrent ovarian cancer, especially in patients that harbor a BRCA mutation, resetting the benchmark for efficacy in phase II trials. (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifiers: NCT01033292 & NCT01033123).

Combined pembrolizumab and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in platinum resistant ovarian cancer: A phase 2 clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in vitro may have immunomodulatory abilities and preclinical evidence suggests it synergizes with immune checkpoint blockade. We hypothesized that combining PLD and pembrolizumab would be active in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC). METHODS: This was a single-arm, multi-center phase II trial. Eligible patients had PROC with ≤2 prior lines of cytotoxic therapy for recurrent or persistent disease. Twenty-six patients were enrolled and given pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously (IV) every 3 weeks and PLD 40 mg/m2 IV every 4 weeks. Patients were assessed radiographically every 8 weeks. The primary endpoint was clinical benefit rate (CBR), defined as complete response (CR) + partial response (PR) + stable disease (SD) ≥24 weeks. The study was powered to detect an improvement in CBR from 25% to 50%, with rejection of the null hypothesis if at least 10 patients achieved clinical benefit. T-cell inflamed gene expression profiles (GEP) and PD-L1 were assessed and correlated with clinical outcome. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were evaluable for best overall response. The study satisfied its primary endpoint, with 12 patients achieving clinical benefit for a CBR of 52.2% (95% CI 30.6-73.2%). There were 5 PRs (21.7%) and 1 CR (4.3%), for an overall response rate (ORR) of 26.1%. Six patients had SD lasting at least 24 weeks. Combination therapy was well tolerated without unexpected toxicities. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of pembrolizumab and PLD was manageable, without unexpected toxicities, and showed preliminary evidence of clinical benefit in the treatment of platinum resistant ovarian cancer. ORR and median PFS of combination therapy in this study was higher than historical comparisons of PLD alone or anti-PD-1/PD-L1 agents alone. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02865811.

Olaparib and α-specific PI3K inhibitor alpelisib for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer: a dose-escalation and dose-expansion phase 1b trial.

BACKGROUND: Based on preclinical work, we found that combination of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors with drugs that inhibit the homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathway (such as PI3K inhibitors) might sensitise HRR-proficient epithelial ovarian cancers to PARP inhibitors. We aimed to assess the safety and identify the recommended phase 2 dose of the PARP inhibitor olaparib in combination with the PI3K inhibitor alpelisib in patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and in patients with breast cancer. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 1b trial following a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with the following key eligibility criteria: confirmed diagnosis of either recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer of high-grade serous histology; confirmed diagnosis of either recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer of any histology with known germline BRCA mutations; confirmed diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer of triple-negative histology; or confirmed diagnosis of recurrent breast cancer of any histology with known germline BRCA mutations. Additional patients with epithelial ovarian cancer were enrolled in a dose-expansion cohort. Four dose levels were planned: the starting dose level of alpelisib 250 mg once a day plus olaparib 100 mg twice a day (dose level 0); alpelisib 250 mg once a day plus olaparib 200 mg twice a day (dose level 1); alpelisib 300 mg once a day plus olaparib 200 mg twice a day (dose level 2); and alpelisib 200 mg once a day plus olaparib 200 mg twice a day (dose level 3). Both drugs were administered orally, in tablet formulation. The primary objective was to identify the maximum tolerated dose and the recommended phase 2 dose of the combination of alpelisib and olaparib for patients with epithelial ovarian cancer and patients with breast cancer. Analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of the study drugs. The trial is active, but closed to enrolment; follow-up for patients who completed treatment is ongoing. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01623349. FINDINGS: Between Oct 3, 2014, and Dec 21, 2016, we enrolled 34 patients (28 in the dose-escalation cohort and six in the dose-expansion cohort); two in the dose-escalation cohort were ineligible at the day of scheduled study initiation. Maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose were identified as alpelisib 200 mg once a day plus olaparib 200 mg twice a day (dose level 3). Considering all dose levels, the most common treatment-related grade 3-4 adverse events were hyperglycaemia (five [16%] of 32 patients), nausea (three [9%]), and increased alanine aminotransferase concentrations (three [9%]). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Dose-limiting toxic effects included hyperglycaemia and fever with decreased neutrophil count. Of the 28 patients with epithelial ovarian cancer, ten (36%) achieved a partial response and 14 (50%) had stable disease according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors 1.1. INTERPRETATION: Combining alpelisib and olaparib is feasible with no unexpected toxic effects. The observed activity provides preliminary clinical evidence of synergism between olaparib and alpelisib, particularly in epithelial ovarian cancer, and warrants further investigation. FUNDING: Ovarian Cancer Dream Team (Stand Up To Cancer, Ovarian Cancer Research Alliance, National Ovarian Cancer Coalition), Breast Cancer Research Foundation, Novartis.

Results from a single arm, single stage phase II trial of trametinib and GSK2141795 in persistent or recurrent cervical cancer.

BACKGROUND: Improved treatment for advanced cervical cancer is needed; currently, treatment options include combined chemotherapy and bevacizumab or pembrolizumab monotherapy for PD-L1 positive disease. PIK3CA and KRAS mutations have been reported in cervical cancers; this study therefore tested dual inhibition of PI3K and RAS signaling by combining the MEK inhibitor trametinib and the AKT inhibitor GSK2141795 in recurrent cervical cancer. METHODS: This was an investigator-initiated phase II study combining trametinib and GSK2141795 in patients with recurrent cervical cancer. Primary endpoint was best tumor response; secondary endpoints included progression free survival, overall survival, and safety assessment. Translational objectives included characterization of molecular alterations in PI3K and RAS signaling pathway genes. RESULTS: Planned accrual was 35 patients; 14 patients were enrolled and received at least one dose of study drug before the study was terminated due to discontinuation of GSK2141795 development. There were no confirmed responses; 1 patient had an unconfirmed PR, 8 had stable disease, 3 had progression as best response, and 2 were unevaluable. Toxicities were mostly grade 1 and 2, although 57% of patients experienced grade 3/4 adverse events and 50% patients required a dose reduction. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of trametinib and GSK2141795 was feasible but required dose holds and modifications for adverse events; however, anti-cancer activity was minimal, even in patients with PI3K or RAS pathway alterations. Although the study was terminated early after GSK2141795 development was halted, the findings in these 14 patients do not support further development of this combination in cervical cancer.

Assessment and management of diarrhea following VEGF receptor TKI treatment in patients with ovarian cancer.

Angiogenesis is a proven clinical target for the treatment of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer. Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs) offer patients potential new treatment regimens as they can be given as monotherapy, in combination with poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors, or with and following cytotoxic chemotherapy. If VEGFR-TKIs are licensed for use in ovarian cancer, patients will require prompt and effective management of adverse events, including diarrhea, to optimize compliance and benefit. As diarrhea is one of the most prevalent toxicities of this class of drug, it is important to consider the potential causes, be they disease related (bowel obstruction), treatment related (VEGFR-TKI-related or infective/neutropenic septic diarrhea when patients are receiving cytotoxic chemotherapy combined with VEGFR inhibitor treatment), or incurred through diet. Here, we provide an overview of the possible mechanisms responsible for VEGFR-TKI-induced diarrhea. We review potential interventions that can help in the management of diarrhea induced by VEGFR-TKIs, when used in combination or as single agents, and we provide a diarrhea treatment algorithm to serve as a clinical reference point for the management of diarrhea in patients with ovarian cancer treated with a VEGFR-TKI in combination with chemotherapy or PARP inhibitors, or as monotherapy.

Combination cediranib and olaparib versus olaparib alone for women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: a randomised phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Olaparib is a poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor and cediranib is an anti-angiogenic agent with activity against VEGF receptor (VEGFR) 1, VEGFR2, and VEGFR3. Both oral agents have antitumour activity in women with recurrent ovarian cancer, and their combination was active and had manageable toxicities in a phase 1 trial. We investigated whether this combination could improve progression-free survival (PFS) compared with olaparib monotherapy in women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. METHODS: In our randomised, open-label, phase 2 study, we recruited women (aged ≥18 years) who had measurable platinum-sensitive, relapsed, high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer, or those with deleterious germline BRCA1/2 mutations from nine participating US academic medical centres. We randomly allocated participants (1:1) according to permuted blocks, stratified by germline BRCA status and previous anti-angiogenic therapy, to receive olaparib capsules 400 mg twice daily or the combination at the recommended phase 2 dose of cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib capsules 200 mg twice daily. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival analysed in the intention-to-treat population. The phase 2 trial is no longer accruing patients. An interim analysis was conducted in November, 2013, after 50% of expected events had occurred and efficacy results were unmasked. The primary analysis was performed on March 31, 2014, after 47 events (66% of those expected). The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01116648. FINDINGS: Between Oct 26, 2011, and June 3, 2013, we randomly allocated 46 women to receive olaparib alone and 44 to receive the combination of olaparib and cediranib. Median PFS was 17·7 months (95% CI 14·7-not reached) for the women treated with cediranib plus olaparib compared with 9·0 months (95% CI 5·7-16·5) for those treated with olaparib monotherapy (hazard ratio 0·42, 95% CI 0·23-0·76; p=0·005). Grade 3 and 4 adverse events were more common with combination therapy than with monotherapy, including fatigue (12 patients in the cediranib plus olaparib group vs five patients in the olaparib monotherapy group), diarrhoea (ten vs none), and hypertension (18 vs none). INTERPRETATION: Cediranib plus olaparib seems to improve PFS in women with recurrent platinum-sensitive high-grade serous or endometrioid ovarian cancer, and warrants study in a phase 3 trial. The side-effect profile suggests such investigations should include assessments of quality of life and patient-reported outcomes to understand the effects of a continuing oral regimen with that of intermittent chemotherapy. FUNDING: American Recovery and Reinvestment Act grant from the National Institutes of Health (NIH) (3 U01 CA062490-16S2); Intramural Program of the Center for Cancer Research; and the Division of Cancer Treatment and Diagnosis, National Cancer Institute, NIH.

A phase II trial of Sunitinib malate in recurrent and refractory ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal carcinoma.

OBJECTIVE: Ovarian cancer is a highly angiogenic tumor and a model for antiangiogenic research. The tyrosine kinase receptor inhibitors target several receptors allowing for the pharmacological disruption of several independent pathways. Sunitinib malate is a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor. A phase II study utilizing a modified dosing schedule was conducted to assess the efficacy and safety of Sunitinib in recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube and peritoneal carcinoma. METHODS: A nonrandomized phase II study was modeled as a two-stage Simon design initially enrolling 17 evaluable participants in stage one and 18 patients in stage two. Patients received the study drug at 37.5mg every day over a 28 day treatment cycle until clinical or radiological evidence of progressive disease. Disease was evaluated radiographically and best overall response was defined using the RECIST 1.0 criteria. The primary objective of this study was to define the response rate (defined as complete response and partial response) while the secondary objectives included both the progression free rate as well as the safety of this agent in this patient population. RESULTS: The response rate (PR+CR) was 8.3% (95% confidence interval: 1.8%, 22.5%). The 16-week and 24 week progression-free survival estimate was 36% (95% confidence interval and 19.2%), respectively. The median progression-free survival estimate was 9.9 weeks. Hypertension and gastrointestional events were the most common toxicities noted. CONCLUSIONS: A modest response rate of 8.3% was achieved with Sunitinib malate. This phase II study adds to the body of literature of VEGFR inhibitors and further underscores the need of defining a genetic angiogenic signature.

Eribulin mesylate (halichondrin B analog E7389) in platinum-resistant and platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: a 2-cohort, phase 2 study.

BACKGROUND: Eribulin mesylate is a tubulin inhibitor with activity superior to paclitaxel in NIH:OVCAR-3 human epithelial ovarian cancer xenograft models. In this study, the authors assessed the efficacy of eribulin in platinum-resistant and platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: Patients with recurrent, measurable epithelial ovarian cancer who had received ≤2 prior cytotoxic regimens and who had adequate organ function were enrolled into 2 separate cohorts: 1) platinum-resistant patients (who had a progression-free interval <6 months after their last platinum-based therapy) and 2) platinum-sensitive patients (who had a progression-free interval ≥6 months after their last platinum-based therapy). Eribulin 1.4 mg/m(2) was administered over 15 minutes intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. Efficacy was determined by objective response on computed tomography studies. RESULTS: In the platinum-resistant cohort, 37 patients enrolled, and 36 patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. Two patients achieved a partial response (5.5%), and 16 patients (44%) had stable disease as their best response. The median progression-free survival was 1.8 months (95% confidence interval, 1.4-2.8 months). In the platinum-sensitive cohort, 37 patients enrolled, and all were evaluable for response. Seven patients achieved a partial response (19%). The median progression-free survival was 4.1 months (95% confidence interval, 2.8-5.8 months). The major toxicity was grade 3 or 4 neutropenia (42% of platinum-resistant patients; 54% of platinum-sensitive patients). CONCLUSIONS: Eribulin produced an objective response in 5.5% of women with platinum-resistant, recurrent ovarian cancer and in 19% of women with platinum-sensitive disease. The median progression-free survival was 1.8 months in the platinum-resistant group and 4.1 months in the platinum-sensitive group.

Sequential bevacizumab and oral cyclophosphamide for recurrent ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: Test the safety and efficacy of sequentially blocking angiogenesis by adding oral cyclophosphamide to bevacizumab following cancer progression on bevacizumab in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. METHODS: Eligibility included ≤ 2 lines of treatment for recurrence and measurable cancer by RECIST 1.0. Patients received bevacizumab (15 mg/kg every 3 weeks IV) and upon RECIST progression, oral cyclophosphamide (50mg orally daily) was added. Objectives included safety, toxicities, 3- and 6-month PFS rates, response rate, PFS, and OS. RESULTS: 20 patients were enrolled. Overall response rate was 10%, and 65% of patients had confirmed stable disease (SD). Thirteen of 20 patients received oral cyclophosphamide added to bevacizumab upon bevacizumab progression. Of these 13 patients, 1 patient subsequently achieved a PR (this patient had SD as best response during bevacizumab) and 3 patients had a confirmed SD. For all patients, median PFS was 8.41 months, 6 month PFS rate was 65%, duration of response (DOR) was 7.3 months, and median OS was 22.72 months. Median DOR for patients receiving both bevacizumab and cyclophosphamide was 8.4 months. Most toxicities were grades 1 and 2 and manageable. Grades 3 and grade 4 toxicities included 1 myocardial infarction, 1 gastrointestinal perforation (GIP), and 12/20 patients (60%) developed grade 3 HTN. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of oral cyclophosphamide to bevacizumab at the time of cancer progression on bevacizumab appears to have continued anti-cancer effects in a subgroup of patients and appears to be safe. Randomized trials testing combination versus sequential anti-angiogenic therapy for recurrent ovarian cancer are warranted.

A phase I study of AZD2171 and Temsirolimus in patients with advanced gynecological malignancies.

PURPOSE: Temsirolimus, a mTOR inhibitor, and AZD2171, a VEGFR inhibitor, have independently shown activity in patients with gynecological malignancies. Understanding the pivotal role of the PI3K/PTEN/AKT/mTOR pathway in regulating angiogenesis, a phase I study utilizing Temsirolimus and AZD2171 was initiated to study the safety of targeting the mTOR and VEGF pathway in patients with recurrent or refractory gynecological malignancies. METHODS: Patients with advanced gynecological cancers were enrolled in this phase 1 study with Temsirolimus and AZD2171. A traditional 3 + 3 design was followed. The primary objective was to determine the MTD of the combination. Secondary objectives included efficacy, progression free survival (PFS) and toxicity profile. An expansion phase was planned after the MTD was determined. RESULTS: The study enrolled 11 patients over 16 months. All patients were enrolled in dose level 1. Due to toxicity, the trial was halted at dose level 1. No MTD was determined. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities included hypertension, thrombocytopenia, thromboembolic events, and hypertriglyceridemia. Five patients were evaluable for best overall clinical response. The best overall clinical response was stable disease. Two patients died without documented progression of disease. The median PFS was 7.2 months. CONCLUSIONS: Despite a conservative dose escalation, the toxicity data demonstrated that the combination of AZD2171 and Temsirolimus was not tolerable. Increased awareness of novel toxicities, pharmacological interactions, coupled with strict patient selection and early mitigation of side effects may enhance phase I clinical trial development.

Phase II Study of Avelumab in Patients With Mismatch Repair Deficient and Mismatch Repair Proficient Recurrent/Persistent Endometrial Cancer.

PURPOSE: Despite the tissue-agnostic approval of pembrolizumab in mismatch repair deficient (MMRD) solid tumors, important unanswered questions remain about the role of immune checkpoint blockade in mismatch repair-proficient (MMRP) and -deficient endometrial cancer (EC). METHODS: This phase II study evaluated the PD-L1 inhibitor avelumab in two cohorts of patients with EC: (1) MMRD/POLE (polymerase ε) cohort, as defined by immunohistochemical (IHC) loss of expression of one or more mismatch repair (MMR) proteins and/or documented mutation in the exonuclease domain of POLE; and (2) MMRP cohort with normal IHC expression of all MMR proteins. Coprimary end points were objective response (OR) and progression-free survival at 6 months (PFS6). Avelumab 10 mg/kg intravenously was administered every 2 weeks until progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients were enrolled. No patient with POLE-mutated tumor was enrolled in the MMRD cohort, and all MMRP tumors were not POLE-mutated. The MMRP cohort was closed at the first stage because of futility: Only one of 16 patients exhibited both OR and PFS6 responses. The MMRD cohort met the predefined primary end point of four ORs after accrual of only 17 patients; of 15 patients who initiated avelumab, four exhibited OR (one complete response, three partial responses; OR rate, 26.7%; 95% CI, 7.8% to 55.1%) and six (including all four ORs) PFS6 responses (PFS6, 40.0%; 95% CI, 16.3% to 66.7%), four of which are ongoing as of data cutoff date. Responses were observed in the absence of PD-L1 expression. IHC captured all cases of MMRD subsequently determined by polymerase chain reaction or genomically via targeted sequencing. CONCLUSION: Avelumab exhibited promising activity in MMRD EC regardless of PD-L1 status. IHC for MMR assessment is a useful tool for patient selection. The activity of avelumab in MMRP/non-POLE-mutated ECs was low.

Phase I study of combination of vorinostat, carboplatin, and gemcitabine in women with recurrent, platinum-sensitive epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Combining histone deacetylase inhibitors and chemotherapy is synergistic. This phase I study combined escalating vorinostat doses with constant doses of carboplatin and gemcitabine for the treatment of recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. The objectives of this study were to determine the maximally tolerated dose of this combination; secondary objectives included preliminary response rate of this regimen and toxicity profile. METHODS: Fifteen patients with relapsed ovarian cancer were enrolled into this phase I study. Doses of carboplatin and gemcitabine were AUC 4 on day 1 and 1000 mg/m(2) on days 1 and 8, respectively; cycles were administered every 21 days. Vorinostat was tested using four different schedules. The first dose level (DL A) tested vorinostat as daily oral dosing from days 1 to 14. DL B tested twice daily (BID) vorinostat dosing on days 1-3 and 8-10. DL C tested BID vorinostat dosing on days 1, 2, 8, and 9, starting vorinostat 1 day prior to initiation of carboplatin and gemcitabine, and DL D tested vorinostat on days 1 and 2 with chemotherapy starting on day 2. RESULTS: All four DLs tested resulted in dose-limiting toxicities, and no MTD was determined. Toxicities were mostly hematologic. Seven patients were evaluable for RECIST assessment, and six of them had partial responses (PR) via RECIST. CONCLUSIONS: Combination of carboplatin, gemcitabine, and vorinostat has activity in relapsed platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, but was difficult to combine because of hematologic toxicities in this phase I study. No maximally tolerated dose was found, and the study was terminated early.

A Phase 1 trial of the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib (AZD2281) in combination with the anti-angiogenic cediranib (AZD2171) in recurrent epithelial ovarian or triple-negative breast cancer.

BACKGROUND: Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP)-inhibitors and anti-angiogenics have activity in recurrent ovarian and breast cancer; however, the effect of combined therapy against PARP and angiogenesis in this population has not been reported. We investigated the toxicities and recommended phase 2 dosing (RP2D) of the combination of cediranib, a multitargeted inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR)-1/2/3 and olaparib, a PARP-inhibitor (NCT01116648). METHODS: Cediranib tablets once daily and olaparib capsules twice daily were administered orally in a standard 3+3 dose escalation design. Patients with recurrent ovarian or metastatic triple-negative breast cancer were eligible. Patients had measurable disease by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 or met Gynecologic Cancer InterGroup (GCIG) CA125 criteria. No prior PARP-inhibitors or anti-angiogenics in the recurrent setting were allowed. RESULTS: 28 patients (20 ovarian, 8 breast) enrolled to 4 dose levels. 2 dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) (1 grade 4 neutropenia ≥ 4 days; 1 grade 4 thrombocytopenia) occurred at the highest dose level (cediranib 30 mg daily; olaparib 400 mg twice daily [BID]). The RP2D was cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib 200 mg BID. Grade 3 or higher toxicities occurred in 75% of patients, and included grade 3 hypertension (25%) and grade 3 fatigue (18%). One grade 3 bowel obstruction occurred. The overall response rate (ORR) in the 18 RECIST-evaluable ovarian cancer patients was 44%, with a clinical benefit rate (ORR plus stable disease (SD) > 24 weeks) of 61%. None of the seven evaluable breast cancer patients achieved clinical response; two patients had stable disease for > 24 weeks. INTERPRETATION: The combination of cediranib and olaparib has haematologic DLTs and anticipated class toxicities, with promising evidence of activity in ovarian cancer patients.

Cediranib, an oral inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor kinases, is an active drug in recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, and peritoneal cancer.

PURPOSE: Angiogenesis is important for epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) growth, and blocking angiogenesis can lead to EOC regression. Cediranib is an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) -1, VEGFR-2, VEGFR-3, and c-kit. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase II study of cediranib for recurrent EOC or peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer; cediranib was administered as a daily oral dose, and the original dose was 45 mg daily. Because of toxicities observed in the first 11 patients, the dose was lowered to 30 mg. Eligibility included 16 weeks, or CA-125 nonprogression > 16 weeks), which was the primary end point, was 30%; eight patients (17%; 95% CI, 7.6% to 30.8%) had a PR, six patients (13%; 95% CI, 4.8% to 25.7%) had SD, and there were no CRs. Eleven patients (23%) were removed from study because of toxicities before two cycles. Grade 3 toxicities (> 20% of patients) included hypertension (46%), fatigue (24%), and diarrhea (13%). Grade 2 hypothyroidism occurred in 43% of patients. Grade 4 toxicities included CNS hemorrhage (n = 1), hypertriglyceridemia/hypercholesterolemia/elevated lipase (n = 1), and dehydration/elevated creatinine (n = 1). No bowel perforations or fistulas occurred. Median PFS was 5.2 months, and median OS has not been reached; median follow-up time is 10.7 months. CONCLUSION: Cediranib has activity in recurrent EOC, tubal cancer, and peritoneal cancer with predictable toxicities observed with other TKIs.