Pharmacokinetics of E5564, a lipopolysaccharide antagonist, in patients with impaired hepatic function.

E5564 is a structural analog of the Lipid A portion of lipopolysaccharide (LPS). E5564 has been tested in several in vitro and in vivo models and has demonstrated its effectiveness against LPS. It is intended to be an antagonist of LPS to reduce the morbidity and mortality associated with sepsis syndrome. This study assessed the pharmacokinetics (PK) of E5564 in patients with impaired hepatic function. E5564 was administered via intermittent intravenous infusion every 12 hours for six times to 24 hepatic-impaired patients (12 each to Child-Pugh Classifications A and B) and 24 matching healthy volunteers. Plasma samples were analyzed by LC/MS/MS. A one-compartment model resulted in good and comparable fits for all volunteers. Regardless of liver disease state, none of the PK parameters compared (i.e., Cmax (0-12),tmax (0-12),CL,t1/2, Vss, AUC(0-12), AUC(0-last), AUC(0-infinity), C(ss,min), C(ss,max), and C(ss,av)) exhibited any difference between these two groups. This suggested that the exposure of E5564 in volunteers was independent of hepatic function. Thus, no dose adjustment is needed in patients with hepatic impairment classified as Child-Pugh A and B.

Pharmacokinetic drug interaction between AEE788 and RAD001 causing thrombocytopenia in patients with glioblastoma.

PURPOSE: Treating glioblastoma through the simultaneous inhibition of multiple transduction pathways may prove more effective than single-pathway inhibition. We evaluated the safety, biologic activity, and pharmacokinetic profile of oral AEE788, a selective inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF), plus oral RAD001, a mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor, in glioblastoma patients. METHODS: This phase IB/II, open-label, multicenter, 2-arm, dose-escalation study enrolled adult glioblastoma patients at first or second recurrence/relapse. Primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) of AEE788 combined with RAD001. Secondary objectives included determining the safety/tolerability, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of the combination. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were enrolled (AEE788 200 mg/day + RAD001 5 mg/day, 2 patients; AEE788 150 mg/day + RAD001 5 mg every other day [qod], 14); all patients discontinued the study most commonly because of disease progression. Four patients experienced DLT (AEE788 200 mg/day + RAD001 5 mg/day, 1 patient; AEE788 150 mg/day + RAD001 5 mg qod, 3). Both patients receiving AEE788 (200 mg/day) plus RAD001 (5 mg/day) experienced clinically significant thrombocytopenia requiring a dose reduction/interruption. AEE788 appeared to inhibit the metabolism of RAD001. The study was terminated prematurely before an MTD was determined because of safety findings in other studies evaluating AEE788 monotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The coadministration of AEE788 and RAD001 in glioblastoma patients caused a clinically significant thrombocytopenia and a higher-than-expected RAD001 area under the curve concentration when dosed at 200 and 5 mg/day, respectively. After a dose reduction to AEE788 (150 mg/day) and RAD001 (5 mg qod), the combination appeared to be better tolerated.

Phase I study of AEE788, a novel multitarget inhibitor of ErbB- and VEGF-receptor-family tyrosine kinases, in recurrent glioblastoma patients.

PURPOSE: Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) and epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) play a significant role in glioblastoma angiogenesis and proliferation, making tyrosine kinase (TK) receptors logical targets for treatment. We evaluated AEE788, a reversible TK inhibitor that inhibits EGFR and VEGFR, in recurrent glioblastoma patients. METHODS: In this dose-escalation, phase I study, patients with recurrent glioblastoma received AEE788 once daily in 28-day cycles in stratified subgroups: those receiving (1) non-enzyme-inducing anticonvulsants drugs or no anticonvulsants (Group A) and (2) enzyme-inducing anticonvulsant drugs (Group B). A dose-expansion phase stratified patients by surgical eligibility. Primary objectives were to determine dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and maximum tolerated dose; secondary objectives included evaluating (1) safety/tolerability, (2) pharmacokinetics, and (3) preliminary antitumor activity. RESULTS: Sixty-four glioblastoma patients were enrolled. Two Group A patients experienced DLTs (proteinuria and stomatitis) at 550 mg; 550 mg was, therefore, the highest dose evaluated and dose limiting. One Group B patient receiving 800 mg experienced a DLT (diarrhea). The initially recommended dose for dose-expansion phase for Group A was 400 mg; additional patients received 250 mg to assess the hepatotoxicity. Most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) included diarrhea and rash. Serious AEs, most commonly grade 3/4 liver function test elevations, were responsible for treatment discontinuation in 17% of patients. AEE788 concentrations were reduced by EIACD. The best overall response was stable disease (17%). CONCLUSIONS: Continuous, once-daily AEE788 was associated with unacceptable toxicity and minimal activity for the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma. The study was, therefore, discontinued prematurely.

Using pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data in early decision making regarding drug development: a phase I clinical trial evaluating tyrosine kinase inhibitor, AEE788.

PURPOSE: In this first-in-human study of AEE788, a tyrosine kinase inhibitor of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR), HER-2, and VEGFR-2, a comprehensive pharmacodynamic program was implemented in addition to the evaluation of safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of AEE788 in cancer patients. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced, solid tumors received escalating doses of oral AEE788 once daily. Primary endpoints were to determine dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and maximum-tolerated dose (MTD). A nonlinear model (Emax model) was used to describe the relationship between AEE788 exposure and target-pathway modulation in skin and tumor tissues. RESULTS: Overall, 111 patients were treated (25 to 550 mg/day). DLTs included rash and diarrhea; MTD was 450 mg/day. Effects on biomarkers correlated to serum AEE788 concentrations. The concentration at 50% inhibition (IC(50)) for EGFR in skin (0.033 µmol/L) and tumor (0.0125 µmol/L) were similar to IC(50) in vitro suggesting skin may be surrogate tissue for estimating tumor EGFR inhibition. No inhibition of p-MAPK and Ki67 was observed in skin vessels at ≤ MTD. Hence, AEE788 inhibited EGFR, but not VEGFR, at doses ≤ MTD. A total of 16 of 96 evaluable patients showed a >10% shrinkage of tumor size; one partial response was observed. CONCLUSION: Our pharmacodynamic-based study showed effective inhibition of EGFR, but not of VEGFR at tolerable AEE788 doses. Emax modeling integrated with biomarker data effectively guided real-time decision making in the early development of AEE788. Despite clinical activity, target inhibition of only EGFR led to discontinuation of further AEE788 development.