A Phase II Randomized Trial (GO27827) of First-Line FOLFOX Plus Bevacizumab with or Without the MET Inhibitor Onartuzumab in Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Dysregulated hepatocyte growth factor/mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) signaling is associated with poor prognosis and resistance to vascular endothelial growth factor inhibition in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We report outcomes from a double-blind, multicenter phase II trial of the MET inhibitor onartuzumab in combination with mFOLFOX-6 and bevacizumab for mCRC (GO27827; NCT01418222). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive onartuzumab (10 mg/kg intravenously [IV]) or placebo plus mFOLFOX-6 and bevacizumab (5 mg/kg IV). Oxaliplatin was given for 8-12 cycles; other agents were continued until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and MET immunohistochemistry (IHC) expression-positive populations. RESULTS: Between September 2011 and November 2012, 194 patients were enrolled. In September 2013, an interim analysis recommended stopping onartuzumab treatment due to lack of efficacy. At the time of the final analysis in February 2014, no significant improvement in PFS was seen with onartuzumab versus placebo in either the ITT or MET IHC-positive populations. An improvement in PFS was noted in the MET IHC-negative population. Neither overall survival nor response rate was improved with onartuzumab. The incidence of fatigue, peripheral edema, and deep vein thrombosis was increased with onartuzumab relative to placebo. CONCLUSION: Onartuzumab combined with mFOLFOX-6 and bevacizumab did not significantly improve efficacy outcomes in either the ITT or MET IHC-positive populations. MET expression by IHC was not a predictive biomarker in this setting. The Oncologist 2017;22:264-271 IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The addition of onartuzumab to mFOLFOX-6 plus bevacizumab did not improve outcomes in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer in this randomized, phase II study. Although initial results with onartuzumab were promising, a number of phase II/III clinical trials have reported a lack of improvement in efficacy with onartuzumab combined with standard-of-care therapies in several tumor types. Furthermore, negative study data have been published for rilotumumab and ficlatuzumab, both of which block hepatocyte growth factor binding to the mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) receptor. MET immunohistochemistry was not a predictive biomarker. It remains to be seen if other biomarkers or small molecule inhibitors may be more appropriate for inhibiting this oncogenic pathway.

Final Results From the Randomized Phase III ASCENT Clinical Trial in Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer and Association of Outcomes by Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2 and Trophoblast Cell Surface Antigen 2 Expression.

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical Trial Updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Sacituzumab govitecan (SG), a first-in-class anti-trophoblast cell surface antigen 2 (Trop-2) antibody-drug conjugate, demonstrated superior efficacy over single-agent chemotherapy (treatment of physician's choice [TPC]) in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC) in the international, multicenter, phase III ASCENT study.Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive SG or TPC until unacceptable toxicity/progression. Final efficacy secondary end point analyses and post hoc analyses of outcomes stratified by Trop-2 expression and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status are reported. Updated safety analyses are provided.In this final analysis, SG (n = 267) improved median progression-free survival (PFS; 4.8 v 1.7 months; hazard ratio (HR), 0.41 [95% CI, 0.33 to 0.52]) and median overall survival (OS; 11.8 v 6.9 months; HR, 0.51 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.63]) over TPC (n = 262). SG improved PFS over TPC in each Trop-2 expression quartile (n = 168); a trend was observed for improved OS across quartiles. Overall, SG had a manageable safety profile, with ≤5% of treatment-related discontinuations because of adverse events and no treatment-related deaths. The safety profile was consistent across all subgroups.These data confirm the clinical benefit of SG over chemotherapy, reinforcing SG as an effective treatment option in patients with mTNBC in the second line or later.

Results of the phase I dose-escalating study of motexafin gadolinium with standard radiotherapy in patients with glioblastoma multiforme.

PURPOSE: Motexafin gadolinium (MGd) is a putative radiation enhancer initially evaluated in patients with brain metastases. This Phase I trial studied the safety and tolerability of a 2-6-week course (10-22 doses) of MGd with radiotherapy for glioblastoma multiforme. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A total of 33 glioblastoma multiforme patients received one of seven MGd regimens starting at 10 doses of 4 mg/kg/d MGd and escalating to 22 doses of 5.3 mg/kg/d MGd (5 or 10 daily doses then three times per week). The National Cancer Institute Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program toxicity and stopping rules were applied. RESULTS: The maximal tolerated dose was 5.0 mg/kg/d MGd (5 d/wk for 2 weeks, then three times per week) for 22 doses. The dose-limiting toxicity was reversible transaminase elevation. Adverse reactions included rash/pruritus (45%), chills/fever (30%), and self-limiting vesiculobullous rash of the thumb and fingers (42%). The median survival of 17.6 months prompted a case-matched analysis. In the case-matched analysis, the MGd patients had a median survival of 16.1 months (n = 31) compared with the matched Radiation Therapy Oncology Group database patients with a median survival of 11.8 months (hazard ratio, 0.43; 95% confidence interval, 0.20-0.94). CONCLUSION: The maximal tolerated dose of MGd with radiotherapy for glioblastoma multiforme in this study was 5 mg/kg/d for 22 doses (daily for 2 weeks, then three times weekly). The baseline survival calculations suggest progression to Phase II trials is appropriate, with the addition of MGd to radiotherapy with concurrent and adjuvant temozolomide.

Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Multicenter Phase II Study of Onartuzumab Plus Bevacizumab Versus Placebo Plus Bevacizumab in Patients With Recurrent Glioblastoma: Efficacy, Safety, and Hepatocyte Growth Factor and O6-Methylguanine-DNA Methyltransferase Biomarker Analyses.

Purpose Bevacizumab regimens are approved for the treatment of recurrent glioblastoma in many countries. Aberrant mesenchymal-epithelial transition factor (MET) expression has been reported in glioblastoma and may contribute to bevacizumab resistance. The phase II study GO27819 investigated the monovalent MET inhibitor onartuzumab plus bevacizumab (Ona + Bev) versus placebo plus bevacizumab (Pla + Bev) in recurrent glioblastoma. Methods At first recurrence after chemoradiation, bevacizumab-naïve patients with glioblastoma were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive Ona (15 mg/kg, once every 3 weeks) + Bev (15 mg/kg, once every 3 weeks) or Pla + Bev until disease progression. The primary end point was progression-free survival by response assessment in neuro-oncology criteria. Secondary end points were overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response, and safety. Exploratory biomarker analyses correlated efficacy with expression levels of MET ligand hepatocyte growth factor, O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase promoter methylation, and glioblastoma subtype. Results Among 129 patients enrolled (Ona + Bev, n = 64; Pla + Bev, n = 65), baseline characteristics were balanced. The median progression-free survival was 3.9 months for Ona + Bev versus 2.9 months for Pla + Bev (hazard ratio, 1.06; 95% CI, 0.72 to 1.56; P = .7444). The median overall survival was 8.8 months for Ona + Bev and 12.6 months for Pla + Bev (hazard ratio, 1.45; 95% CI, 0.88 to 2.37; P = .1389). Grade ≥ 3 adverse events were reported in 38.5% of patients who received Ona + Bev and 35.9% of patients who received Pla + Bev. Exploratory biomarker analyses suggested that patients with high expression of hepatocyte growth factor or unmethylated O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase may benefit from Ona + Bev. Conclusion There was no evidence of further clinical benefit with the addition of onartuzumab to bevacizumab compared with bevacizumab plus placebo in unselected patients with recurrent glioblastoma in this phase II study; however, further investigation into biomarker subgroups is warranted.

Neurocognitive function and progression in patients with brain metastases treated with whole-brain radiation and motexafin gadolinium: results of a randomized phase III trial.

PURPOSE: To report the neurocognitive findings in a phase III randomized trial evaluating survival and neurologic and neurocognitive function in patients with brain metastases from solid tumors receiving whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) with or without motexafin gadolinium (MGd). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive WBRT 30 Gy in 10 fractions with or without MGd 5 mg/kg/d. Monthly neurocognitive testing for memory, executive function, and fine motor skill was performed. RESULTS: Four hundred one patients were enrolled (251 with non-small-cell lung cancer, 75 with breast cancer, and 75 with other cancers); 90.5% patients had impairment of one or more neurocognitive tests at baseline. Neurocognitive test scores of memory, fine motor speed, executive function, and global neurocognitive impairment at baseline were correlated with brain tumor volume and predictive of survival. There was no statistically significant difference between treatment arms in time to neurocognitive progression. Patients with lung cancer (but not other types of cancer) who were treated with MGd tended to have improved memory and executive function (P =.062) and improved neurologic function as assessed by a blinded events review committee (P =.048). CONCLUSION: Neurocognitive tests are a relatively sensitive measure of brain functioning; a combination of tumor prognostic variables and brain function assessments seems to predict survival better than tumor variables alone. Although the addition of MGd to WBRT did not produce a significant overall improvement between treatment arms, MGd may improve memory and executive function and prolong time to neurocognitive and neurologic progression in patients with brain metastases from lung cancer.

Survival and neurologic outcomes in a randomized trial of motexafin gadolinium and whole-brain radiation therapy in brain metastases.

PURPOSE: This phase III randomized trial evaluated survival as well as neurologic and neurocognitive function in patients with brain metastases from solid tumors receiving whole-brain radiation therapy (WBRT) with or without motexafin gadolinium (MGd). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned to 30 Gy of WBRT +/- 5 mg/kg/d MGd. Survival and time to neurologic progression determined by a blinded events review committee (ERC) were coprimary end points. Standardized investigator neurologic assessment and neurocognitive testing were evaluated. RESULTS: Four hundred one (251 non-small-cell lung cancer) patients were enrolled. There was no significant difference by treatment arm in survival (median, 5.2 months for MGd v 4.9 months for WBRT; P =.48) or time to neurologic progression (median, 9.5 months for MGd v 8.3 months for WBRT; P =.95). Treatment with MGd improved time to neurologic progression in patients with lung cancer (median, not reached for MGd v 7.4 months for WBRT; P =.048, unadjusted). By investigator, MGd improved time to neurologic progression in all patients (median, 4.3 months for MGd v 3.8 months for WBRT; P =.018) and in lung cancer patients (median, 5.5 months for MGd v 3.7 months for WBRT; P =.025). MGd improved neurocognitive function in lung cancer patients. CONCLUSION: The overall results did not demonstrate significant differences by treatment arm for survival and ERC time to neurologic progression. Investigator neurologic assessments demonstrated an MGd treatment benefit in all patients. In lung cancer patients, ERC- and investigator-determined time to neurologic progression demonstrated an MGd treatment benefit. MGd may improve time to neurologic and neurocognitive progression in lung cancer.

Population pharmacokinetics of motexafin gadolinium in adults with brain metastases or glioblastoma multiforme.

The purpose of this study was to determine clinical variables affecting motexafin gadolinium (MGd) pharmacokinetics. Motexafin gadolinium (4-5.3 mg/kg/d) was administered intravenously for 2 to 6.5 weeks. Plasma samples from 3 clinical trials were analyzed for MGd using liquid chromatography/mass spectroscopy. The pooled data were analyzed using population pharmacokinetic (POP-PK) methods. The POP-PK model included 243 patients (1575 samples). Clearance (CL) was 14% lower in women, but weight-normalized clearance was only 5% lower in women. Clearance decreased with increasing alkaline phosphatase, increasing age, and decreasing hemoglobin. Administration of phenytoin increased CL by approximately 30%. Central compartment volume (V1) was 21% lower in women and increased with increasing serum creatinine. For all covariates, except sex and phenytoin, the predicted change in CL or V1 (5th and 95th percentiles) varied < or =13% from the population mean CL or V1 estimate. It was concluded that a 3-compartment, open, POP-PK model predicts small but significant effects of age, sex, alkaline phosphatase, hemoglobin, serum creatinine, and phenytoin on MGd pharmacokinetics.

Safety of Onartuzumab in Patients with Solid Tumors: Experience to Date from the Onartuzumab Clinical Trial Program.

BACKGROUND: Onartuzumab, a recombinant humanized monovalent monoclonal antibody directed against MET, the receptor for the hepatocyte growth factor, has been investigated for the treatment of solid tumors. This publication describes the safety profile of onartuzumab in patients with solid tumors using data from the global onartuzumab clinical development program. METHODS: Adverse event (AE) and laboratory data from onartuzumab phase II/III studies were analyzed and coded into standardized terms according to industry standards. The severity of AEs was assessed using the NCI Common Toxicity Criteria, Version 4. Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA) AEs were grouped using the standardized MedDRA queries (SMQs) "gastrointestinal (GI) perforation", "embolic and thrombotic events, venous (VTE)", and "embolic and thrombotic events, arterial (ATE)", and the Adverse Event Group Term (AEGT) "edema." The safety evaluable populations (patients who received at least one dose of study treatment) for each study were included in this analysis. RESULTS: A total of 773 onartuzumab-treated patients from seven studies (phase II, n = 6; phase III, n = 1) were included. Edema and VTEs were reported in onartuzumab-treated patients in all seven studies. Edema events in onartuzumab arms were generally grade 1-2 in severity, observed more frequently than in control arms and at incidences ranging from 25.4-65.7% for all grades and from 1.2-14.1% for grade 3. Hypoalbuminemia was also more frequent in onartuzumab arms and observed at frequencies between 77.8% and 98.3%. The highest frequencies of all grade and grade ≥3 VTE events were 30.3% and 17.2%, respectively in onartuzumab arms. The cumulative incidence of all grade ATE events ranged from 0-5.6% (grade ≥3, 0-5.1%) in onartuzumab arms. The frequency of GI perforation was below 10% in all studies; the highest estimates were observed in studies with onartuzumab plus bevacizumab for all grades (0-6.2%) and grade ≥3 (0-6.2%). CONCLUSIONS: The frequencies of VTE, ATE, GI perforation, hypoalbuminemia, and edema in clinical studies were higher in patients receiving onartuzumab than in control arms; these are considered to be expected events in patients receiving onartuzumab.

Biomarker analyses from a placebo-controlled phase II study evaluating erlotinib±onartuzumab in advanced non-small cell lung cancer: MET expression levels are predictive of patient benefit.

PURPOSE: In a recent phase II study of onartuzumab (MetMAb), patients whose non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) tissue scored as positive for MET protein by immunohistochemistry (IHC) experienced a significant benefit with onartuzumab plus erlotinib (O+E) versus erlotinib. We describe development and validation of a standardized MET IHC assay and, retrospectively, evaluate multiple biomarkers as predictors of patient benefit. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Biomarkers related to MET and/or EGF receptor (EGFR) signaling were measured by IHC, FISH, quantitative reverse transcription PCR, mutation detection techniques, and ELISA. RESULTS: A positive correlation between IHC, Western blotting, and MET mRNA expression was observed in NSCLC cell lines/tissues. An IHC scoring system of MET expression taking proportional and intensity-based thresholds into consideration was applied in an analysis of the phase II study and resulted in the best differentiation of outcomes. Further analyses revealed a nonsignificant overall survival (OS) improvement with O+E in patients with high MET copy number (mean≥5 copies/cell by FISH); however, benefit was maintained in "MET IHC-positive"/MET FISH-negative patients (HR, 0.37; P=0.01). MET, EGFR, amphiregulin, epiregulin, or HGF mRNA expression did not predict a significant benefit with onartuzumab; a nonsignificant OS improvement was observed in patients with high tumor MET mRNA levels (HR, 0.59; P=0.23). Patients with low baseline plasma hepatocyte growth factor (HGF) exhibited an HR for OS of 0.519 (P=0.09) in favor of onartuzumab treatment. CONCLUSIONS: MET IHC remains the most robust predictor of OS and progression-free survival benefit from O+E relative to all examined exploratory markers.

Treatment rationale and study design for a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study evaluating onartuzumab (MetMAb) in combination with bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX-6 in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer.

BACKGROUND: Dysregulation of the hepatocyte growth factor (HGF)/MET pathway is associated with poor prognosis, more aggressive biological characteristics of the tumor, and shortened survival in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Onartuzumab (MetMAb) is a recombinant humanized monovalent monoclonal antibody directed against MET. We present the treatment rationale and protocol for an ongoing randomized multicenter placebo-controlled phase II study designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of MetMAb combined with bevacizumab and mFOLFOX-6 (5-fluoruracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eligible patients with previously untreated mCRC are randomized 1:1 to either mFOLFOX-6 combined with bevacizumab and placebo followed by 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin plus bevacizumab and placebo or mFOLFOX6, bevacizumab plus MetMAb followed by 5 FU/LV, bevacizumab, and MetMAb. The primary end point of this study is progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Secondary end points include overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. Subanalyses will be performed to evaluate the effect of MET receptor expression on study primary and secondary end points. Correlative studies will be performed on tissue- and blood-derived biomarkers related to both HGF/MET signaling and other associated pathway markers.

Randomized phase II trial of Onartuzumab in combination with erlotinib in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Increased hepatocyte growth factor/MET signaling is associated with poor prognosis and acquired resistance to epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) -targeted drugs in patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We investigated whether dual inhibition of MET/EGFR results in clinical benefit in patients with NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with recurrent NSCLC were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to receive onartuzumab plus erlotinib or placebo plus erlotinib; crossover was allowed at progression. Tumor tissue was required to assess MET status by immunohistochemistry (IHC). Coprimary end points were progression-free survival (PFS) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) and MET-positive (MET IHC diagnostic positive) populations; additional end points included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. RESULTS: There was no improvement in PFS or OS in the ITT population (n = 137; PFS hazard ratio [HR], 1.09; P = .69; OS HR, 0.80; P = .34). MET-positive patients (n = 66) treated with erlotinib plus onartuzumab showed improvement in both PFS (HR, .53; P = .04) and OS (HR, .37; P = .002). Conversely, clinical outcomes were worse in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab plus erlotinib (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.82; P = .05; OS HR, 1.78; P = .16). MET-positive control patients had worse outcomes versus MET-negative control patients (n = 62; PFS HR, 1.71; P = .06; OS HR, 2.61; P = .004). Incidence of peripheral edema was increased in onartuzumab-treated patients. CONCLUSION: Onartuzumab plus erlotinib was associated with improved PFS and OS in the MET-positive population. These results combined with the worse outcomes observed in MET-negative patients treated with onartuzumab highlight the importance of diagnostic testing in drug development.

RIBBON-1: randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab for first-line treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: This phase III study compared the efficacy and safety of bevacizumab (BV) when combined with several standard chemotherapy regimens versus those regimens alone for first-line treatment of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomly assigned in 2:1 ratio to chemotherapy plus BV or chemotherapy plus placebo. Before random assignment, investigators chose capecitabine (Cape; 2,000 mg/m(2) for 14 days), taxane (Tax) -based (nab-paclitaxel 260 mg/m(2), docetaxel 75 or 100 mg/m(2)), or anthracycline (Anthra) -based (doxorubicin or epirubicin combinations [doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide, epirubicin/cyclophosphamide, fluorouracil/epirubicin/cyclophosphamide, or fluorouracil/doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide]) chemotherapy administered every 3 weeks. BV or placebo was administered at 15 mg/kg every 3 weeks. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included overall survival (OS), 1-year survival rate, objective response rate, duration of objective response, and safety. Two independently powered cohorts defined by the choice of chemotherapy (Cape patients or pooled Tax/Anthra patients) were analyzed in parallel. RESULTS: RIBBON-1 (Regimens in Bevacizumab for Breast Oncology) enrolled 1,237 patients (Cape cohort, n = 615; Tax/Anthra cohort, n = 622). Median PFS was longer for each BV combination (Cape cohort: increased from 5.7 months to 8.6 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.69; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.84; log-rank P < .001; and Tax/Anthra cohort: increased from 8.0 months to 9.2 months; HR, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.52 to 0.80; log-rank P < .001). No statistically significant differences in OS between the placebo- and BV-containing arms were observed. Safety was consistent with results of prior BV trials. CONCLUSION: The combination of BV with Cape, Tax, or Anthra improves clinical benefit in terms of increased PFS in first-line treatment of metastatic breast cancer, with a safety profile comparable to prior phase III studies.

Phase II trial of anastrozole plus goserelin in the treatment of hormone receptor-positive, metastatic carcinoma of the breast in premenopausal women.

PURPOSE: To explore the antitumor activity of the aromatase inhibitor, anastrozole, in the treatment of premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive, metastatic breast cancer who have been rendered functionally postmenopausal with the use of the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist, goserelin. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Premenopausal women with estrogen and/or progesterone receptor-positive, metastatic or recurrent breast cancer were enrolled in this prospective, single-arm, multicenter phase II trial. Patients were treated with goserelin 3.6 mg subcutaneous monthly and began anastrozole 1-mg daily 21 days after the first injection of goserelin. Patients continued on treatment until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were enrolled of which 32 were evaluable for response and toxicity. Estradiol suppression was assessed, with mean estradiol levels of 18.7 pg/mL at 3 months and 14.8 pg/mL at 6 months. One participant (3.1%) experienced a complete response, 11 (34.4%) experienced partial response, and 11 (34.4%) experienced stable disease for 6 months or longer for a clinical benefit rate of 71.9%. Median time to progression was 8.3 months (range, 2.1 to 63+) and median survival was not been reached (range, 11.1 to 63+). The most common adverse events were fatigue (50%), arthralgias (53%), and hot flashes (59%). There were no grade 4 to 5 toxicities. CONCLUSION: The combination of goserelin plus anastrozole has substantial antitumor activity in the treatment of premenopausal women with hormone receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer.

Effects of motexafin gadolinium in a phase II trial in refractory chronic lymphocytic leukemia.

Chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL) cells are susceptible to oxidative stress. The expanded porphyrin, motexafin gadolinium (MGd), reacts with intracellular reducing metabolites and protein thiols to generate reactive oxygen species (ROS). A phase II trial administered MGd 5 mg/kg/day IV for 5 days every 3 weeks until disease progression to patients with previously treated CLL and small lymphocytic lymphoma. Thirteen patients (median age 66 years) with a median of four prior therapies (range 2-9) were enrolled. Modest anti-tumor activity was seen in three patients, with improvement in lymphocytosis, lymphadenopathy and/or splenomegaly, but no patient achieved a partial or complete response by NCI 96 criteria. Flow cytometry confirmed tumor uptake of MGd. Serial increase in AKT phosphorylation in patient samples following MGd treatment was not observed, suggesting intracellular generation of ROS was not optimal. Therefore, this schedule of administration achieved MGd uptake into primary tumor cells in vivo, but clinical activity was modest.

Phase I trial of motexafin gadolinium in combination with docetaxel and cisplatin for the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Motexafin gadolinium is a novel antineoplastic drug that disrupts cancer cell antioxidant systems, thus contributing to cellular death. In patients with lung cancer, motexafin gadolinium has been shown to increase the time to neurologic progression when given in combination with whole-brain radiotherapy in randomized phase III studies. Preclinical data suggest that this drug might also enhance the antineoplastic effects of chemotherapy. METHODS: In this one-arm, open label, phase I, dose-escalation study, we administered docetaxel (75 mg/m2), cisplatin (75 mg/m2), and motexafin gadolinium every 3 weeks to patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. Twenty-one patients were treated at one of four motexafin dose levels. RESULTS: The maximal tolerated motexafin dose was 10 mg/kg on day 1 of a 3-week cycle. Dose-limiting toxicities consisted of febrile neutropenia, hypertension, myocardial ischemia, and pneumonitis/pulmonary infiltrates. Other common grade 3-4 adverse events across all cohorts that did not appear to be exacerbated by motexafin gadolinium included granulocytopenia, fatigue, dehydration, nausea, and vomiting. Two episodes of myocardial ischemia and one sudden death of unknown cause were observed. Response rates were partial response (10%), stable disease (60%), and disease progression (30%). CONCLUSIONS: The regimen studied was tolerable and showed activity in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer. The recommended doses for future phase II trials are motexafin gadolinium 10 mg/kg, docetaxel 75 mg/m2, and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks. Caution is advised in patients with a history of cardiovascular disease.