Phase I, Pharmacogenomic, Drug Interaction Study of Sorafenib and Bevacizumab in Combination with Paclitaxel in Patients with Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors.

VEGF blockade does not uniformly result in clinical benefit. We evaluated safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), antitumor efficacy, and exploratory biomarkers including pharmacogenomics and pharmacokinetics with sorafenib, bevacizumab, and paclitaxel in patients with refractory cancers. The study had a "3 + 3" design, using paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 every week for 3 weeks, in every 4 week cycles, bevacizumab 5 mg/kg every 2 weeks, and sorafenib 200 or 400 mg twice a day, 5 or 7 days/week (5/7, 7/7). The MTD cohort was expanded. Twenty-seven patients enrolled in 3 cohorts: sorafenib 200 mg twice a day 5/7, 200 mg twice a day 7/7, and 400 mg twice a day 5/7. DLTs were grade 3 neutropenia >7 days (cohort 1, 1), grade 3 hypertension (cohort 2, 1), grade 3 hand-foot skin reaction (HFSR; cohort 3, 2). MTD was sorafenib 200 mg twice a day 7/7. Six DLTs occurred in cohort 2 expansion: grade 3 HFSR (2), grade 2 HFSR with sorafenib delay >7 days (2), grade 4 cerebrovascular accident (1), grade 3 neutropenia >7 days (1). RP2D was sorafenib 200 mg twice a day 5/7. Most patients (62%) dose reduced sorafenib to 200 mg daily 5/7 after a median 3 (range, 2-17) cycles. Response rates were 48% overall (27) and 64% for ovarian cancers (14). VEGF-A-1154AA and -7TT recessive homozygous genotypes conferred worse overall survival versus alternative genotypes (7 vs. 22 months). Intermittent, low-dose sorafenib (200 mg twice a day 5/7) combined with bevacizumab and paclitaxel was tolerable and had high antitumor efficacy in patients with refractory cancer (NCT00572078).

Pathological complete response with anti-PD-1 therapy in a patient with microsatellite instable high, BRAF mutant metastatic colon cancer: a case report and review of literature.

IMPORTANCE: Mismatch repair (MMR) and BRAF mutation status are established independent prognostic factors for colorectal cancer (CRC). MMR deficient tumors are considered to have better prognosis whereas BRAF mutation is associated with poor prognosis. Studies evaluating the combined effect of BRAF and MMR status suggest MSI-high and BRAF mutant patients have a poorer prognosis as compared to MSI-high and BRAF wild type patients. Emerging evidence suggests MMR status predicts the immune response to anti-PD-1 therapy in CRC patients; however little is known about combined MMR and BRAF mutation status in this context. Therefore, it is important to identify whether there is a differential response to anti-PD-1 therapy based on BRAF status in the subset of MSI-high CRC patients. OBSERVATIONS: We report the first case of MSI-high, BRAF mutant metastatic CRC that had an excellent response (pathologic complete response) to anti-PD-1 therapy. We take this opportunity to review the similar cases in literature and discuss combined MMR and BRAF status as a potential biomarker for anti-PD-1 therapy. CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE: The case presented illustrates that anti-PD-1 therapy can be effectively used to treat CRC patients with MSI-high and BRAF mutant status which is usually considered a poor prognostic category as opposed to MSI-high and BRAF wild type tumors. Future studies with anti-PD-1 therapy distinguishing these molecular subgroups will improve our knowledge of whether BRAF status can add to MMR status as a predictive biomarker for anti-PD-1 therapy in patients with metastatic CRC.

A Phase I First-in-Human Study of Enoticumab (REGN421), a Fully Human Delta-like Ligand 4 (Dll4) Monoclonal Antibody in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: Enoticumab (REGN421) is a fully human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that binds human Dll4 and disrupts Notch-mediated signaling. The main objectives of this trial were to determine the safety, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), pharmacokinetics (PK), and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of enoticumab. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Enoticumab was administered intravenously, with dose escalations from 0.25 to 4 mg/kg every 3 weeks (Q3W) and 0.75 to 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W). RESULTS: Of 53 enrolled patients, 31 patients were treated Q3W and 22 patients were treated Q2W. Two DLTs occurred: grade 3 nausea (0.5 mg/kg Q3W) and grade 3 abdominal pain (1 mg/kg Q2W). An MTD was not reached on either schedule. The most frequent adverse events (AE) were fatigue, nausea, vomiting, hypertension, headache, and anorexia. Six treatment-related serious AEs were reported in 4 patients: brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) increase (0.25 mg/kg Q3W, Gr1), troponin I increase (4 mg/kg Q3W, Gr3), right ventricular dysfunction and pulmonary hypertension (1.5 mg/kg Q2W, both Gr3), and left ventricular dysfunction and pulmonary hypertension (3 mg/kg Q2W, both Gr3). Enoticumab was characterized by nonlinear, target-mediated PK, and had a terminal half-life of 8 to 9 days. With multiple Q2W or Q3W dosing, accumulation was not observed. Antitumor activity included two partial responses (non-small cell lung cancer bronchoalveolar-type with a ß-catenin mutation, and ovarian cancer) and 16 patients with stable disease (3> 6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Enoticumab was tolerated, with RP2D of 4 mg/kg Q3W and 3 mg/kg Q2W based on PK profile and clinical activity. Responses and SD were noted in ovarian cancer and other solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res; 21(12); 2695-703. ©2015 AACR.

A phase I dose escalation and pharmacokinetic study of vatalanib (PTK787/ZK 222584) in combination with paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To define the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) for weekly paclitaxel administered in combination with daily vatalanib (PTK787/ZK 222584, PTK/ZK) and assess for a drug-drug interaction. METHODS: Patients were treated with escalating doses of weekly paclitaxel (75-85 mg/m(2)), and daily PTK/ZK (250-1,000 mg). During the first cycle only, paclitaxel was given on days 1 and 15, and PTK/ZK on days 3-28. Pharmacokinetic studies were conducted on cycle 1 days 1 and 15 for paclitaxel, and on cycle 1 day 15 for PTK/ZK. Therapy was given until disease progression. RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were accrued to four dose levels. Two of five patients treated with paclitaxel 85 mg/m(2) and PTK/ZK 1,000 mg had Grade 3 transaminase elevation as dose-limiting toxicity. Paired PK analyses demonstrated a significant increase in paclitaxel clearance on day 15 (p = 0.006). Activity included one partial response and 11 patients with stable disease > or =4 months, including patients previously treated with paclitaxel. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD for weekly paclitaxel plus daily PTK/ZK is 75 mg/m(2) and 750 mg. PK analysis revealed a significant drug-drug interaction, with an increase in paclitaxel clearance. This combination was well tolerated with evidence of anti-cancer activity and provides guidance for phase 2 planning.