Differentiation therapy in poor risk myeloid malignancies: Results of companion phase II studies.

Pre-clinical data in non-M3 AML supports the use of differentiation therapy, but clinical activity has been limited. Myeloid growth factors can enhance anti-leukemic activity of differentiating agents in vitro. We conducted companion phase II trials investigating sargramostim (GM-CSF) 125µg/m(2)/day plus 1) bexarotene (BEX) 300mg/m(2)/day or 2) entinostat (ENT) 4-8mg/m(2)/week in patients with MDS or relapsed/refractory AML. Primary endpoints were response after at least two treatment cycles and toxicity. 26 patients enrolled on the BEX trial had a median of 2 prior treatments and 24 enrolled on the ENT trial had a median of 1. Of 13 response-evaluable patients treated with BEX, the best response noted was hematologic improvement in neutrophils (HI-N) seen in 4 (31%) patients; none achieved complete (CR) or partial remission (PR). Of 10 treated with ENT, there was 1 (10%) partial remission (PR) and 2 (20%) with HI-N. The secondary endpoint responses of HI-N with each combination were accompanied by a numerical increase in ANC (BEX: 524 to 931 cells/mm(3), p=0.096; ENT: 578 to 1 137 cells/mm(3), p=0.15) without increasing marrow blasts. Shared grade 3-4 non-hematologic toxicities included febrile neutropenia, bone pain, fatigue, and dyspnea. GM-CSF plus either BEX or ENT are well tolerated in resistant and refractory MDS and AML and showed modest clinical and biologic activity, most commonly HI-N.

A phase I trial of two sequence-specific schedules of decitabine and vorinostat in patients with acute myeloid leukemia.

This phase I trial evaluated two schedules of escalating vorinostat in combination with decitabine every 28 days: (i) sequential or (ii) concurrent. There were three dose-limiting toxicities: grade 3 fatigue and generalized muscle weakness on the sequential schedule (n = 1) and grade 3 fatigue on the concurrent schedule (n = 2). The maximum tolerated dose was not reached on both planned schedules. The overall response rate (ORR) was 23% (three complete response [CR], two CR with incomplete incomplete blood count recovery [CRi], one partial response [PR] and two morphological leukemic free state [MLFS]). The ORR for all and previously untreated patients in the sequential arm was 13% (one CRi; one MLFS) and 0% compared to 30% (three CR; one CRi; one PR; one MLFS) and 36% in the concurrent arm (p = 0.26 for both), respectively. Decitabine plus vorinostat was safe and has clinical activity in patients with previously untreated acute myeloid leukemia. Responses appear higher with the concurrent dose schedule. Cumulative toxicities may limit long-term usage on the current dose/schedules.

A Phase I study of intermittently dosed vorinostat in combination with bortezomib in patients with advanced solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Accumulating evidence shows evidence of efficacy with the combination of vorinostat and bortezomib in solid tumors. We previously examined a once-daily continuous dosing schedule of vorinostat in combination with bortezomib which was well tolerated in cycles 1 and 2; however, there was concern regarding the tolerability through multiple cycles. This study was conducted to evaluate an intermittent dosing schedule of vorinostat with bortezomib. METHODS: Vorinostat was initially administered orally twice daily on days 1-14 with bortezomib IV on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21 day cycle. Two DLTs (elevated ALT and fatigue) were observed at dose level 1, thus the protocol was amended to administer vorinostat intermittently twice daily on days 1-4 and 8-11. RESULTS: 29 patients were enrolled; 13 men and 16 women. Common cancer types included sarcoma, pancreatic, colorectal, GIST, and breast. The most common Grade 3-4 toxicities at any dose level included thrombocytopenia, fatigue, increased ALT, elevated INR, and diarrhea. DLTs in the intermittent dosing scheduled included thrombocytopenia and fatigue. The Cmax and AUC for the intermittent dosing regimen were similar to those observed in the daily dosing. In this heavily pretreated population, stable disease was observed in patients with sarcoma, colorectal adenocarcinoma and GIST. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD was established at vorinostat 300 mg BID on days 1-4 and 8-11 and bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) IV on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21 day cycle. Tolerability was not improved with the intermittent dosing schedule of vorinostat when compared to continuous dosing.

A phase I study of vorinostat in combination with bortezomib in patients with advanced malignancies.

BACKGROUND: A phase I study to assess the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), pharmacokinetics (PK) and antitumor activity of vorinostat in combination with bortezomib in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients received vorinostat orally once daily on days 1-14 and bortezomib intravenously on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 of a 21-day cycle. Starting dose (level 1) was vorinostat (400 mg) and bortezomib (0.7 mg/m(2)). Bortezomib dosing was increased using a standard phase I dose-escalation schema. PKs were evaluated during cycle 1. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients received 57 cycles of treatment on four dose levels ranging from bortezomib 0.7 mg/m(2) to 1.5 mg/m(2). The MTD was established at vorinostat 400 mg daily and bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2). DLTs consisted of grade 3 fatigue in three patients (1 mg/m(2),1.3 mg/m(2) and 1.5 mg/m(2)) and grade 3 hyponatremia in one patient (1.5 mg/m(2)). The most common grade 1/2 toxicities included nausea (60.9%), fatigue (34.8%), diaphoresis (34.8%), anorexia (30.4%) and constipation (26.1%). Objective partial responses were observed in one patient with NSCLC and in one patient with treatment-refractory soft tissue sarcoma. Bortezomib did not affect the PKs of vorinostat; however, the Cmax and AUC of the acid metabolite were significantly increased on day 2 compared with day 1. CONCLUSIONS: This combination was generally well-tolerated at doses that achieved clinical benefit. The MTD was established at vorinostat 400 mg daily × 14 days and bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2) on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 of a 21-day cycle.

Vorinostat in combination with bortezomib in patients with advanced malignancies directly alters transcription of target genes.

INTRODUCTION: Vorinostat is a small molecule inhibitor of class I and II histone deacetylase enzymes which alters the expression of target genes including the cell cycle gene p21, leading to cell cycle arrest and apoptosis. METHODS: Patients enrolled in a phase I trial were treated with vorinostat alone on day 1 and vorinostat and bortezomib in combination on day 9. Paired biopsies were obtained in eleven subjects. Blood samples were obtained on days 1 and 9 of cycle 1 prior to dosing and 2 and 6 h post-dosing in all 60 subjects. Gene expression of p21, HSP70, AKT, Nur77, ERB1, and ERB2 was evaluated in peripheral blood mononuclear cells and tissue samples. Chromatin immunoprecipitation of p21, HSP70, and Nur77 was also performed in biopsy samples. RESULTS: In peripheral blood mononuclear cells, Nur77 was significantly and consistently decreased 2 h after vorinostat administration on both days 1 and 9, median ratio of gene expression relative to baseline of 0.69 with interquartile range 0.49-1.04 (p < 0.001); 0.28 (0.15-0.7) (p < 0.001), respectively, with more pronounced decrease on day 9, when patients received both vorinostat and bortezomib. p21, a downstream target of Nur77, was significantly decreased on day 9, 2 and 6 h after administration of vorinostat and bortezomib, 0.67 (0.41-1.03) (p < 0.01); 0.44 (0.25-1.3) (p < 0.01), respectively. The ChIP assay demonstrated a protein-DNA interaction, in this case interaction of Nur77, HSP70 and p21 with acetylated histone H3, at baseline and at day 9 after treatment with vorinostat in tissue biopsies in most patients. CONCLUSION: Vorinostat inhibits Nur77 expression, which in turn may decrease p21 and AKT expression in PBMCs. The influence of vorinostat on target gene expression in tumor tissue was variable; however, most patients demonstrated interaction of acetylated H3 with Nur77, HSP70, and p21 which provides evidence of interaction with the transcriptionally active acetylated H3.

Biomarker modulation following short-term vorinostat in women with newly diagnosed primary breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Agents that target the epigenome show activity in breast cancer models. In preclinical studies, the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat induces cell-cycle arrest, apoptosis, and differentiation. We evaluated biomarker modulation in breast cancer tissues obtained from women with newly diagnosed invasive disease who received vorinostat and those who did not. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Tumor specimens were collected from 25 women who received up to 6 doses of oral vorinostat 300 mg twice daily and from 25 untreated controls in a nonrandomized study. Candidate gene expression was analyzed by reverse transcription PCR (RT-PCR) using the Oncotype DX 21-gene assay, and by immunohistochemistry for Ki-67 and cleaved caspase-3. Matched samples from treated women were analyzed for gene methylation by quantitative multiplex methylation-specific PCR (QM-MSP). Wilcoxon nonparametric tests were used to compare changes in quantitative gene expression levels pre- and post-vorinostat with changes in expression in untreated controls, and changes in gene methylation between pre- and post-vorinostat samples. RESULTS: Vorinostat was well tolerated and there were no study-related delays in treatment. Compared with untreated controls, there were statistically significant decreases in the expression of proliferation-associated genes Ki-67 (P = 0.003), STK15 (P = 0.005), and Cyclin B1 (P = 0.03) following vorinostat, but not in other genes by the Oncotype DX assay, or in expression of Ki-67 or cleaved caspase-3 by immunohistochemistry. Changes in methylation were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Short-term vorinostat administration is associated with a significant decrease in expression of proliferation-associated genes in untreated breast cancers. This demonstration of biologic activity supports investigation of vorinostat in combination with other agents for the management of breast cancer.

Translational phase I trial of vorinostat (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid) combined with cytarabine and etoposide in patients with relapsed, refractory, or high-risk acute myeloid leukemia.

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat combined with fixed doses of cytarabine (ara-C or cytosine arabinoside) and etoposide in patients with poor-risk or advanced acute leukemia, to obtain preliminary efficacy data, describe pharmacokinetics, and in vivo pharmacodynamic effects of vorinostat in leukemia blasts. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: In this open-label phase I study, vorinostat was given orally on days one to seven at three escalating dose levels: 200 mg twice a day, 200 mg three times a day, and 300 mg twice a day. On days 11 to 14, etoposide (100 mg/m(2)) and cytarabine (1 or 2 g/m(2) twice a day if ≥65 or <65 years old, respectively) were given. The study used a standard 3+3 dose escalation design. RESULTS: Eighteen of 21 patients with acute myelogenous leukemia (AML) treated on study completed planned therapy. Dose-limiting toxicities [hyperbilirubinemia/septic death (1) and anorexia/fatigue (1)] were encountered at the 200 mg three times a day level; thus, the MTD was established to be vorinostat 200 mg twice a day. Of 21 patients enrolled, seven attained a complete remission (CR) or CR with incomplete platelet recovery, including six of 13 patients treated at the MTD. The median remission duration was seven months. No differences in percentage S-phase cells or multidrug resistance transporter (MDR1 or BCRP) expression or function were observed in vivo in leukemia blasts upon vorinostat treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Vorinostat 200 mg twice a day can be given safely for seven days before treatment with cytarabine and etoposide. The relatively high CR rate seen at the MTD in this poor-risk group of patients with AML warrants further studies to confirm these findings.

A phase I trial of vorinostat and bortezomib in children with refractory or recurrent solid tumors: a Children's Oncology Group phase I consortium study (ADVL0916).

BACKGROUND: A pediatric Phase I trial was performed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), and pharmacokinetics (PK) of vorinostat and bortezomib, in patients with solid tumors. PROCEDURE: Oral vorinostat was administered on days 1-5 and 8-12 of a 21-day cycle (starting dose 180 mg/m(2) /day with dose escalations to 230 and 300 mg/m(2) /day). Bortezomib (1.3 mg/m(2) i.v.) was administered on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of the same cycle. PK and correlative biology studies were performed during Cycle 1. RESULTS: Twenty-three eligible patients [17 male, median age 12 years (range: 1-20)] were enrolled of whom 17 were fully evaluable for toxicity. Cycle 1 DLTs that occurred in 2/6 patients at dose level 3 (vorinostat 300 mg/m(2) /day) were Grade 2 sensory neuropathy that progressed to Grade 4 (n = 1) and Grade 3 nausea and anorexia (n = 1). No objective responses were observed. There was wide interpatient variability in vorinostat PK parameters. Bortezomib disposition was best described by a three-compartment model that demonstrated rapid distribution followed by prolonged elimination. We did not observe a decrease in nuclear factor-κB activity or Grp78 induction after bortezomib treatment in peripheral blood mononuclear cells from solid tumor patients. CONCLUSION: The recommended Phase 2 dose and schedule is vorinostat (230 mg/m(2) /day PO on days 1-5 and 8-12) in combination with bortezomib (1.3 mg/m(2) /day i.v. on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21-day cycle) in children with recurrent or refractory solid tumors.

Phase I study of vorinostat in combination with temozolomide in patients with high-grade gliomas: North American Brain Tumor Consortium Study 04-03.

PURPOSE: A phase I, dose-finding study of vorinostat in combination with temozolomide (TMZ) was conducted to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and pharmacokinetics in patients with high-grade glioma (HGG). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: This phase I, dose-finding, investigational study was conducted in two parts. Part 1 was a dose-escalation study of vorinostat in combination with TMZ 150 mg/m(2)/day for 5 days every 28 days. Part 2 was a dose-escalation study of vorinostat in combination with TMZ 150 mg/m(2)/day for 5 days of the first cycle and 200 mg/m(2)/day for 5 days of the subsequent 28-day cycles. RESULTS: In part 1, the MTD of vorinostat administered on days 1 to 7 and 15 to 21 of every 28-day cycle, in combination with TMZ, was 500 mg daily. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) included grade 3 anorexia, grade 3 ALT, and grade 5 hemorrhage in the setting of grade 4 thrombocytopenia. In part 2, the MTD of vorinostat on days 1 to 7 and 15 to 21 of every 28-day cycle, combined with TMZ, was 400 mg daily. No DLTs were encountered, but vorinostat dosing could not be escalated further due to thrombocytopenia. The most common serious adverse events were fatigue, lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, and thromboembolic events. There were no apparent pharmacokinetic interactions between vorinostat and TMZ. Vorinostat treatment resulted in hyperacetylation of histones H3 and H4 in peripheral mononuclear cells. CONCLUSION: Vorinostat in combination with temozolomide is well tolerated in patients with HGG. A phase I/II trial of vorinostat with radiotherapy and concomitant TMZ in newly diagnosed glioblastoma is underway.

A phase I and pharmacokinetic study of oral 3-aminopyridine-2-carboxaldehyde thiosemicarbazone (3-AP, NSC #663249) in the treatment of advanced-stage solid cancers: a California Cancer Consortium Study.

BACKGROUND: 3-Aminopyridine-2-carboxaldehyde thiosemicarbazone (3-AP) is a novel small-molecule ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor. This study was designed to estimate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and oral bioavailability of 3-AP in patients with advanced-stage solid tumors. METHODS: Twenty patients received one dose of intravenous and subsequent cycles of oral 3-AP following a 3 + 3 patient dose escalation. Intravenous 3-AP was administered to every patient at a fixed dose of 100 mg over a 2-h infusion 1 week prior to the first oral cycle. Oral 3-AP was administered every 12 h for 5 consecutive doses on days 1-3, days 8-10, and days 15-17 of every 28-day cycle. 3-AP was started at 50 mg with a planned dose escalation to 100, 150, and 200 mg. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) and bioavailability were evaluated. RESULTS: Twenty patients were enrolled. For dose level 1 (50 mg), the second of three treated patients had a DLT of grade 3 hypertension. In the dose level 1 expansion cohort, three patients had no DLTs. No further DLTs were encountered during escalation until the 200-mg dose was reached. At the 200 mg 3-AP dose level, two treated patients had DLTs of grade 3 hypoxia. One additional DLT of grade 4 febrile neutropenia was subsequently observed at the de-escalated 150 mg dose. One DLT in 6 evaluable patients established the MTD as 150 mg per dose on this dosing schedule. Responses in the form of stable disease occurred in 5 (25%) of 20 patients. The oral bioavailability of 3-AP was 67 ± 29% and was consistent with the finding that the MTD by the oral route was 33% higher than by the intravenous route. CONCLUSIONS: Oral 3-AP is well tolerated and has an MTD similar to its intravenous form after accounting for the oral bioavailability. Oral 3-AP is associated with a modest clinical benefit rate of 25% in our treated patient population with advanced solid tumors.

Phase II study of belinostat in patients with recurrent or refractory advanced thymic epithelial tumors.

PURPOSE: Thymic epithelial tumors are rare malignancies, and there is no standard treatment for patients with advanced disease in whom chemotherapy has failed. Antitumor activity of histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors in this disease has been documented, including one patient with thymoma treated with the pan-HDAC inhibitor belinostat. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced thymic epithelial malignancies in whom at least one line of platinum-containing chemotherapy had failed were eligible for this study. Other eligibility criteria included adequate organ function and good performance status. Belinostat was administered intravenously at 1 g/m(2) on days 1 to 5 of a 21-day cycle until disease progression or development of intolerance. The primary objective was response rate in patients with thymoma. RESULTS: Of the 41 patients enrolled, 25 had thymoma, and 16 had thymic carcinoma; patients had a median of two previous systemic regimens (range, one to 10 regimens). Treatment was well tolerated, with nausea, vomiting, and fatigue being the most frequent adverse effects. Two patients achieved partial response (both had thymoma; response rate, 8%; 95% CI, 2.2% to 25%), 25 had stable disease, and 13 had progressive disease; there were no responses among patients with thymic carcinoma. Median times to progression and survival were 5.8 and 19.1 months, respectively. Survival of patients with thymoma was significantly longer than that of patients with thymic carcinoma (median not reached v 12.4 months; P = .001). Protein acetylation, regulatory T-cell numbers, and circulating angiogenic factors did not predict outcome. CONCLUSION: Belinostat has modest antitumor activity in this group of heavily pretreated thymic malignancies. However, the duration of response and disease stabilization is intriguing, and additional testing of belinostat in this disease is warranted.

Phase II study of vorinostat for treatment of relapsed or refractory indolent non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and mantle cell lymphoma.

PURPOSE: We performed a phase II study of oral vorinostat, a histone and protein deacetylase inhibitor, to examine its efficacy and tolerability in patients with relapsed/refractory indolent lymphoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open label phase II study (NCT00253630), patients with relapsed/refractory follicular lymphoma (FL), marginal zone lymphoma (MZL), or mantle cell lymphoma (MCL), with ≤ 4 prior therapies were eligible. Oral vorinostat was administered at a dose of 200 mg twice daily on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR), with secondary end points of progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression, duration of response, safety, and tolerability. RESULTS: All 35 eligible patients were evaluable for response. The median number of vorinostat cycles received was nine. ORR was 29% (five complete responses [CR] and five partial responses [PR]). For 17 patients with FL, ORR was 47% (four CR, four PR). There were two of nine responders with MZL (one CR, one PR), and no formal responders among the nine patients with MCL, although one patient maintained stable disease for 26 months. Median PFS was 15.6 months for patients with FL, 5.9 months for MCL, and 18.8 months for MZL. The drug was well-tolerated over long periods of treatment, with the most common grade 3 adverse events being thrombocytopenia, anemia, leucopenia, and fatigue. CONCLUSION: Oral vorinostat is a promising agent in FL and MZL, with an acceptable safety profile. Further studies in combination with other active agents in this setting are warranted.

Phase I study of decitabine in combination with vorinostat in patients with advanced solid tumors and non-Hodgkin's lymphomas.

PURPOSE: This phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary efficacy of the combination of decitabine with vorinostat. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors or non-Hodgkin's lymphomas were eligible. Sequential and concurrent schedules were studied. RESULTS: Forty-three patients were studied in 9 different dose levels (6 sequential and 3 concurrent). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) on the sequential schedule was decitabine 10 mg/m(2)/day on days 1 to 5 and vorinostat 200 mg three times a day on days 6 to 12. The MTD on the concurrent schedule was decitabine 10 mg/m(2)/day on days 1 to 5 with vorinostat 200 mg twice a day on days 3 to 9. However, the sequential schedule of decitabine 10 mg/m(2)/day on days 1 to 5 and vorinostat 200 mg twice a day on days 6 to 12 was more deliverable than both MTDs with fewer delays on repeated dosing and it represents the recommended phase II (RP2D) dose of this combination. Dose-limiting toxicities during the first cycle consisted of myelosuppression, constitutional and gastrointestinal symptoms and occurred in 12 of 42 (29%) patients evaluable for toxicity. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were neutropenia (49% of patients), thrombocytopenia (16%), fatigue (16%), lymphopenia (14%), and febrile neutropenia (7%). Disease stabilization for 4 cycles or more was observed in 11 of 38 (29%) evaluable patients. CONCLUSION: The combination of decitabine with vorinostat is tolerable on both concurrent and sequential schedules in previously treated patients with advanced solid tumors or non-Hodgkin's lymphomas. The sequential schedule was easier to deliver. The combination showed activity with prolonged disease stabilization in different tumor types.

Phase II trial of the ribonucleotide reductase inhibitor 3-aminopyridine-2-carboxaldehydethiosemicarbazone plus gemcitabine in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer.

BACKGROUND: 3-Aminopyridine-2-carboxaldehydethiosemicarbazone (3-AP) is a novel small molecule ribonucleotide reductase (RR) inhibitor which is more potent than hydroxyurea, the prototype of RR inhibitors. 3-AP enhances the cellular uptake and DNA incorporation of gemcitabine in tumor cell lines. We evaluated the combination of 3-AP plus gemcitabine in advanced biliary tract adenocarcinoma. METHODS: Thirty-three patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the gall bladder or biliary tract received gemcitabine (1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days) 1 h after completing a 4-h infusion of 3-AP given at a dose of 105 mg/m(2) in patients with normal liver function (stratum A) or 80 mg/m(2) if abnormal liver function (stratum B). The trial was designed to determine whether the response rate was at least 30% in stratum A and 20% in stratum B. RESULTS: Objective response occurred in 3 of 23 patients (13%, 95% confidence intervals [CI] 3, 34%) with normal liver function, and in 0 of 10 patients with abnormal liver function. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events in all patients included neutropenia (42%), infection (33%), thrombocytopenia (27%), anemia (18%), and fatigue (15%). Fine needle aspiration of tumor samples obtained before and 24 h after 3-AP therapy showed increased R2 mRNA expression by in situ RT-PCR, suggesting RR inhibition. CONCLUSIONS: Despite evidence for RR inhibition in vivo, the 3-AP plus gemcitabine combination is not likely to be associated with a response rate exceeding 30% in patients with adenocarcinoma of the biliary tract.

A phase I, pharmacokinetic, and pharmacodynamic study of two schedules of vorinostat in combination with 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with refractory solid tumors.

PURPOSE: We conducted a phase I clinical trial to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of daily or twice daily vorinostat x 3 days when combined with fixed doses of 5-fluorouracil (FU) and leucovorin every 2 weeks. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Vorinostat doses were escalated in a standard 3 x 3 phase I design. FU/leucovorin was started on day 2 of vorinostat and consisted of leucovorin 400 mg/m(2) i.v. over 2 hours followed by FU 400 mg/m(2) i.v. bolus and 2,400 mg/m(2) over 46 hours (sLV5FU2). RESULTS: Forty-three patients were enrolled. Grade 3 fatigue, and hand and foot syndrome were the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) at the 2,000 mg vorinostat once-daily dose level. Grade 3 fatigue and mucositis were DLTs at the 800 mg vorinostat twice-daily dose level. None of six patients at the 1,700 mg once daily or six patients at the 600 mg twice daily dose levels had a DLT; those dose levels represent the MTD. Twenty-one of 38 patients with FU-refractory colorectal cancer had stable disease, and one had a partial response. Vorinostat maximum serum concentrations at the MTD exceeded concentrations associated with thymidylate synthase downregulation in vitro. No pharmacokinetic interactions were noted between vorinostat and FU. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of vorinostat in combination with sLV5FU2 is 1,700 mg orally once daily x 3 or 600 mg orally twice daily x 3 days every 2 weeks. Clinical activity in refractory colorectal cancer supports further clinical development of this combination.

A phase I study of vorinostat in combination with idarubicin in relapsed or refractory leukaemia.

Histone deacetylase inhibitors (HDACi) affect chromatin remodelling and modulate the expression of aberrantly silenced genes. HDACi have single-agent clinical activity in haematological malignancies and have synergistic anti-leukaemia activity when combined with anthracyclines in vitro. We conducted a two-arm, parallel Phase I trial to investigate two schedules of escalating doses of vorinostat (Schedule A: thrice daily (TID) for 14 d; B: TID for 3 d) in combination with a fixed dose of idarubicin in patients with refractory leukaemia. Of the 41 patients enrolled, 90% had acute myeloid leukaemia, with a median of 3 prior therapies. Seven responses (17%) were documented (two complete response (5%), one complete response without platelet recovery (2.5%), and four marrow responses). The 3-d schedule of vorinostat was better tolerated than the 14-d schedule. The maximum tolerated dose for vorinostat was defined as 400 mg TID for 3 d. The most common grade 3 and 4 toxicities included mucositis, fatigue and diarrhoea. Correlative studies demonstrated histone acetylation in patients on therapy and modulation of CDKN1A and TOP2A (topoisomerase II) gene expression. Pharmacokinetic analysis confirmed a dose-related elevation in plasma vorinostat concentrations. The combination of vorinostat and idarubicin is generally tolerable and active in patients with advanced leukaemia and should be studied in the front-line setting.

Carboplatin and Paclitaxel in combination with either vorinostat or placebo for first-line therapy of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE Vorinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, exerts anticancer effects by both histone and nonhistone-mediated mechanisms. It also enhances the anticancer effects of platinum compounds and taxanes in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cell lines. This phase II randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study evaluated the efficacy of vorinostat in combination with carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with advanced-stage NSCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with previously untreated stage IIIB (ie, wet) or IV NSCLC were randomly assigned (2:1) to carboplatin (area under the curve, 6 mg/mL x min) and paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2) day 3) with either vorinostat (400 mg by mouth daily) or placebo. Vorinostat or placebo was given on days 1 through 14 of each 3-week cycle to a maximum of six cycles. The primary end point was comparison of the response rate. Results Ninety-four patients initiated protocol therapy. Baseline patient characteristics were similar between the two arms. The median number of cycles was four for both treatment arms. The confirmed response rate was 34% with vorinostat versus 12.5% with placebo (P = .02). There was a trend toward improvement in median progression-free survival (6.0 months v 4.1 months; P = .48) and overall survival (13.0 months v 9.7 months; P = .17) in the vorinostat arm. Grade 4 platelet toxicity was more common with vorinostat (18% v 3%; P < .05). Nausea, emesis, fatigue, dehydration, and hyponatremia also were more frequent with vorinostat. CONCLUSION Vorinostat enhances the efficacy of carboplatin and paclitaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC. HDAC inhibition is a promising therapeutic strategy for treatment of NSCLC.

Clinical Toxicities of Histone Deacetylase Inhibitors.

The HDAC inhibitors are a new family of antineoplastic agents. Since the entry of these agents into our therapeutic armamentarium, there has been increasing interest in their use. Although this family comprises chemical compounds from unrelated chemical classes that have different HDAC isoform specificities, they surprisingly have very similar toxicity profiles. In contrast, the observed toxicity profile is somewhat different from that of traditional cytotoxic chemotherapeutic agents and from other epigenetic agents. While some of the side effects may be familiar to the oncologist, others are less commonly seen. As some patients remain on therapy for a prolonged period of time, the long-term sequelae need to be characterized. In addition, since preclinical models suggest promising activity when used in combination with other antineoplastic agents, combination trials are being pursued. It will thus be important to distinguish the relative toxicity attributed to these agents and be alert to the exacerbation of toxicities observed in single agent studies. Notably, few of the agents in this class have completed phase 2 testing. Consequently, more clinical experience is needed to determine the relative frequency of the observed side effects, and to identify and develop approaches to mitigate potential clinical sequelae.

A phase 2 study of vorinostat in acute myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: This two-stage, multi-institutional, randomized phase 2 trial assessed the toxicity and response rate associated with two treatment schedules of the histone deacetylase inhibitor, vorinostat (suberoylanilide hydroxamic acid; SAHA) in patients with relapsed acute myeloid leukemia and in selected untreated patients with high-risk acute myeloid leukemia. DESIGN AND METHODS: Patients with relapsed or untreated acute myeloid leukemia who were not candidates for chemotherapy entered one of the two treatment arms. In both arms a total dose of 8400 mg of vorinostat was delivered in each 21-day cycle of treatment: in arm A the dose regimen was 400 mg daily whereas in arm B the dose regimen was 200 mg three times daily for 14 days followed by 1 week rest. RESULTS: Data from all 37 patients were used for the analyses. In arm A (n=15), the confirmed complete remission rate was 0% (95% CI, 0% to 23%); this arm was closed at the planned interim analysis. In arm B (n=22), the confirmed complete remission rate was 4.5% (1 response; 95% CI, 0.4% to 24%), with a duration of response exceeding 398 days. The median time to treatment failure in arm A was 42 days (95% CI, 26 to 57); although a minimum of four cycles of treatment were planned, 11 patients (79%) received no more than two cycles. The median time to treatment failure in arm B was 46 days (95% CI, 20 to 71); 13 patients (59%) received no more than two cycles of treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Vorinostat monotherapy demonstrated minimal activity in this group of patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Therapy was discontinued in many patients before the planned four cycles had been administered, either because of failure of vorinostat to control the leukocyte count or patients' and physicians' preference. Future studies of vorinostat in acute myeloid leukemia should focus on combinations with other drugs with which it might interact pharmacodynamically. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT00305773.

Phase I study of vorinostat in combination with bortezomib for relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

PURPOSE: Vorinostat, a histone deacetylase inhibitor, enhances cell death by the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib in vitro. We sought to test the combination clinically. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: A phase I trial evaluated sequential dose escalation of bortezomib at 1 to 1.3 mg/m2 i.v. on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 and vorinostat at 100 to 500 mg orally daily for 8 days of each 21-day cycle in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients. Vorinostat pharmacokinetics and dynamics were assessed. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients were treated. Patients had received a median of 7 prior regimens (range, 3-13), including autologous transplantation in 20, thalidomide in all 23, lenalidomide in 17, and bortezomib in 19, 9 of whom were bortezomib-refractory. Two patients receiving 500 mg vorinostat had prolonged QT interval and fatigue as dose-limiting toxicities. The most common grade >3 toxicities were myelo-suppression (n = 13), fatigue (n = 11), and diarrhea (n = 5). There were no drug-related deaths. Overall response rate was 42%, including three partial responses among nine bortezomib refractory patients. Vorinostat pharmacokinetics were nonlinear. Serum Cmax reached a plateau above 400 mg. Pharmacodynamic changes in CD-138+ bone marrow cells before and on day 11 showed no correlation between protein levels of NF-kappaB, IkappaB, acetylated tubulin, and p21CIP1 and clinical response. CONCLUSIONS: The maximum tolerated dose of vorinostat in our study was 400 mg daily for 8 days every 21 days, with bortezomib administered at a dose of 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8, and 11. The promising antimyeloma activity of the regimen in refractory patients merits further evaluation.