LP-184, a Novel Acylfulvene Molecule, Exhibits Anticancer Activity against Diverse Solid Tumors with Homologous Recombination Deficiency.

Homologous recombination (HR)-related gene alterations are present in a significant subset of prostate, breast, ovarian, pancreatic, lung, and colon cancers rendering these tumors as potential responders to specific DNA damaging agents. A small molecule acylfulvene prodrug, LP-184, metabolizes to an active compound by the oxidoreductase activity of enzyme prostaglandin reductase 1 (PTGR1), which is frequently elevated in multiple solid tumor types. Prior work demonstrated that cancer cell lines deficient in a spectrum of DNA damage repair (DDR) pathway genes show increased susceptibility to LP-184. Here, we investigated the potential of LP-184 in targeting multiple tumors with impaired HR function and its mechanism of action as a DNA damaging agent. LP-184 induced elevated DNA double-strand breaks in HR deficient (HRD) cancer cells. Depletion of key HR components BRCA2 or ataxia telangiectasia mutated (ATM) in cancer cells conferred up to 12-fold increased sensitivity to the LP-184. LP-184 showed nanomolar potency in a diverse range of HRD cancer models, including prostate cancer organoids, leiomyosarcoma cell lines, and patient-derived tumor graft models of lung, pancreatic, and prostate cancers. LP-184 demonstrated complete, durable tumor regression in 10 patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models of HRD triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) including those resistant to PARP inhibitors (PARPi). LP-184 further displayed strong synergy with PARPi in ovarian and prostate cancer cell lines as well as in TNBC PDX models. These preclinical findings illustrate the potential of LP-184 as a pan-HRD cancer therapeutic. Taken together, our results support continued clinical evaluation of LP-184 in a large subset of HRD solid tumors. SIGNIFICANCE: New agents with activity against DDR-deficient solid tumors refractory to standard-of-care therapies are needed. We report multiple findings supporting the potential for LP-184, a novel alkylating agent with three FDA orphan drug designations, to fill this void clinically: strong nanomolar potency; sustained, durable regression of solid tumor xenografts; synthetic lethality with HR defects. LP-184 adult phase IA trial to assess safety in advanced solid tumors is ongoing.

Pharmacokinetics and safety of niraparib in patients with moderate hepatic impairment.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to characterize niraparib pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety in patients with normal hepatic function (NHF) versus moderate hepatic impairment (MHI). METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumors were stratified by NHF or MHI (National Cancer Institute-Organ Dysfunction Working Group criteria [bilirubin > 1.5-3 × upper limit of normal and any aspartate aminotransferase elevation]). In the PK phase, all patients received one 300 mg dose of niraparib. In the extension phase, patients with MHI received niraparib 200 mg daily; patients with NHF received 200 or 300 mg based on weight (< 77 kg, ≥ 77 kg)/platelets (< 150,000/µL, ≥ 150,000/µL). PK parameters included maximum concentration (Cmax), area under the curve to last measured concentration (AUClast) and extrapolated to infinity (AUCinf). Safety was assessed in both phases. Exposure-response (E-R) modeling was used to predict MHI effects on exposure and safety of niraparib doses ≤ 200 mg or 300/200 mg or 200/100 mg weight/platelet regimens. RESULTS: In the PK phase (NHF, n = 9; MHI, n = 8), mean niraparib Cmax was 7% lower in patients with MHI versus NHF. Mean exposure (AUClast, AUCinf) was increased by 45% and 56%, respectively, in patients with MHI without impacting tolerability. In the extension phase (NHF, n = 8; MHI, n = 7), the overall safety profile was consistent with previous trials. In patients with MHI, E-R modeling predicted niraparib 200 mg reduced Grade ≥ 3 thrombocytopenia incidence, whereas a 200/100 mg regimen yielded exposures below efficacy-associated levels in 15% of patients. CONCLUSION: These findings support adjusting the 300 mg niraparib starting dose to 200 mg QD in patients with MHI. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03359850; registered December 2, 2017.

PF-06881894, a Proposed Biosimilar to Pegfilgrastim, Versus US-Licensed and EU-Approved Pegfilgrastim Reference Products (Neulasta®): Pharmacodynamics, Pharmacokinetics, Immunogenicity, and Safety of Single or Multiple Subcutaneous Doses in Healthy Volunteers.

INTRODUCTION: PF-06881894 is a proposed biosimilar to pegfilgrastim (Neulasta®). This study evaluated the pharmacodynamic/pharmacokinetic (PD/PK) equivalence, immunogenicity, and safety of PF-06881894 vs pegfilgrastim reference products (US- and EU-Neulasta®) in healthy volunteers. METHODS: A phase 1, open-label, randomized, crossover study was conducted to assess the pharmacologic equivalence and safety of a single 6-mg dose of PF-06881894, pegfilgrastim-US, and pegfilgrastim-EU. The primary PD endpoints were area under the effect-versus-time curve for absolute neutrophil count (ANC) from dose administration to 288 h postdose, and maximum observed ANC value among subjects confirmed negative for anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies. Primary PK variables included area under the serum pegfilgrastim-versus-time curve from the time of dose administration to time infinity and maximum observed serum pegfilgrastim concentration. A second phase 1, open-label, randomized (1:1), parallel-group, non-inferiority study was conducted to assess the immunogenicity and safety of multiple 6-mg doses of PF-06881894 versus pegfilgrastim-US. The primary endpoint for the immunogenicity study was the proportion of subjects with both negative baseline and confirmed positive postdose anti-pegfilgrastim antibodies at any time during the study. RESULTS: Across the single- and multiple-dose studies (N = 153 and N = 420 treated subjects, respectively), demographics for age (18-65 years), male gender (n = 264/573), and white race (n = 423/573) were similar. Three-way PD/PK equivalence of PF-06881894, pegfilgrastim-US, and pegfilgrastim-EU was demonstrated with the primary PD endpoints and primary PK variables being completely contained within the predefined 90% confidence interval acceptance limits (80-125%). The non-inferiority of PF-06881894 versus pegfilgrastim-US in terms of immunogenicity was established according to the prespecified non-inferiority margin (≤10%). Overall, there were no clinically meaningful differences in safety profiles among or between study groups. CONCLUSIONS: Single-dose PF-06881894 demonstrated PD/PK equivalence and comparable safety with US- and EU-pegfilgrastim reference products. Multiple-dose PF-06881894 demonstrated immunogenicity non-inferiority to pegfilgrastim-US with comparable safety. Both studies contributed to the totality of evidence supporting biosimilarity. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifiers: NCT02629289; NCT03273842 (C1221005).

Correction to: Population pharmacokinetics of PF­05280014 (a trastuzumab biosimilar) and reference trastuzumab (Herceptin®) in patients with HER2­positive metastatic breast cancer.

The article "Population pharmacokinetics of PF-05280014 (a trastuzumab biosimilar) and reference trastuzumab (Herceptin®) in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer" written by Xiaoying Chen, Cheryl Li, Reginald Ewesuedo, Donghua Yin was originally published electronically on the publisher's internet portal (currently SpringerLink) on 3rd May 2019 without open access.

Population pharmacokinetics of PF-05280014 (a trastuzumab biosimilar) and reference trastuzumab (Herceptin®) in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: PF-05280014 is a biosimilar to trastuzumab (Herceptin®). Following demonstration of pharmacokinetic (PK) similarity in healthy volunteers, a comparative clinical study in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC) compared the efficacy, safety and immunogenicity of PF-05280014 and trastuzumab sourced from the EU (trastuzumab-EU), both with paclitaxel. METHODS: Population PK of PF-05280014 and trastuzumab-EU was evaluated. RESULTS: Overall, 702 patients were treated: PF-05280014 (n = 349) and trastuzumab-EU (n = 353). Peak-and-trough serum drug concentration samples were collected (selected doses) following repeated intravenous administration of PF-05280014 or trastuzumab-EU. Population PK analysis was performed with drug concentration-time data to cycle 17 for each compound, using nonlinear mixed effect modeling. Potential baseline covariates (circulating HER2 concentrations, body weight, Japanese race, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status, number of metastatic sites and antidrug antibody status) were evaluated. Concentration-time data of PF-05280014 and trastuzumab-EU were adequately described by a two-compartment model with first-order elimination, with inter-individual variability (IIV) on clearance (CL), volumes of distribution in central compartment (V1) and peripheral compartments, and intercompartment clearance. Similar estimated PK parameters and IIV were obtained for both treatments. For PF-05280014 and trastuzumab-EU, baseline body weight was an influential covariate on CL and V1; the magnitude was comparable between treatments. PK was consistent between the limited number of Japanese and non-Japanese patients for both compounds. CONCLUSIONS: PF-05280014 and trastuzumab-EU had similar PK parameters and influential PK covariates in patients with HER2-positive mBC. These results provided further evidence in patients for PK similarity between PF-05280014 and trastuzumab-EU. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01989676.

PF-05280014 (a trastuzumab biosimilar) plus paclitaxel compared with reference trastuzumab plus paclitaxel for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer: a randomised, double-blind study.

BACKGROUND: This randomised, double-blind study compared PF-05280014 (a trastuzumab biosimilar) with reference trastuzumab (Herceptin®) sourced from the European Union (trastuzumab-EU), when each was given with paclitaxel as first-line treatment for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer. METHODS: Between 4 April 2014 and 22 January 2016, 707 participants were randomised 1:1 to receive intravenous PF-05280014 plus paclitaxel (PF-05280014 group; n = 352) or trastuzumab-EU plus paclitaxel (trastuzumab-EU group; n = 355). PF-05280014 or trastuzumab-EU was administered weekly (first dose 4 mg/kg, subsequent doses 2 mg/kg), with the option to change to a 3-weekly regimen (6 mg/kg) from Week 33. Treatment with PF-05280014 or trastuzumab-EU could continue until disease progression. Paclitaxel (starting dose 80 mg/m2) was administered on Days 1, 8 and 15 of 28-day cycles for at least six cycles or until maximal benefit of response. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR), evaluating responses achieved by Week 25 and confirmed by Week 33, based on blinded central radiology review. RESULTS: The risk ratio for ORR was 0.940 (95% CI: 0.842-1.049). The 95% CI fell within the pre-specified equivalence margin of 0.80-1.25. ORR was 62.5% (95% CI: 57.2-67.6%) in the PF-05280014 group and 66.5% (95% CI: 61.3-71.4%) in the trastuzumab-EU group. As of data cut-off on 11 January 2017 (using data up to 378 days post-randomisation), there were no notable differences between groups in progression-free survival (median: 12.16 months in the PF-05280014 group vs. 12.06 months in the trastuzumab-EU group; 1-year rate: 54% vs. 51%) or overall survival (median: not reached in either group; 1-year rate: 89.31% vs. 87.36%). Safety outcomes and immunogenicity were similar between the treatment groups. CONCLUSION: When given as first-line treatment for HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer, PF-05280014 plus paclitaxel demonstrated equivalence to trastuzumab-EU plus paclitaxel in terms of ORR. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01989676.

Biosimilars for the Treatment of Cancer: A Systematic Review of Published Evidence.

BACKGROUND: Biologic treatments for cancer continue to place a significant economic burden on healthcare stakeholders. Biosimilar therapies may help reduce this burden through cost savings, thereby increasing patient access. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to collate all published data to assess the weight of available evidence (quantity and quality) for proposed monoclonal antibody biosimilars and intended copies, for the treatment of cancer. METHODS: MEDLINE®, Embase®, and ISI Web of Science® databases were searched to September 2015. Conference proceedings (17) were searched (2012 to July 2015). Searches of the United States National Library of Medicine ClinicalTrials.gov registry were also conducted. Risk of bias assessments were undertaken to assess data strength and validity. RESULTS: Proposed biosimilars were identified in 23 studies (36 publications) in oncology and ten studies in 14 publications in oncology and chronic inflammatory diseases for bevacizumab, rituximab, and trastuzumab originators. Based on our review of the included published studies, and as inferred from the conclusions of study authors, the identified proposed biosimilars exhibit close similarity to their originators. Published data were also retrieved on intended copies of rituximab. It remains unclear what role these agents may have, as publications on rigorous clinical studies are lacking for these molecules. CONCLUSION: While biosimilar products have the potential to improve patient access to important biologic therapies, robust evidence of outcomes for monoclonal antibody biosimilars in treating cancer patients, including data from comparative efficacy and safety trials, is not yet available in the published literature. Significant data gaps exist, particularly for intended copies, which reinforces the need to maintain a clear differentiation between these molecules and true biosimilars. As more biosimilars become available for use, it will be important for stakeholders to understand fully the robustness of overall evidence used to demonstrate biosimilarity and gain regulatory approval.

Evaluating imbalances of adverse events during biosimilar development.

Biosimilars are designed to be highly similar to approved or licensed (reference) biologics and are evaluated based on the totality of evidence from extensive analytical, nonclinical and clinical studies. As part of the stepwise approach recommended by regulatory agencies, the first step in the clinical evaluation of biosimilarity is to conduct a pharmacokinetics similarity study in which the potential biosimilar is compared with the reference product. In the context of biosimilar development, a pharmacokinetics similarity study is not necessarily designed for a comparative assessment of safety. Development of PF-05280014, a potential biosimilar to trastuzumab, illustrates how a numerical imbalance in an adverse event in a small pharmacokinetics study can raise questions on safety that may require additional clinical trials.

A phase I pharmacokinetics study comparing PF-06439535 (a potential biosimilar) with bevacizumab in healthy male volunteers.

PURPOSE: This study compared the pharmacokinetics of PF-06439535, a potential bevacizumab biosimilar, to bevacizumab sourced from the European Union (bevacizumab-EU) and USA (bevacizumab-US), and of bevacizumab-EU to bevacizumab-US. METHODS: In this double-blind study, 102 healthy males, aged 21-55 years, were randomized 1:1:1 to receive a single 5 mg/kg intravenous dose of PF-06439535, bevacizumab-EU, or bevacizumab-US. Pharmacokinetic assessments were conducted for 71 days, with additional safety and immunogenicity assessments until day 100. Pharmacokinetic similarity was achieved if 90 % confidence intervals (CIs) for the test-to-reference ratios of the maximum serum concentration (C max), area under the serum concentration-time curve from zero to infinity (AUC0-∞), and from zero to time of last quantifiable concentration (AUC0-t ) were within the 80.00-125.00 % bioequivalence acceptance window. RESULTS: The three study drugs exhibited similar pharmacokinetic properties. For the comparisons of PF-06439535 to bevacizumab-EU or bevacizumab-US, and of bevacizumab-EU to bevacizumab-US, the 90 % CIs for the ratios of C max, AUC0-t , and AUC0-∞ were all within 80.00-125.00 %. Two, one, and two subjects treated with PF-06439535, bevacizumab-EU, and bevacizumab-US, respectively, tested positive for antidrug antibodies, none of whom tested positive for neutralizing antibodies. Treatment-related adverse events were reported in 15.2, 25.7, and 18.2 % of subjects in the PF-06439535, bevacizumab-EU, and bevacizumab-US treatment arms, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated the pharmacokinetic similarity of PF-06439535 to both bevacizumab-EU and bevacizumab-US, and of bevacizumab-EU to bevacizumab-US. The safety profile (including immunogenicity) was similar in the three treatment groups, with no significant safety findings reported.

Bone marrow and tumor cell colony-forming units and human tumor xenograft efficacy of noncamptothecin and camptothecin topoisomerase I inhibitors.

Topoisomerase I (TopoI), an established anticancer target, is an enzyme producing a single-strand DNA break during transcription. Several noncamptothecin TopoI inhibitors have been identified. One of these, ARC-111, was compared with two clinically used camptothecins, topotecan and irinotecan/SN-38. In mouse and human bone marrow colony formation [colony-forming units granulocyte-macrophage (CFU-GM)] assays, the IC(90) values were 519 and 331 nmol/L for topotecan and SN-38 mouse CFU-GM and were 19 and 26 nmol/L for human CFU-GM, giving mouse to human differentials of 28- and 13-fold. ARC-111 produced IC(90) values of 28 nmol/L in mouse and 6.2 nmol/L in human CFU-GM, thus only a 4.5-fold differential between species. Human bone marrow CFU-GM was more sensitive to topotecan than were several human cancer cell lines, but ARC-111 cytotoxicity was similar for human bone marrow CFU-GM and the seven human tumor cell lines tested. In HCT-116 xenografts, tumor growth delays (TGD) were 17 days for irinotecan and 20 days for ARC-111. In HT-29 xenografts, the TGD was 9 days for both irinotecan and ARC-111. Both ARC-111 and docetaxel had a TGD of 21 days in NCI-H460 xenografts, and both ARC-111 and gemcitabine had a TGD of 7 days in MiaPaCa2 xenograft. Current TopoI inhibitors have broad antitumor activity in human tumor xenografts that is not achieved in the clinic. This may be due to greater sensitivity of human bone marrow than mouse to the cytotoxicity of these agents. It may be possible to achieve similar levels of ARC-111 in patients as in mice allowing improved antitumor activity.

O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase activity and promoter methylation status in pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the activity of the DNA repair protein O6-methylguanine-DNA methyltransferase (MGMT) and MGMT promoter methylation status of pediatric rhabdomyosarcoma (RMS) and examine MGMT in RMS tumors from different prognostic groups. METHODS: Fifteen samples each of the alveolar (ARMS) and embryonal (ERMS) subtypes were obtained for analysis of MGMT activity and promoter methylation status. MGMT activity was assayed by measuring the removal of O6-[3H] methylguanine from [3H]-methylated substrate by a tumor extract containing the enzyme. Promoter methylation status was examined using methylation-specific polymerase chain reaction (PCR). RESULTS: MGMT activity was successfully assayed from 25 samples, 10 ERMS and 15 ARMS. All ERMS and 11 of the 15 ARMS samples displayed high activity levels. There was significant intertumor variability among both subtypes but no significant difference in mean activity between the two histologic groups. There were trends toward increased activity in ERMS tumors and tumors from anatomically unfavorable locations. Only one tumor was hypermethylated at the MGMT promoter region. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis suggests that a low percentage of RMS samples are hypermethylated at the MGMT promoter and that most have significant MGMT activity, implying that clinical trials with MGMT-modulating agents may have a role in the treatment of these tumors. This analysis does not support MGMT activity as an explanation of the differential response to chemotherapy demonstrated by ARMS and ERMS, but does suggest that MGMT may be involved in RMS treatment failure regardless of subtype and in the poorer response shown by tumors from unfavorable locations.