Isatuximab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma patients with renal impairment: ICARIA-MM subgroup analysis.

The randomized, phase 3 ICARIA-MM study investigated isatuximab (Isa) with pomalidomide and dexamethasone (Pd) versus Pd in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and ≥2 prior lines. This prespecified subgroup analysis examined efficacy in patients with renal impairment (RI; estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m²). Isa 10 mg/kg was given intravenously once weekly in cycle 1, and every 2 weeks in subsequent 28-day cycles. Patients received standard doses of Pd. Median progression-free survival (PFS) for patients with RI was 9.5 months with Isa-Pd (n = 55) and 3.7 months with Pd (n = 49; hazard ratio [HR] 0.50; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.30-0.85). Without RI, median PFS was 12.7 months with Isa-Pd (n = 87) and 7.9 months with Pd (n = 96; HR 0.58; 95% CI, 0.38-0.88). The overall response rate (ORR) with and without RI was higher with Isa-Pd (56 and 68%) than Pd (25 and 43%). Complete renal response rates were 71.9% (23/32) with Isa-Pd and 38.1% (8/21) with Pd; these lasted ≥60 days in 31.3% (10/32) and 19.0% (4/21) of patients, respectively. Isa pharmacokinetics were comparable between the subgroups, suggesting no need for dose adjustment in patients with RI. In summary, the addition of Isa to Pd improved PFS, ORR and renal response rates.

A first-in-human phase I study of SAR125844, a selective MET tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumours with MET amplification.

PURPOSE: Dysregulated MET signalling is implicated in oncogenesis. The safety and preliminary efficacy of a highly selective MET kinase inhibitor (SAR125844) was investigated in patients with advanced solid tumours and MET dysregulation. METHODS: This was a phase I dose-escalation (3 + 3 design [50-740 mg/m2]) and dose-expansion study. In the dose escalation, patients had high total MET (t-MET) expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC) or MET amplification by fluorescence in situ hybridisation. In the dose expansion, patients had MET amplification (including a subset of patients with non-small cell lung cancer [NSCLC]) or phosphorylated-MET (p-MET) expression (IHC). Objectives were determination of maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of once-weekly intravenous SAR125844 based on dose-limiting toxicities; safety and pharmacokinetic profile; preliminary efficacy of SAR125844 MTD in the expansion cohort. RESULTS: In total, 72 patients were enrolled: dose escalation, N = 33; dose expansion, N = 39; 570 mg/m2 was established as the MTD. Most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were asthenia/fatigue (58.3%), nausea (31.9%), and abdominal pain, constipation, and dyspnea (27.8% for each); 58.3% of patients reported grade 3 AEs (19.4% were treatment related). Of the 29 evaluable patients with MET amplification treated at 570 mg/m2, five achieved a partial response, including four of 22 with NSCLC; 17 patients had stable disease. No response was observed in patients with high p-MET solid tumours. There was no correlation between tumour response and t-MET status or MET gene copy number. CONCLUSION: The MTD of once-weekly SAR125844 was 570 mg/m2; SAR125844 was well tolerated, with significant antitumour activity in patients with MET-amplified NSCLC. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01391533.

Phase I dose-escalation study of the c-Met tyrosine kinase inhibitor SAR125844 in Asian patients with advanced solid tumors, including patients with MET-amplified gastric cancer.

SAR125844 is a potent and selective inhibitor of the c-Met kinase receptor. This was an open-label, phase I, multicenter, dose-escalation, and dose-expansion trial of SAR125844 in Asian patients with solid tumors, a subgroup of whom had gastric cancer and MET amplification (NCT01657214). SAR125844 was administered by intravenous infusion (260-570 mg/m2) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each 28-day cycle. Objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and to evaluate SAR125844 safety and pharmacokinetic profile. Antitumor activity was also assessed. Of 38 patients enrolled (median age 64.0 years), 22 had gastric cancer, including 14 with MET amplification. In the dose-escalation cohort (N = 19; unselected population, including three patients with MET-amplification [two with gastric cancer and one with lung cancer]), the MTD was not reached, and the recommended dose was established at 570 mg/m2. Most frequent treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were nausea (36.8%), vomiting (34.2%), decreased appetite (28.9%), and fatigue or asthenia, constipation, and abdominal pains (each 21.1%); none appeared to be dose-dependent. Grade ≥ 3 AEs were observed in 39.5% of patients and considered drug-related in 7.9%. SAR125844 exposure increased slightly more than expected by dose proportionality; dose had no significant effect on clearance. No objective responses were observed in the dose-escalation cohort, with seven patients (three gastric cancer, two colorectal cancer, one breast cancer, and one with cancer of unknown primary origin) having stable disease. Modest antitumor activity was observed at 570 mg/m2 in the dose-expansion cohort, comprising patients with MET-amplified tumors (N = 19). Two gastric cancer patients had partial responses, seven patients had stable disease (six gastric cancer and one kidney cancer), and 10 patients had progressive disease. Single-agent SAR125844 administered up to 570 mg/m2 has acceptable tolerability and modest antitumor activity in patients with MET-amplified gastric cancer.

Phase I Dose-Escalation and Pharmacokinetic Study of Intravenous Aflibercept in Combination with Docetaxel, Cisplatin, and 5-Fluorouracil in Patients with Advanced Solid Malignancies.

PURPOSE: This phase I study (EudraCT No. 2006-001177-25) investigated aflibercept, a vascular endothelial growth factor decoy receptor protein (VEGF Trap), in combination with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5-fluorouracil in patients with advanced solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received 2, 4, or 6 mg/kg of intravenous aflibercept with docetaxel 75 mg/m2, cisplatin 75 mg/m2, and 5-fluorouracil 750 mg/m2 in 3-week cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary objectives were to evaluate dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during cycle 1 and to determine the recommended phase II dose. Pharmacokinetics, tolerability, and antitumor activity were also investigated. RESULTS: Forty-four patients were enrolled and treated (29 patients in a dose-escalation phase and 15 patients in an expansion cohort). Following three cases of febrile neutropenia in patients receiving aflibercept at 4 mg/kg, the protocol was amended to allow earlier granulocyte colony-stimulating factor support (from day 6) and prophylactic use of ciprofloxacin. Subsequently, there were two DLTs: febrile neutropenia (2 mg/kg) and grade 4 pulmonary embolism (6 mg/kg). An excess of free over VEGF-bound aflibercept was observed at 6 mg/kg. The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) were neutropenia (54.5%), lymphopenia (47.7%), and stomatitis (38.6%). AEs associated with VEGF blockade (any grade) included epistaxis (61.4%), dysphonia (40.9%), hypertension (38.6%), and proteinuria (11.4%). There were 15 partial responses, including 9 in patients with gastroesophageal cancers. Thirteen patients had stable disease. CONCLUSION: Aflibercept 6 mg/kg administered every 3 weeks in combination with docetaxel, cisplatin, and 5- fluorouracil is the recommended dose for further clinical development based on tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity.

Randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind, parallel-group phase III study evaluating aflibercept in patients receiving first-line treatment with gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer.

BACKGROUND: This phase III study investigated the addition of aflibercept to gemcitabine, in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous (i.v.) aflibercept, 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks, or matching placebo combined with gemcitabine, 1000 mg/m(2) i.v. weekly for 7 weeks out of 8, then weekly for 3 weeks out of 4 until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. The primary objective was to demonstrate an improvement in overall survival (OS) between the treatment arms. RESULTS: The study was stopped for futility following a planned interim analysis of OS in 427 randomised patients. With a median follow-up of 7.9 months, based on the 546 patients at study termination, median OS was 7.8 months in the gemcitabine plus placebo arm (n=275) versus 6.5 months in the gemcitabine plus aflibercept arm (n=271), which was not significant (hazard ratio 1.165, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.921-1.473, p=0.2034). Median progression-free survival was 3.7 months in both arms. Treatment discontinuations due to adverse events were more frequent in the aflibercept than in the placebo-containing arm (23% versus 12%). CONCLUSION: Adding aflibercept to gemcitabine did not improve OS in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

Intravenous aflibercept administered in combination with irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with advanced solid tumours: results from the expansion cohort of a phase I study.

BACKGROUND: Following the dose-escalation stage, this double-blind expansion stage of the phase I study evaluated the safety, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, anti-vascular effects and antitumour activity of aflibercept 4 mg/kg with irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (LV5FU2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumours were randomised at cycle-1 to placebo or aflibercept (4 mg/kg) on day 1 then irinotecan-LV5FU2 on days 1 and 2. Subsequently, all patients received aflibercept with irinotecan-LV5FU2 every 2 weeks. Anti-vascular effects were assessed using dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI). RESULTS: Twenty-seven patients were treated; 14 received placebo in cycle-1 followed by aflibercept in later cycles and 13 received aflibercept 4 mg/kg upfront. The median number of aflibercept cycles was 16 (range 1-44), 12 patients received ≥20 cycles. Most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia (37%), fatigue (33%) and hypertension (30%). No anti-aflibercept antibodies were detected. Four patients achieved partial responses and 17 had stable disease, lasting >3 months in 14 patients. Plasma levels of free over vascular endothelial growth factor-bound aflibercept were adequate, with steady-state achieved from cycle-3. Exploratory DCE-MRI showed no significant perfusion changes with aflibercept. CONCLUSION: Aflibercept 4 mg/kg plus irinotecan-LV5FU2 every 2 weeks had acceptable toxicity and pharmacokinetics, and showed promising antitumour activity.

Phase I dose-escalation study of intravenous aflibercept administered in combination with irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: To determine dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), recommended phase II trial dose (RPTD), safety, preliminary antitumour activity and pharmacokinetics of intravenous aflibercept with irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil and leucovorin (LV5FU2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label study, 38 patients with advanced solid tumours received aflibercept 2, 4, 5, or 6 mg/kg on day 1, then irinotecan and LV5FU2 on days 1 and 2 every 2 weeks. RESULTS: Two grade 3/4 aflibercept-associated DLTs occurred with 4 mg/kg: proteinuria lasting >2 weeks and acute nephrotic syndrome with thrombotic microangiopathy. Two DLTs with 5mg/kg (grade 3 stomatitis and grade 3 oesophagitis reflux) and three with 6 mg/kg (febrile neutropenia, grade 3 stomatitis and grade 3 abdominal pain) were considered related to concurrent chemotherapy and underlying disease. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were neutropenia, hypertension and diarrhoea. Nine patients had partial responses, five with 4 mg/kg. Twenty-two patients had stable disease (five with 4 mg/kg), lasting >3 months in 17 patients. No anti-aflibercept antibodies were detected. Free aflibercept was in excess of bound in most patients on 4 mg/kg. CONCLUSION: Based on pharmacokinetics, acceptable safety and encouraging antitumour activity, aflibercept 4 mg/kg was selected as the RPTD with irinotecan and LV5FU2 every 2 weeks.

Phase I dose-escalation study of intravenous aflibercept in combination with docetaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: This phase I study cohort investigated aflibercept in combination with docetaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic or nonresectable cancer for which docetaxel was considered appropriate. Patients received intravenous aflibercept (either 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, or 9 mg/kg) with docetaxel (75 mg/m(2)) on day 1 every 3 weeks until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary objectives were to evaluate dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) during cycle 1 and to determine the aflibercept recommended phase II trial dose (RP2D) for combination with docetaxel. Pharmacokinetics, tolerability, and antitumor activity were also investigated. RESULTS: Fifty-four patients (mean age, 56 y) were enrolled. Most had prior chemotherapy (96%) and most (24.1%) had breast cancer. In the dose-escalation phase (n = 34), there were three DLTs: grade 4 neutropenic infection (2 mg/kg), grade 3 dysphonia (7 mg/kg), and grade 2 hypertension (9 mg/kg). An excess of free-over-bound aflibercept was observed at doses of 5 mg/kg or more. The pharmacokinetics of aflibercept and docetaxel were not modified by coadministration. Aflibercept (6 mg/kg) was defined as the RP2D based on DLT and pharmacokinetic data. Overall, the most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events (AE) were neutropenia (85.2%), leukopenia (74.1%), hypertension (18.5%), and stomatitis (16.7%). AEs associated with vascular endothelial growth factor blockade included epistaxis (all grades, 83.3%), proteinuria (68.5%), dysphonia (68.5%), and hypertension (53.7%). Seven patients had partial responses, and 32 patients had stable disease (>3 months in 18 patients). CONCLUSION: On the basis of findings from this study, aflibercept (6 mg/kg) was the dose recommended for further clinical development.

A phase II study of irinotecan in children with relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma: a European cooperation of the Société Française d'Oncologie Pédiatrique (SFOP) and the United Kingdom Children Cancer Study Group (UKCCSG).

PURPOSE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of irinotecan in paediatric recurrent or refractory neuroblastoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Thirty seven patients aged between 6 months and < or = 20 years, with relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma, received irinotecan at 600 mg/m(2) administered as a 60-min infusion, every 3 weeks. Tumour response was evaluated by conventional radiological and mIBG scans every two cycles. RESULTS: No objective response was observed during the study. Stable disease was observed in 13% of evaluable patients. Median times to progression and survival were 1.4 months (range, 1.2-1.5 months) and 8.8 months (range, 6.7-11.3 months), respectively. One forty two cycles were administered, with a median of two cycles per patient (range, 1-17 cycles). The most common grade 3-4 toxicities were neutropenia (65% of patients), anaemia (43%), thrombocytopenia (38%), vomiting (14%), abdominal pain or cramping (8%), and nausea (5%). CONCLUSION: Irinotecan administered intravenously as a single agent every 3 weeks induced no objective response in relapsed or refractory neuroblastoma.

Phase II trial of irinotecan in children with relapsed or refractory rhabdomyosarcoma: a joint study of the French Society of Pediatric Oncology and the United Kingdom Children's Cancer Study Group.

PURPOSE: This phase II study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of irinotecan administered intravenously once every 3 weeks in pediatric patients with recurrent or refractory rhabdomyosarcoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 35 patients younger than age 20 years, with refractory or relapsed rhabdomyosarcoma for which standard treatments have failed, received irinotecan at 600 mg/m2 administered as a 60-minute infusion every 3 weeks. Concomitant treatments included atropine for cholinergic symptoms, loperamide for diarrhea at the first liquid stool, and preventive antiemetic treatment. Tumor response was assessed every two cycles until progression according to WHO criteria. RESULTS: The best overall response rate to irinotecan was 11.4% (95% CI, 3.2 to 26.7%; 2.9% complete responses, 8.5% partial responses) from all patients recruited. The median times to progression and survival were 1.4 and 5.8 months, respectively. A total of 112 cycles were administered, with a median number of two cycles per patient (range, 1 to 16). The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were neutropenia (46%), abdominal pain or cramping (17%), cholinergic syndrome (14%), nausea/vomiting (11%), anemia (11%), thrombocytopenia (9%), and diarrhea (6%). CONCLUSION: In heavily pretreated children with a high tumor burden who have been treated with multiagent chemotherapy, irinotecan administered intravenously as a single agent, at 600 mg/m2 every 3 weeks, showed an interesting objective response rate and a good tolerance profile in rhabdomyosarcoma.

Phase II multi-institutional randomized trial of docetaxel plus cisplatin with or without fluorouracil in patients with untreated, advanced gastric, or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to define the contribution of docetaxel to combination chemotherapy in the outcome of patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma. We compared the overall response rate (ORR) and safety of docetaxel plus cisplatin (DC) with DC plus fluorouracil (DCF) to select either DC or DCF as the experimental treatment in the ensuing phase III part of trial V-325. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase II randomized study, untreated patients with confirmed advanced gastric or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma received either DCF (docetaxel 75 mg/m2, cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1, and fluorouracil 750 mg/m2/d as continuous infusion on days 1 to 5) or DC (docetaxel 85 mg/m2 and cisplatin 75 mg/m2 on day 1) every 3 weeks. An independent data monitoring committee (IDMC) was to select one of the two regimens based primarily on ORR and safety profile. RESULTS: Of 158 randomly assigned patients, 155 (DCF, n = 79; DC, n = 76) received treatment. The confirmed ORR was 43% for DCF (n = 79) and 26% for DC (n = 76). Median time to progression was 5.9 months for DCF and 5.0 months for DC. Median overall survival time was 9.6 months for DCF and 10.5 months for DC. The most frequent grade 3 and 4 events per patient included neutropenia (DCF = 86%; DC = 87%) and GI (DCF = 56%; DC = 30%). CONCLUSION: Both regimens were active, but DCF produced a higher confirmed ORR than DC. Toxicity profiles of DCF were considered manageable. The IDMC chose DCF for the phase III part of V-325, which compares DCF with cisplatin plus fluorouracil.

Phase I pharmacokinetic, food effect, and pharmacogenetic study of oral irinotecan given as semisolid matrix capsules in patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To characterize the maximum-tolerated dose, recommended dose, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), pharmacokinetic profile, and food effect of orally administered irinotecan formulated as new semisolid matrix capsules. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Irinotecan was given orally in fasted patients once daily for 5 consecutive days and repeated every 3 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned to take the drug along with a high-fat, high-calorie breakfast for the administration at day 1 of the first or second cycle. Dosages tested were 70 and 80 mg/m(2)/day. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients received 101 cycles of therapy (median two cycles, range 1-15). During the first cycle, grade 3 delayed diarrhea and grade 3 fever were the DLTs at the dosage of 80 mg/m(2)/day in three out of five patients. Hematologic and nonhematologic toxicities were mild to moderate. Exposure to the active metabolite SN-38 was relatively high compared with i.v. infusion, but no relevant accumulation was observed. Food had no significant effect on irinotecan pharmacokinetics. One confirmed partial remission and 10 disease stabilizations were observed in previously treated patients. No association was found between the UGT1A1*28 genotype and the risk of severe irinotecan-induced toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: For oral irinotecan, a dose of 70 mg/m(2)/day for 5 consecutive days every 3 weeks is recommended for further studies. Delayed diarrhea was the main DLT, similar to that observed with intravenously administered irinotecan. This study confirms that oral administration of irinotecan is feasible and may have favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of oral irinotecan given once daily for 5 days every 3 weeks in combination with capecitabine in patients with solid tumors.

PURPOSE: To assess the maximum tolerated dose, dose-limiting toxicity, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of oral irinotecan given in combination with capecitabine to patients with advanced, refractory solid tumors. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were treated from day 1 with irinotecan capsules given once daily for 5 consecutive days (50 to 60 mg/m2/d) concomitantly with capecitabine given twice daily for 14 consecutive days (800 to 1,000 mg/m2); cycles were repeated every 21 days. RESULTS: Twenty-eight patients were enrolled and received 155 cycles of therapy (median, five cycles; range, one to 18 cycles). With irinotecan 60 mg/m2/d and capecitabine 2 x 800 mg/m2/d, grade 3 delayed diarrhea in combination with grade 2 nausea (despite maximal antiemetic support) and grade 3 anorexia and colitis, were the first-cycle dose-limiting toxicities in two of six patients, respectively. At the recommended doses (irinotecan 50 mg/m2/d; capecitabine 2 x 1,000 mg/m2/d), side effects were mostly mild to moderate and uniformly reversible. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed that there was no interaction between oral irinotecan and capecitabine, and that body-surface area was not significantly contributing to the observed pharmacokinetic variability. Confirmed partial responses were observed in two patients with gallbladder carcinoma and in one patient with melanoma. Disease stabilization was noted in 16 patients. CONCLUSION: The recommended phase II doses for oral irinotecan and capecitabine are 50 mg/m2/d for 5 consecutive days, and 2 x 1,000 mg/m2/d for 14 consecutive days repeated every 3 weeks, respectively.

Phase I study of an oral formulation of irinotecan administered daily for 14 days every 3 weeks in patients with advanced solid tumours.

A phase I study was conducted with oral irinotecan given daily for 14 days every 3 weeks in 45 patients with solid tumours to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), toxicity, preliminary antitumour response and pharmacokinetics. Irinotecan was administered orally as a powder-filled capsule at doses ranging from 7.5 to 40 mg/m2 per day. Tumours were predominantly colorectal (30) together with 10 other gastrointestinal, 2 breast, 2 small cell lung and 1 ovarian. All but three patients had received prior chemotherapy. The median number of administered cycles was 3 (range 1-19). Gastrointestinal toxicities (grade 3 nausea, grade 3/4 vomiting and diarrhoea) and one incidence of grade 3 asthenia were dose limiting. There were no grade 3/4 haematological toxicities. The MTD was 30 mg/m2 per day. There were two documented partial responses, one in a patient with cancer of the small intestine and the other in a patient with colon cancer. Stable disease was seen in 16 patients (35.5%). Peak concentrations of irinotecan and metabolite SN-38 were reached within 2.0-2.4 h. The metabolic ratio of SN-38 AUC to irinotecan AUC was 0.17+/-0.10 (mean+/-SD). The dose recommended for phase II studies is 30 mg/m2 per day administered daily for 14 days every 3 weeks.