Treatment Patterns, Survival, Quality of Life, and Healthcare Resource Use Among Patients With Triple-Class Refractory Multiple Myeloma in US Clinical Practice: Findings From the Connect MM Disease Registry.

BACKGROUND: Adults with triple-class refractory (TCR) multiple myeloma (MM) have limited treatment options and poor prognosis, but the burden of TCR MM has not been well characterized. This study evaluated treatment patterns, overall survival (OS), health-related quality of life (HRQoL), and healthcare resource use (HCRU) among patients with TCR MM in US clinical practice. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with TCR MM in the Connect MM Registry (NCT01081028; a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of patients with newly diagnosed MM) were included. Patient characteristics, treatment patterns, HRQoL, and HCRU were analyzed using descriptive statistics. OS was calculated using Kaplan-Meier methodology for the overall cohort and for patients with/without ≥1 post-TCR line of therapy (LOT). RESULTS: A total of 232 patients with TCR MM were included; 155 (67%) had ≥1 post-TCR LOT (post-TCR-Treated subgroup; median 9.9 months of follow-up). Most common post-TCR treatments were carfilzomib (47%), pomalidomide (40%), and daratumumab (26%); median treatment duration was 3.3 months. Median OS was 9.9 months in the overall population, 10.8 months in post-TCR-Treated patients, and 2.6 months for those with no new post-TCR LOT. HRQoL deteriorated and pain increased over 1 year of follow-up, with clinically meaningfully changes in EQ-5D (mean, -0.06 points) and FACT-G (mean, -9.9 points). 124 (53%) patients had ≥1 all-cause hospitalization and 58 (25%) had ≥1 MM-related hospitalization; median annualized length of stay was 35.3 and 42.9 days, respectively. CONCLUSION: The burden of TCR MM is substantial, emphasizing the need for more effective treatment options in the TCR setting.

Elotuzumab Plus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone for Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Final Overall Survival Analysis From the Randomized Phase II ELOQUENT-3 Trial.

PURPOSE: In the phase II ELOQUENT-3 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02654132), elotuzumab combined with pomalidomide/dexamethasone (EPd) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus pomalidomide/dexamethasone (Pd) in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) previously treated with lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor (PI). Here, we present the final overall survival (OS) results. METHODS: Patients with RRMM who had received ≥ 2 prior lines of therapy, with disease refractory to last therapy and either refractory or relapsed and refractory to lenalidomide and a PI were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive EPd or Pd. The primary end point was PFS per investigator assessment. ORR and OS were secondary end points planned to be tested hierarchically. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients were randomly assigned to EPd (n = 60) and Pd (n = 57). Among treated patients (EPd 60, Pd 55), there were 37 (61.7%) deaths in the EPd group and 41 (74.5%) in the Pd group, most commonly because of disease progression (EPd 41.7%, Pd 49.1%). Median (95% CI) OS was significantly improved with EPd (29.8 [22.9 to 45.7] months) versus Pd (17.4 [13.8 to 27.7] months), with a hazard ratio of 0.59 (95% CI, 0.37 to 0.93; P = .0217). OS benefit with EPd was observed in most patient subgroups. The safety profile of EPd was consistent with prior reports with no new safety signals detected. CONCLUSION: EPd demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in OS versus Pd in patients with RRMM previously treated with lenalidomide and a PI who had disease refractory to last therapy. In this setting, ELOQUENT-3 is the first randomized study of a triplet regimen incorporating a monoclonal antibody and Pd to improve both PFS and OS significantly.

Addition of elotuzumab to lenalidomide and dexamethasone for patients with newly diagnosed, transplantation ineligible multiple myeloma (ELOQUENT-1): an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Elotuzumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone has shown improved progression-free and overall survival versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. We aimed to assess these regimens in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for haematopoietic stem-cell transplantation (HSCT). METHODS: ELOQUENT-1 is an open-label, multicentre, randomised, phase 3 trial conducted at 185 hospitals, oncology practices, and research centres in 19 countries. Eligible patients were aged 18 years or older with newly diagnosed, untreated, symptomatic myeloma and not candidates for high-dose therapy plus HSCT, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 2 or lower. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive elotuzumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone or lenalidomide and dexamethasone using an interactive voice response system, stratified by the International Staging System (ISS; stage I-II vs III), age (<75 years vs ≥75 years), and ECOG performance status (0 vs 1-2). Patients in the elotuzumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group received elotuzumab administered intravenously at 10 mg/kg on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 during cycles 1 and 2, days 1 and 15 during cycles 3-18, and then at 20 mg/kg on day 1 for subsequent cycles. In both treatment groups, patients received 25 mg lenalidomide orally on days 1-21 of each cycle and 40 mg dexamethasone on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of each cycle. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, as per the primary definition from European Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation criteria in all randomly assigned patients (intention-to-treat population). This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT01335399 (completed). FINDINGS: Between Aug 4, 2011, and June 19, 2014, 748 patients were randomly assigned (374 in each treatment group) and 742 patients received treatment (333 (90%) of 371 in the elotuzumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group vs 339 (91%) of 371 in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group discontinued treatment). The median age of patients was 73·0 years (IQR 69·0-78·0), 294 (39%) patients were 75 years or older. Most patients were White (711 [95%]) and male (412 [55%]). At a minimum follow-up of 65·3 months, the median progression-free survival was not significantly different between the groups: 31·4 months (95% CI 26·2-36·8) in the elotuzumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone group versus 29·5 months (23·5-34·3) in the lenalidomide and dexamethasone group (HR 0·93, 95·71% CI 0·77-1·12; stratified log-rank p=0·44). The median follow-up was 70·6 months (IQR 35·1-79·2). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse event was neutropenia (64 [17%] of 371 vs 79 [21%] of 371). Study drug toxicity was the reported cause of death in five (1%) versus four (1%) patients. INTERPRETATION: Elotuzumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone did not significantly improve progression-free survival versus lenalidomide and dexamethasone in patients with newly diagnosed multiple myeloma who are ineligible for HSCT. Although these data contribute to the treatment landscape, further research is needed to find ways to improve treatments in the front-line setting. FUNDING: Bristol Myers Squibb.

Elotuzumab, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone in RRMM: final overall survival results from the phase 3 randomized ELOQUENT-2 study.

Prolonging overall survival (OS) remains an unmet need in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). In ELOQUENT-2 (NCT01239797), elotuzumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (ERd) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus lenalidomide/dexamethasone (Rd) in patients with RRMM and 1-3 prior lines of therapy (LoTs). We report results from the pre-planned final OS analysis after a minimum follow-up of 70.6 months, the longest reported for an antibody-based triplet in RRMM. Overall, 646 patients with RRMM and 1-3 prior LoTs were randomized 1:1 to ERd or Rd. PFS and overall response rate were co-primary endpoints. OS was a key secondary endpoint, with the final analysis planned after 427 deaths. ERd demonstrated a statistically significant 8.7-month improvement in OS versus Rd (median, 48.3 vs 39.6 months; hazard ratio, 0.82 [95.4% Cl, 0.68-1.00]; P = 0.0408 [less than allotted α of 0.046]), which was consistently observed across key predefined subgroups. No additional safety signals with ERd at extended follow-up were reported. ERd is the first antibody-based triplet regimen shown to significantly prolong OS in patients with RRMM and 1-3 prior LoTs. The magnitude of OS benefit was greatest among patients with adverse prognostic factors, including older age, ISS stage III, IMWG high-risk disease, and 2-3 prior LoTs.

Elotuzumab plus Pomalidomide and Dexamethasone for Multiple Myeloma.

BACKGROUND: The immunostimulatory monoclonal antibody elotuzumab plus lenalidomide and dexamethasone has been shown to be effective in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma. The immunomodulatory agent pomalidomide plus dexamethasone has been shown to be effective in patients with multiple myeloma that is refractory to lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. METHODS: Patients with multiple myeloma that was refractory or relapsed and refractory to lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor were randomly assigned to receive elotuzumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone (elotuzumab group) or pomalidomide and dexamethasone alone (control group). The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 117 patients were randomly assigned to the elotuzumab group (60 patients) or the control group (57 patients). After a minimum follow-up period of 9.1 months, the median progression-free survival was 10.3 months in the elotuzumab group and 4.7 months in the control group. The hazard ratio for disease progression or death in the elotuzumab group as compared with the control group was 0.54 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.34 to 0.86; P=0.008). The overall response rate was 53% in the elotuzumab group as compared with 26% in the control group (odds ratio, 3.25; 95% CI, 1.49 to 7.11). The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events were neutropenia (13% in the elotuzumab group vs. 27% in the control group), anemia (10% vs. 20%), and hyperglycemia (8% vs. 7%). A total of 65% of the patients in each group had infections. Infusion reactions occurred in 3 patients (5%) in the elotuzumab group. CONCLUSIONS: Among patients with multiple myeloma in whom treatment with lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor had failed, the risk of progression or death was significantly lower among those who received elotuzumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone than among those who received pomalidomide plus dexamethasone alone. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and AbbVie Biotherapeutics; ELOQUENT-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02654132 .).

Elotuzumab monotherapy in patients with smouldering multiple myeloma: a phase 2 study.

Smouldering multiple myeloma (SMM) is associated with increased risk of progression to multiple myeloma within 2 years, with no approved treatments. Elotuzumab has been shown to promote natural killer (NK) cell stimulation and antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity (ADCC) in vitro. CD56dim (CD56dim /CD16+ /CD3- /CD45+ ) NK cells represent the primary subset responsible for elotuzumab-induced ADCC. In this phase II, non-randomized study (NCT01441973), patients with SMM received elotuzumab 20 mg/kg intravenously (cycle 1: days 1, 8; monthly thereafter) or 10 mg/kg (cycles 1, 2: weekly; every 2 weeks thereafter). The primary endpoint was the relationship between baseline proportion of bone marrow-derived CD56dim NK cells and maximal M protein reduction; secondary endpoints included overall response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS). Fifteen patients received 20 mg/kg and 16 received 10 mg/kg; combined data arepresented. At database lock (DBL, September 2014), no association was found between baseline CD56dim NK cell proportion and maximal M protein reduction. With minimum 28 months' follow-up (DBL: January 2016), ORR (90% CI) was 10% (2·7-23·2) and 2-year PFS rate was 69% (52-81%). Upper respiratory tract infections occurred in 18/31 (58%) patients. Four (13%) patients experienced infusion reactions, all grade 1-2. Elotuzumab plus lenalidomide/dexamethasone is under investigation for SMM.

Phase 1 safety, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor dinaciclib administered every three weeks in patients with advanced malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Dinaciclib is a potent inhibitor of cell cycle and transcriptional cyclin-dependent kinases. This Phase 1 study evaluated the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics of various dosing schedules of dinaciclib in advanced solid tumour patients and assessed pharmacodynamic and preliminary anti-tumour activity. METHODS: In part 1, patients were enrolled in escalating cohorts of 2-h infusions administered once every 3 weeks, utilising an accelerated titration design until a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) was defined. In part 2, 8- and 24-h infusions were evaluated. Pharmacokinetic parameters were determined for all schedules. Pharmacodynamic effects were assessed with an ex vivo stimulated lymphocyte proliferation assay performed in whole blood.Effects of dinaciclib on retinoblastoma (Rb) phosphorylation and other CDK targets were evaluated in skin and tumour biopsies. In addition to tumour size, metabolic response was evaluated by 18F-fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography. RESULTS: Sixty-one patients were enrolled to parts 1 and 2. The RP2Ds were 50, 7.4 and 10.4 mg m-2 as 2- 8- and 24-hour infusions, respectively. Dose-limiting toxicities included pancytopenia, neutropenic fever, elevated transaminases, hyperuricemia and hypotension. Pharmacokinetics demonstrated rapid distribution and a short plasma half-life. Dinaciclib suppressed proliferation of stimulated lymphocytes. In skin and tumour biopsies, dinaciclib reduced Rb phosphorylation at CDK2 phospho-sites and modulated expression of cyclin D1 and p53, suggestive of CDK9 inhibition. Although there were no RECIST responses, eight patients had prolonged stable disease and received between 6 and 30 cycles. Early metabolic responses occurred. CONCLUSIONS: Dinaciclib is tolerable at doses demonstrating target engagement in surrogate and tumour tissue.

Effects of elotuzumab on QT interval and cardiac safety in patients with multiple myeloma.

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of elotuzumab on corrected QT (QTc) intervals and cardiac safety. METHODS: Patients with high-risk smoldering multiple myeloma who had been treated with elotuzumab monotherapy (10 or 20 mg/kg) in Study CA204011 (NCT01441973) underwent electrocardiogram (ECG) examination over 8-10 weeks (treatment cycles 1-3). ECG intervals and changes relative to baseline were assessed. The key ECG endpoint was change from baseline in QT interval corrected with Fridericia's method (ΔQTcF). The relationship between elotuzumab concentration and ΔQTcF was assessed using time-matched ΔQTcF data and linear regression. Adverse events (AEs) potentially related to abnormal ECG findings were summarized. RESULTS: There was no trend of change from baseline in QTcF, PR and QRS intervals among all 31 evaluable patients from Study CA204011, and no patient assessed had a QTcF interval >480 ms or a ΔQTcF >60 ms. Concentration-response modeling indicated that there was no significant relationship between ΔQTcF and elotuzumab serum concentration: Upper limits of 90% confidence intervals for mean change in QTcF were <10 ms over the range of observed elotuzumab concentrations. No ECG-assessed patient had an AE associated with abnormal ECG findings potentially related to proarrhythmia. CONCLUSIONS: Study CA204011 ECG data indicate that elotuzumab treatment was not associated with QT/QTc prolongation. Concentration-response modeling demonstrated that baseline-adjusted QTcF changes did not cross thresholds for clinical or regulatory concern.

Randomized clinical trial of the safety and efficacy of sitagliptin and metformin co-administered to Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus.

INTRODUCTION: The results of a clinical trial to evaluate the efficacy and safety of initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and metformin in Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycemic control are reported here. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, 24-week clinical trial carried out in China. Patients (n = 744) with type 2 diabetes and inadequate glycemic control (glycated hemoglobin ≥7.5 and ≤11.0%) who were either drug-naïve or washed out of previous therapy were randomized in equal ratios to sitagliptin 100 mg once daily (q.d.; S100), metformin 500 mg twice daily (b.i.d.; M1000), metformin 850 mg b.i.d. (M1700), sitagliptin 50 mg b.i.d. plus metformin 500 mg b.i.d. (S100/M1000), sitagliptin 50 mg b.i.d. plus metformin 850 mg b.i.d. (S100/M1700), or placebo. RESULTS: The mean baseline glycated hemoglobin in randomized patients was 8.7%. Least squares mean changes from baseline in glycated hemoglobin were -0.59% (placebo), -0.99% (S100), -1.29% (M1000), -1.56% (M1700), -1.67% (S100/M1000) and -1.83% (S100/M1700) (P < 0.05 for each active group vs placebo, for S100/M1700 and S100/M1000 vs S100, and for S100/M1000 vs M1000). All treatments were generally well-tolerated. The overall incidence of hypoglycemia (symptomatic or asymptomatic) was higher in the two co-administration groups (S100/M1700 and S100/M1000) compared with the placebo. The incidence of symptomatic hypoglycemia was low, and similar, across all treatment groups. The incidences of gastrointestinal adverse events were generally higher in high-dose metformin groups than in the placebo group. CONCLUSIONS: In Chinese patients with type 2 diabetes, initial combination therapy with sitagliptin and metformin was generally well-tolerated, and provided improvement in glycemic control.

Randomized phase 2 study: elotuzumab plus bortezomib/dexamethasone vs bortezomib/dexamethasone for relapsed/refractory MM.

In this proof-of-concept, open-label, phase 2 study, patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) received elotuzumab with bortezomib and dexamethasone (EBd) or bortezomib and dexamethasone (Bd) until disease progression/unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary/exploratory endpoints included overall response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). Two-sided 0.30 significance level was specified (80% power, 103 events) to detect hazard ratio (HR) of 0.69. Efficacy and safety analyses were performed on all randomized patients and all treated patients, respectively. Of 152 randomized patients (77 EBd, 75 Bd), 150 were treated (75 EBd, 75 Bd). PFS was greater with EBd vs Bd (HR, 0.72; 70% confidence interval [CI], 0.59-0.88; stratified log-rank P = .09); median PFS was longer with EBd (9.7 months) vs Bd (6.9 months). In an updated analysis, EBd-treated patients homozygous for the high-affinity FcγRIIIa allele had median PFS of 22.3 months vs 9.8 months in EBd-treated patients homozygous for the low-affinity allele. ORR was 66% (EBd) vs 63% (Bd). Very good partial response or better occurred in 36% of patients (EBd) vs 27% (Bd). Early OS results, based on 40 deaths, revealed an HR of 0.61 (70% CI, 0.43-0.85). To date, 60 deaths have occurred (28 EBd, 32 Bd). No additional clinically significant adverse events occurred with EBd vs Bd. Grade 1/2 infusion reaction rate was low (5% EBd) and mitigated with premedication. In patients with RRMM, elotuzumab, an immunostimulatory antibody, appears to provide clinical benefit without added clinically significant toxicity when combined with Bd vs Bd alone. Registered to ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01478048.

Antitumor activity in RAS-driven tumors by blocking AKT and MEK.

PURPOSE: KRAS is the most commonly mutated oncogene in human tumors. KRAS-mutant cells may exhibit resistance to the allosteric MEK1/2 inhibitor selumetinib (AZD6244; ARRY-142886) and allosteric AKT inhibitors (such as MK-2206), the combination of which may overcome resistance to both monotherapies. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We conducted a dose/schedule-finding study evaluating MK-2206 and selumetinib in patients with advanced treatment-refractory solid tumors. Recommended dosing schedules were defined as MK-2206 at 135 mg weekly and selumetinib at 100 mg once daily. RESULTS: Grade 3 rash was the most common dose-limiting toxicity (DLT); other DLTs included grade 4 lipase increase, grade 3 stomatitis, diarrhea, and fatigue, and grade 3 and grade 2 retinal pigment epithelium detachment. There were no meaningful pharmacokinetic drug-drug interactions. Clinical antitumor activity included RECIST 1.0-confirmed partial responses in non-small cell lung cancer and low-grade ovarian carcinoma. CONCLUSION: Responses in KRAS-mutant cancers were generally durable. Clinical cotargeting of MEK and AKT signaling may be an important therapeutic strategy in KRAS-driven human malignancies (Trial NCT number NCT01021748).

Randomized phase II trial of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor dinaciclib (MK-7965) versus capecitabine in patients with advanced breast cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Effective therapies after failure of treatment with anthracyclines and taxanes are needed for patients with metastatic breast cancer. Dinaciclib (MK-7965, formerly SCH727965), a small-molecule cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, has demonstrated antitumor activity in phase I studies with solid-tumor patients. This phase II trial was designed to assess the efficacy and safety of dinaciclib compared with that of capecitabine in women with previously treated advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive either dinaciclib at 50 mg/m(2), administered as a 2-hour infusion every 21 days, or 1250 mg/m(2) capecitabine, administered orally twice daily in 21-day cycles. RESULTS: An unplanned interim analysis showed that the time to disease progression was inferior with dinaciclib treatment compared with capecitabine treatment; therefore, the trial was stopped after 30 patients were randomized. Dinaciclib treatment demonstrated antitumor activity in 2 of 7 patients with estrogen receptor-positive and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative metastatic breast cancer (1 confirmed and 1 unconfirmed partial response), as well as acceptable safety and tolerability. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events were common and included neutropenia, leukopenia, increase in aspartate aminotransferase, and febrile neutropenia. Population pharmacokinetic model-predicted mean dinaciclib exposure (area under the concentration-time curve extrapolated to infinity [AUC[I]]) at 50 mg/m(2) was similar to that observed in a previous phase I trial, and no drug accumulation was observed after multiple-dose administration. CONCLUSION: Although dinaciclib monotherapy demonstrated some antitumor activity and was generally tolerated, efficacy was not superior to capecitabine. Future studies may be considered to evaluate dinaciclib in select patient populations with metastatic breast cancer and in combination with other agents.

Randomized phase 2 study of the cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor dinaciclib (MK-7965) versus erlotinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer.

OBJECTIVES: Dinaciclib (MK-7965, formerly SCH 727965), a novel, small-molecule inhibitor of cyclin-dependent kinases, has been shown to induce apoptosis in preclinical studies of human tumor cell lines, including non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) cells. Erlotinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor, is approved for the treatment of advanced NSCLC as second- or third-line therapy. This phase 2, randomized, multicenter, open-label study compared dinaciclib with erlotinib in patients with previously treated NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The study was comprised of 2 parts: in part 1, patients were randomized to either intravenous (IV) dinaciclib (50 mg/m2) or oral erlotinib (150 mg) using an adaptive Bayesian design that adjusted the randomization ratio in favor of the more active arm, and in part 2, patients who had progressed on erlotinib were permitted to cross over to receive dinaciclib at the same dosage as in part 1. Patients were followed until disease progression or death, initiation of nonstudy cancer treatment, discontinuation, or withdrawal of consent. The primary efficacy end point was time-to-progression (TTP) in part 1 and objective response rate (ORR) in part 2. RESULTS: Based on Kaplan-Meier estimates, the median TTP was 1.49 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.31, 2.63) following initial treatment with dinaciclib, compared with 1.58 months (95% CI: 1.38, 2.83) with erlotinib. No objective responses were observed following initial treatment with dinaciclib. Common severe (grade 3 or 4) drug-related adverse effects included neutropenia, leukopenia, vomiting, and diarrhea. CONCLUSIONS: Dinaciclib, administered IV, was well tolerated at the 50 mg/m2 dose, but does not have activity as monotherapy in previously treated NSCLC. Evaluation of dinaciclib in combination with other agents for other indications including breast cancer and multiple myeloma is in progress.

A first-in-human, phase 1, dose-escalation study of dinaciclib, a novel cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, administered weekly in subjects with advanced malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Dinaciclib, a small-molecule, cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor, inhibits cell cycle progression and proliferation in various tumor cell lines in vitro. We conducted an open-label, dose-escalation study to determine the safety, tolerability, and bioactivity of dinaciclib in adults with advanced malignancies. METHODS: Dinaciclib was administered starting at a dose of 0.33 mg/m2, as a 2-hour intravenous infusion once weekly for 3 weeks (on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle), to determine the maximum administered dose (MAD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D), and safety and tolerability. Pharmacodynamics of dinaciclib were assessed using an ex vivo phytohemagglutinin lymphocyte stimulation assay and immunohistochemistry staining for retinoblastoma protein phosphorylation in skin biopsies. Evidence of antitumor activity was assessed by sequential computed tomography imaging after every 2 treatment cycles. RESULTS: Forty-eight subjects with solid tumors were treated. The MAD was found to be 14 mg/m2 and the RP2D was determined to be 12 mg/m2; DLTs at the MAD included orthostatic hypotension and elevated uric acid. Forty-seven (98%) subjects reported adverse events (AEs) across all dose levels; the most common AEs were nausea, anemia, decreased appetite, and fatigue. Dinaciclib administered at the RP2D significantly inhibited lymphocyte proliferation, demonstrating a pharmacodynamic effect. Ten subjects treated at a variety of doses achieved prolonged stable disease for at least 4 treatment cycles. CONCLUSIONS: Dinaciclib administered every week for 3 weeks (on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle) was generally safe and well tolerated. Initial bioactivity and observed disease stabilization support further evaluation of dinaciclib as a treatment option for patients with advanced solid malignancies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov # NCT00871663.

Clinical and laboratory studies of the novel cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor dinaciclib (SCH 727965) in acute leukemias.

PURPOSE: Dinaciclib inhibits cyclin-dependent kinases 1, 2, 5, and 9 with a better therapeutic index than flavopiridol in preclinical studies. This study assessed the activity of dinaciclib in acute leukemia both in the clinic and in vitro. METHODS: Adults with relapsed/refractory acute myeloid leukemia (n = 14) and acute lymphoid leukemia (n = 6) were treated with dinaciclib 50 mg/m(2) given as a 2-h infusion every 21 days. RESULTS: Most patients had dramatic but transient reduction in circulating blasts; however, no remissions were achieved on this schedule. The most common toxicities were gastrointestinal, fatigue, transaminitis, and clinical and laboratory manifestations of tumor lysis syndrome, including one patient who died of acute renal failure. Dinaciclib pharmacokinetics showed rapid (2 h) achievement of maximum concentration and a short elimination/distribution phase. Pharmacodynamic studies demonstrated in vivo inhibition of Mcl-1 expression and induction of PARP cleavage in patients' peripheral blood mononuclear cells 4 h after dinaciclib infusion, but the effects were lost by 24 h and did not correlate with clinical outcome. Correlative in vitro studies showed that prolonged exposures to dinaciclib, at clinically attainable concentrations, result in improved leukemia cell kill. CONCLUSIONS: While dinaciclib given as a 2-h bolus did not exhibit durable clinical activity, pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data support the exploration of prolonged infusion schedules in future trials in patients with acute leukemias.