Lurbinectedin, a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription, in patients with pretreated germline BRCA1/2 metastatic breast cancer: results from a phase II basket study.

BACKGROUND: Lurbinectedin, a selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription, has shown preclinical antitumor activity against homologous recombination repair-deficient models and preliminary clinical activity in BRCA1/2 breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This phase II basket multitumor trial (NCT02454972) evaluated lurbinectedin 3.2 mg/m2 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks in a cohort of 21 patients with pretreated germline BRCA1/2 breast cancer. Patients with any hormone receptor and human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 status were enrolled. The primary efficacy endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) according to RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. RESULTS: Confirmed partial response (PR) was observed in six patients [ORR = 28.6%; 95% confidence interval (CI) 11.3% to 52.2%] who had received a median of two prior advanced chemotherapy lines. Lurbinectedin was active in both BRCA mutations: four PRs in 11 patients (36.4%) with BRCA2 and two PRs in 10 patients (20.0%) with BRCA1. Median DoR was 8.6 months, median PFS was 4.1 months and median OS was 16.1 months. Stable disease (SD) was observed in 10 patients (47.6%), including 3 with unconfirmed response in a subsequent tumor assessment [ORR unconfirmed = 42.9% (95% CI 21.8% to 66.0%)]. Clinical benefit rate (PR + SD ≥ 4 months) was 76.2% (95% CI 52.8% to 91.8%). No objective response was observed among patients who had received prior poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors. The most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were nausea (61.9%), fatigue (38.1%) and vomiting (23.8%). These AEs were mostly grade 1/2. The most common grade 3/4 toxicity was neutropenia (42.9%: grade 4, 23.8%: with no febrile neutropenia). CONCLUSIONS: This phase II study met its primary endpoint and showed activity of lurbinectedin in germline BRCA1/2 breast cancer. Lurbinectedin showed a predictable and manageable safety profile. Considering the exploratory aim of this trial as well as previous results in other phase II studies, further development of lurbinectedin in this indication is warranted.

Metabolic Disposition of Lurbinectedin, a Potent Selective Inhibitor of Active Transcription of Protein-Coding Genes, in Nonclinical Species and Patients.

Lurbinectedin is a novel and potent selective inhibitor of active transcription of protein-coding genes, triggering apoptosis of cancerous cells. It has been approved for the treatment of patients with metastatic small-cell lung cancer with disease progression on or after platinum-based chemotherapy. Studies exploring the disposition and metabolism of lurbinectedin were performed in vitro and in vivo (by intravenous administration of lurbinectedin). Low blood cell partitioning for lurbinectedin in rats, nonhuman primates (NHP), and humans was determined as 23.4%, 29.8%, and 9.8%, respectively. Protein binding was very high (>95%) in total plasma (rat, NHP, and human), albumin, and α-1-acid glycoprotein (both human). In vitro, lurbinectedin underwent intense liver microsome-mediated metabolism-in 10 minutes, 80% of the compound is metabolized in human-with CYP3A4 being the isoform involved in that metabolism. Results also showed NHPs being the nonclinical species which, metabolically, most closely resembles humans. Mass balance studies performed in rats (both genders), NHPs (male only), and patients (both genders) demonstrated that the principal route of excretion of 14C-lurbinectedin-related radioactivity was through the feces (88.7% ± 10.1% in patients), with only a minor fraction recovered from the urine (5.6% ± 2.0% in patients). In plasma samples, the majority of lurbinectedin-related radioactivity was attributed to unchanged compound (95% ± 3.1% and 70.2% ± 10.9% in NHPs and humans, respectively). Plasma metabolic profiling demonstrated the major (% compared with unchanged compound) circulating metabolites were N-Desmethyl-lurbinectedin (0.4% ± 0.2% and 10.4% ± 2.2% in NHPs and patients, respectively) and 1',3'-Desmethylene-lurbinectedin (0.9% ± 0.7% and 14.3% ± 10.4% in NHP and patients, respectively). SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT: Lurbinectedin is a novel and potent selective inhibitor of active transcription of protein-coding genes, triggering apoptosis of cancerous cells, and was recently approved for the treatment of patients with metastatic small-cell lung cancer with disease progression on or after platinum-based chemotherapy. The present study provides a complete set of information on the pharmacokinetics, biotransformation, and elimination of 14C-lurbinectedin and its metabolites, following a single intravenous administration to nonclinical species (rats and nonhuman primates) and patients.

Alectinib versus crizotinib in treatment-naive anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer: CNS efficacy results from the ALEX study.

Background: The phase III ALEX study in patients with treatment-naive advanced anaplastic lymphoma kinase mutation-positive (ALK+) non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) met its primary end point of improved progression-free survival (PFS) with alectinib versus crizotinib. Here, we present detailed central nervous system (CNS) efficacy data from ALEX. Patients and methods: Overall, 303 patients aged ≥18 years underwent 1:1 randomization to receive twice-daily doses of alectinib 600 mg or crizotinib 250 mg. Brain imaging was conducted in all patients at baseline and every subsequent 8 weeks. End points (analyzed by subgroup: patients with/without baseline CNS metastases; patients with/without prior radiotherapy) included PFS, CNS objective response rate (ORR), and time to CNS progression. Results: In total, 122 patients had Independent Review Committee-assessed baseline CNS metastases (alectinib, n = 64; crizotinib, n = 58), 43 had measurable lesions (alectinib, n = 21; crizotinib, n = 22), and 46 had received prior radiotherapy (alectinib, n = 25; crizotinib, n = 21). Investigator-assessed PFS with alectinib was consistent between patients with baseline CNS metastases [hazard ratio (HR) 0.40, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.25-0.64] and those without (HR 0.51, 95% CI: 0.33-0.80, P interaction = 0.36). Similar results were seen in patients regardless of prior radiotherapy. Time to CNS progression was significantly longer with alectinib versus crizotinib and comparable between patients with and without baseline CNS metastases (P < 0.0001). CNS ORR was 85.7% with alectinib versus 71.4% with crizotinib in patients who received prior radiotherapy and 78.6% versus 40.0%, respectively, in those who had not. Conclusion: Alectinib demonstrated superior CNS activity and significantly delayed CNS progression versus crizotinib in patients with previously untreated, advanced ALK+ NSCLC, irrespective of prior CNS disease or radiotherapy. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02075840.

Alectinib versus chemotherapy in crizotinib-pretreated anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer: results from the phase III ALUR study.

Background: This is the first trial to directly compare efficacy and safety of alectinib versus standard chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK)-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients who have progressed on, or were intolerant to, crizotinib. Patients and methods: ALUR (MO29750; NCT02604342) was a randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase III trial of alectinib versus chemotherapy in advanced/metastatic ALK-positive NSCLC patients previously treated with platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and crizotinib. Patients were randomized 2 : 1 to receive alectinib 600 mg twice daily or chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 or docetaxel 75 mg/m2, both every 3 weeks) until disease progression, death, or withdrawal. Primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Altogether, 107 patients were randomized (alectinib, n = 72; chemotherapy, n = 35) in 13 countries across Europe and Asia. Median investigator-assessed PFS was 9.6 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 6.9-12.2] with alectinib and 1.4 months (95% CI: 1.3-1.6) with chemotherapy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.15 (95% CI: 0.08-0.29); P < 0.001]. Independent Review Committee-assessed PFS was also significantly longer with alectinib [HR 0.32 (95% CI: 0.17-0.59); median PFS was 7.1 months (95% CI: 6.3-10.8) with alectinib and 1.6 months (95% CI: 1.3-4.1) with chemotherapy]. In patients with measurable baseline central nervous system (CNS) disease (alectinib, n = 24; chemotherapy, n = 16), CNS objective response rate was significantly higher with alectinib (54.2%) versus chemotherapy (0%; P < 0.001). Grade ≥3 adverse events were more common with chemotherapy (41.2%) than alectinib (27.1%). Incidence of AEs leading to study-drug discontinuation was lower with alectinib (5.7%) than chemotherapy (8.8%), despite alectinib treatment duration being longer (20.1 weeks versus 6.0 weeks). Conclusion: Alectinib significantly improved systemic and CNS efficacy versus chemotherapy for crizotinib-pretreated ALK-positive NSCLC patients, with a favorable safety profile. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02604342; Roche study MO29750.

Dose escalation to rash for erlotinib plus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer: the phase II RACHEL study.

BACKGROUND: This phase II, open-label, randomised study evaluated whether patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer receiving erlotinib/gemcitabine derived survival benefits from increasing the erlotinib dose. METHODS: After a 4-week run-in period (gemcitabine 1000 mg m(-2) once weekly plus erlotinib 100 mg per day), patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer who developed grade 0/1 rash were randomised to receive gemcitabine plus erlotinib dose escalation (150 mg, increasing by 50 mg every 2 weeks (maximum 250 mg); n=71) or gemcitabine plus standard-dose erlotinib (100 mg per day; n=75). The primary end point was to determine whether overall survival (OS) was improved by increasing the erlotinib dose. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), incidence of grade ⩾2 rash, and safety. RESULTS: Erlotinib dose escalation induced grade ⩾2 rash in 29 out of 71 (41.4%) patients compared with 7 out of 75 (9.3%) patients on standard dose. Efficacy was not significantly different in the dose-escalation arm compared with the standard-dose arm (OS: median 7.0 vs 8.4 months, respectively, hazard ratio (HR), 1.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.88-1.80; P=0.2026; PFS: median 3.5 vs 4.5 months, respectively, HR, 1.09, 95% CI: 0.77-1.54; P=0.6298). Incidence of adverse events was comparable between randomised arms. CONCLUSION: The erlotinib dose-escalation strategy induced rash in some patients; there was no evidence that the higher dose translated into increased benefit.

Bioactivity of indigenous medicinal plants against the cotton whitefly, Bemisia tabaci.

Forty-one methanol extracts of 28 indigenous medicinal plant species were tested for their insecticidal bioactivity against cotton whitefly, Bemisia tabaci (Gennadius) (Hemiptera: Aleyrodidae), adults and second nymphal instars under controlled conditions. This study is within a bioprospection context, in the form of utilizing local plant species as an alternative in sustainable agriculture development. Eighteen and nine plant extracts caused a significant decrease in number of live adult and nymphal whiteflies, respectively, compared to the control. This is the first report for the potential effect on survival of insects for 22 out of 28 tested medicinal plant species. Whole plant extracts of Ranunculus myosuroudes Boiss. and Kotschy (Ranunculaceae), Achillea damascena L. (Asteraceae), and Anthemis hebronica Boiss. and Kotschy (Asteraceae) and leaf extracts of Verbascum leptostychum DC. (Scrophulariaceae) and Heliotropium rotundifolium Boiss. (Borangiaceae) caused both repellent and toxic effects against the adult and second nymphal instars, respectively. Extracts of leaves and stems of Anthemis scariosa Boiss. (Asteraceae) and Calendula palestina Pers. (Asteraceae) were found to be more bioactive against the adult and nymphal instars, respectively, than extracts of other plant parts, such as flowers. Thus, the bioactive extracts of these medicinal plants have the potential to lower whitefly populations in a comprehensive pest management program in local communities, pending cultivation of these medicinal plant species.

A phase II study of erlotinib in combination with bevacizumab versus chemotherapy plus bevacizumab in the first-line treatment of advanced non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Molecularly targeted agents for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) can provide similar efficacy to chemotherapy without chemotherapy-associated toxicities. Combining two agents with different modes of action could further increase the efficacy of these therapies. The TASK study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor erlotinib in combination with the anti-angiogenic agent bevacizumab as first-line therapy in unselected, advanced non-squamous NSCLC patients. METHODS: Patients were recruited from December 2007 to September 2008. Planned sample size was 200 patients, a total of 124 patients were randomized. Patients were randomized using a minimization algorithm 1:1 to receive bevacizumab (iv 15 mg/kg day 1 of each 21-day cycle) plus chemotherapy (gemcitabine/cisplatin or carboplatin/paclitaxel standard doses, 4-6 cycles) (BC arm) or bevacizumab plus erlotinib (p.o. 150 mg/day; BE arm) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). If the hazard ratio (HR) of PFS for BE relative to BC was above 1.25 at the pre-planned interim analysis in favor of BC, the study would be re-evaluated. Secondary endpoints included overall survival, response rate and safety. RESULTS: All randomized patients (n = 63 BE; n = 61 BC) were evaluated for the efficacy analyses. At the updated interim analysis, median PFS was 18.4 weeks (95% confidence interval [CI] 17.0-25.1) versus 25.0 weeks (95% CI 20.6-[not reached]) for BE versus BC, respectively (HR for death or disease progression, BE relative to BC, 2.05, p = 0.0183). The incidence of death was 19% for BE treatment compared with 11.5% for BC treatment. The HR for PFS at the updated interim analysis was above 1.25, therefore patients on the BE arm were permitted to change arms or switch to another drug and the study was terminated. Adverse events reported were as expected. CONCLUSIONS: The TASK study did not show a benefit in terms of PFS for the combination of erlotinib with bevacizumab in unselected first-line advanced non-squamous NSCLC compared with chemotherapy plus bevacizumab.

AVAglio: Phase 3 trial of bevacizumab plus temozolomide and radiotherapy in newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme.

Despite treatment with the current standard-of-care therapies, patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) exhibit dismal prognoses. Bevacizumab has demonstrated activity in patients with recurrent GBM and phase 2 trials indicate that the combination of bevacizumab with standard-of-care therapy is feasible and active for patients with newly diagnosed GBM. Bevacizumab has been granted US approval for use as single-agent therapy for patients with progressive GBM following prior therapy, although it has not received approval for use in patients with GBM in Europe. Phase 3 studies have been initiated in patients with newly diagnosed GBM and are currently recruiting patients. We describe the protocol for the AVAglio phase 3 registration trial, which is designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of combining bevacizumab with standard-of-care therapy in patients with newly diagnosed GBM.