Effectiveness of change from suvorexant to lemborexant drug in the treatment of sleep disorders.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to examine the effects of a change in medication from suvorexant to lemborexant among patients with insomnia. METHODS: Patients with chronic insomnia who had persistent insomnia for 3 months or longer and who had been taking suvorexant for 3 months or longer were selected. The participants were divided into two groups: the 'modified' group and the 'non-modified' group. Four sub-types of insomnia (i.e., difficulty initiating sleep, difficulty maintaining sleep, early-morning awakening, and non-restorative sleep) were investigated. Logistic regression was used to investigate improvements in both the groups after 12 weeks. RESULTS: Among the 77 participants, 43 and 34 patients were in the modified drug group and the non-modified drug group, respectively. Comparing sleep disorders between the two groups, we found significant improvement after 12 weeks in the modified drug group in terms of difficulty initiating sleep, compared with the non-modified drug group (odds ratio = 0.036, P = 0.008, 95% CI = 0.003-0.415). However, no significant differences were found between the two groups in terms of difficulty maintaining sleep, early-morning awakening, and non-restorative sleep. CONCLUSIONS: Sleep disorders can be treated by alleviating difficulties in initiating sleep by changing from suvorexant to lemborexant. In addition, it was confirmed that the drug change caused no serious side effects and that it was highly safe and tolerated.

Population Pharmacokinetics and Exposure-Safety Relationships of Alisertib in Children and Adolescents With Advanced Malignancies.

Population pharmacokinetic (PK) and exposure-safety analyses of alisertib were performed in children enrolled in 2 clinical trials: NCT02444884 and NCT01154816. NCT02444884 was a dose-finding study in children with relapsed/refractory solid malignancies (phase 1) or neuroblastomas (phase 2). Patients received oral alisertib 45 to 100 mg/m2 as powder-in-capsule once daily or twice daily for 7 days in 21-day cycles. Serial blood samples were collected up to 24 hours after dosing on cycle 1, day 1. NCT01154816 was a phase 2 single-arm study evaluating efficacy in children with relapsed/refractory solid malignancies or acute leukemias. Patients received alisertib 80 mg/m2 as enteric-coated tablets once daily for 7 days in 21-day cycles. Sparse PK samples were collected up to 8 hours after dosing on cycle 1, day 1. Sources of alisertib PK variability were characterized and quantified using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling to support dosing recommendations in children and adolescents. A 2-compartment model with oral absorption described by 3 transit compartments was developed using data from 146 patients. Apparent oral clearance and central distribution volume were correlated with body surface area across the age range of 2 to 21 years, supporting the use of body surface area-based alisertib dosing in the pediatric population. The recommended dose of 80 mg/m2 once daily enteric-coated tablets provided similar alisertib exposures across pediatric age groups and comparable exposure to that in adults receiving 50 mg twice daily (recommended adult dose). Statistically significant relationships (P < .01) were observed between alisertib exposures and incidence of grade ≥2 stomatitis and febrile neutropenia, consistent with antiproliferative mechanism-related toxicities.

Phase 1 study combining alisertib with nab-paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

AIM: Aurora kinase A (AURKA) is a pleiotropic serine/threonine kinase that orchestrates mitotic progression. Paclitaxel stabilises microtubules and disrupts mitotic spindle assembly. The combination of AURKA inhibitor (alisertib) plus paclitaxel may be synergistic in rapidly proliferative cancers. We evaluated the safety and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of alisertib in combination with nab-paclitaxel and its preliminary efficacy in patients with refractory high-grade neuroendocrine tumours (NETs). METHOD: This is a two-part, Phase 1 study. In Part A (dose escalation), a standard 3 + 3 design was used to determine MTD. In Part B (dose expansion), patients with predominantly refractory high-grade NETs were enrolled. RESULTS: In total, 31 patients were enrolled and treated (16 in Part A and 15 in Part B). The MTD of alisertib was 40 mg BID on D1-3 per week and nab-paclitaxel 100mg/m2 weekly: 3 weeks, 1 week off. Dose-limiting toxicity was neutropenia, and other common side-effects included fatigue, mucositis, and diarrhoea. In Part A, a patient with small-cell lung cancer with partial response (PR) was treated for more than 2 years, whereas four other patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma (one patient), small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (two patients), or high-grade NET (one patient) achieved stable disease (SD). In Part B, 13 of 15 enrolled patients had high-grade NETs. Of these, one had PR, and four had SD for more than 10 months. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of alisertib and nab-paclitaxel has manageable side-effect profile and showed promising preliminary efficacy in high-grade NETs, warranting further testing. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01677559.

Effects of benzodiazepine and orexin receptor antagonist on cognitive function revealed by auditory event-related potentials.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive decline after oral administration of sedatives, such as benzodiazepines, is a serious side effect. Suvorexant, an orexin receptor antagonist, has a favorable tolerability and a limited side-effect profile. AIM: The purpose of this study was to estimate the cognitive decline 1 day after oral medication with lormetazepam, a benzodiazepine, and suvorexant by comparing mismatch negativity (MMN) and P300 reflecting auditory discrimination function. METHODS: Sixty healthy subjects (42 males) were randomly assigned to three groups receiving suvorexant 20 mg, lormetazepam 2 mg, or placebo in this double-blind, randomized control study. Event-related potential recordings during an auditory oddball task and a digit symbol substitution test (DSST) were performed 1 day after oral administration. RESULTS: MMN, on the day after oral administration, was significantly attenuated in the lormetazepam group compared with the other two groups, but there was no difference between the suvorexant and placebo groups. No significant difference was found in P300 amplitudes and DSST scores among the three groups. CONCLUSION: These findings suggest that suvorexant, unlike benzodiazepine, is not associated with cognitive deficits, as revealed by MMN but not P300. This study shows a neurophysiological difference in the effects of suvorexant and benzodiazepine on cognitive function.

Effects of Bedtime Dosing With Suvorexant and Zolpidem on Balance and Psychomotor Performance in Healthy Elderly Participants During the Night and in the Morning.

PURPOSE/BACKGROUND: This study was designed as an early assessment of the safety of the orexin receptor antagonist suvorexant, but also included exploratory assessments of balance and psychomotor performance that are the focus of this report. METHODS/PROCEDURES: This was a double-blind, randomized, 3-period, crossover, phase 1 study. Balance and psychomotor performance were evaluated during the night in 12 healthy elderly participants after bedtime administration of suvorexant 30 mg (a supratherapeutic dose), the GABAergic agonist zolpidem 5 mg (the recommended dose in the elderly), or placebo. Balance (body sway measured by platform stability) and psychomotor performance (measured by choice reaction time) were assessed predose and at 1.5, 4, and 8 hours postdose in each period. Memory (measured by word recall) was assessed predose and at 4 hours postdose. FINDINGS/RESULTS: At 1.5 hours after nighttime administration of each drug (the approximate time of their anticipated maximal plasma concentrations), both zolpidem and suvorexant increased body sway versus placebo, with a greater increase for zolpidem than suvorexant. Suvorexant increased choice reaction time compared with placebo or zolpidem at 1.5 hours. There were no treatment differences on body sway or choice reaction time at 4 or 8 hours, or on word recall at 4 hours. IMPLICATIONS/CONCLUSIONS: These exploratory data suggest that a 30-mg dose of suvorexant (supratherapeutic) and a 5-mg dose of zolpidem (recommended dose in the elderly) impaired balance at 1.5 hours in healthy elderly people, with potentially less impairment for suvorexant relative to zolpidem, but no treatment differences on body sway or psychomotor performance at 4 and 8 hours. Because of their exploratory nature, these findings and their clinical relevance, if any, require confirmation in a prospective study.

Prompt improvement of difficulty with sleep initiation and waking up in the morning and daytime somnolence by combination therapy of suvorexant and ramelteon in delayed sleep-wake phase disorder: a case series of three patients.

Patients with delayed sleep-wake phase disorder (DSWPD) suffer from difficulties in sleep initiation at night, difficulties in waking up at the socially required time, and daytime somnolence. About half of the patients resist conventional light therapy and melatonin therapy. Therapy using hypnotics is not recommended due to its adverse effects. Recently, suvorexant, an orexin receptor antagonist, has become available for clinical use. The drug is relatively safer than traditional hypnotics such as benzodiazepines. We report three DSWPD patients who were successfully treated by the combination therapy of suvorexant and ramelteon. The first case was a 19-year-old woman who was experiencing difficulties in sleep initiation, difficulty in waking up in the morning, and daytime somnolence. She showed a prompt response to the combination therapy of suvorexant and ramelteon. Her sleep phase advanced, and her daytime somnolence reduced. The second and third cases were 21-year-old and 17-year-old men, respectively, who also showed significant sleep phase advances. Although case 2 was resistant to ramelteon treatment, his sleep phase advanced after suvorexant started. His difficulty in falling asleep and his habit of daytime napping disappeared after the combination therapy of suvorexant and ramelteon was started. Case 3 also showed a prompt response. His difficulties in falling asleep and waking up in the morning were ameliorated immediately after suvorexant with ramelteon was started. No obvious side effects were observed. Therapy using the combination therapy of suvorexant and ramelteon might be a reasonable option for DSWPD patients.

A Phase 1 study of RO6870810, a novel bromodomain and extra-terminal protein inhibitor, in patients with NUT carcinoma, other solid tumours, or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

BACKGROUND: Bromodomain and extra-terminal (BET) proteins are epigenetic readers that can drive carcinogenesis and therapy resistance. RO6870810 is a novel, small-molecule BET inhibitor. METHODS: We conducted a Phase 1 study of RO6870810 administered subcutaneously for 21 or 14 days of 28- or 21-day cycles, respectively, in patients with the nuclear protein of the testis carcinoma (NC), other solid tumours, or diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) with MYC deregulation. RESULTS: Fatigue (42%), decreased appetite (35%) and injection-site erythema (35%) were the most common treatment-related adverse events. Pharmacokinetic parameters demonstrated linearity over the dose range tested and support once-daily dosing. Pharmacodynamic assessments demonstrated sustained decreases in CD11b levels in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Objective response rates were 25% (2/8), 2% (1/47) and 11% (2/19) for patients with NC, other solid tumours and DLBCL, respectively. Responding tumours had evidence of deregulated MYC expression. CONCLUSIONS: This trial establishes the safety, favourable pharmacokinetics, evidence of target engagement and preliminary single-agent activity of RO6870810. Responses in patients with NC, other solid tumours and DLBCL provide proof-of-principle for BET inhibition in MYC-driven cancers. The results support further exploration of RO6870810 as monotherapy and in combinations. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: NCT01987362.

Pharmacotherapies for sleep disturbances in dementia.

BACKGROUND: Sleep disturbances, including reduced nocturnal sleep time, sleep fragmentation, nocturnal wandering, and daytime sleepiness are common clinical problems in dementia, and are associated with significant carer distress, increased healthcare costs, and institutionalisation. Although non-drug interventions are recommended as the first-line approach to managing these problems, drug treatment is often sought and used. However, there is significant uncertainty about the efficacy and adverse effects of the various hypnotic drugs in this clinically vulnerable population. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects, including common adverse effects, of any drug treatment versus placebo for sleep disorders in people with dementia. SEARCH METHODS: We searched ALOIS (www.medicine.ox.ac.uk/alois), the Cochrane Dementia and Cognitive Improvement Group's Specialized Register, on 19 February 2020, using the terms: sleep, insomnia, circadian, hypersomnia, parasomnia, somnolence, rest-activity, and sundowning. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared a drug with placebo, and that had the primary aim of improving sleep in people with dementia who had an identified sleep disturbance at baseline. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently extracted data on study design, risk of bias, and results. We used the mean difference (MD) or risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as the measures of treatment effect, and where possible, synthesised results using a fixed-effect model. Key outcomes to be included in our summary tables were chosen with the help of a panel of carers. We used GRADE methods to rate the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We found nine eligible RCTs investigating: melatonin (5 studies, n = 222, five studies, but only two yielded data on our primary sleep outcomes suitable for meta-analysis), the sedative antidepressant trazodone (1 study, n = 30), the melatonin-receptor agonist ramelteon (1 study, n = 74, no peer-reviewed publication), and the orexin antagonists suvorexant and lemborexant (2 studies, n = 323). Participants in the trazodone study and most participants in the melatonin studies had moderate-to-severe dementia due to Alzheimer's disease (AD); those in the ramelteon study and the orexin antagonist studies had mild-to-moderate AD. Participants had a variety of common sleep problems at baseline. Primary sleep outcomes were measured using actigraphy or polysomnography. In one study, melatonin treatment was combined with light therapy. Only four studies systematically assessed adverse effects. Overall, we considered the studies to be at low or unclear risk of bias. We found low-certainty evidence that melatonin doses up to 10 mg may have little or no effect on any major sleep outcome over eight to 10 weeks in people with AD and sleep disturbances. We could synthesise data for two of our primary sleep outcomes: total nocturnal sleep time (TNST) (MD 10.68 minutes, 95% CI -16.22 to 37.59; 2 studies, n = 184), and the ratio of day-time to night-time sleep (MD -0.13, 95% CI -0.29 to 0.03; 2 studies; n = 184). From single studies, we found no evidence of an effect of melatonin on sleep efficiency, time awake after sleep onset, number of night-time awakenings, or mean duration of sleep bouts. There were no serious adverse effects of melatonin reported. We found low-certainty evidence that trazodone 50 mg for two weeks may improve TNST (MD 42.46 minutes, 95% CI 0.9 to 84.0; 1 study, n = 30), and sleep efficiency (MD 8.53%, 95% CI 1.9 to 15.1; 1 study, n = 30) in people with moderate-to-severe AD. The effect on time awake after sleep onset was uncertain due to very serious imprecision (MD -20.41 minutes, 95% CI -60.4 to 19.6; 1 study, n = 30). There may be little or no effect on number of night-time awakenings (MD -3.71, 95% CI -8.2 to 0.8; 1 study, n = 30) or time asleep in the day (MD 5.12 minutes, 95% CI -28.2 to 38.4). There were no serious adverse effects of trazodone reported. The small (n = 74), phase 2 trial investigating ramelteon 8 mg was reported only in summary form on the sponsor's website. We considered the certainty of the evidence to be low. There was no evidence of any important effect of ramelteon on any nocturnal sleep outcomes. There were no serious adverse effects. We found moderate-certainty evidence that an orexin antagonist taken for four weeks by people with mild-to-moderate AD probably increases TNST (MD 28.2 minutes, 95% CI 11.1 to 45.3; 1 study, n = 274) and decreases time awake after sleep onset (MD -15.7 minutes, 95% CI -28.1 to -3.3: 1 study, n = 274) but has little or no effect on number of awakenings (MD 0.0, 95% CI -0.5 to 0.5; 1 study, n = 274). It may be associated with a small increase in sleep efficiency (MD 4.26%, 95% CI 1.26 to 7.26; 2 studies, n = 312), has no clear effect on sleep latency (MD -12.1 minutes, 95% CI -25.9 to 1.7; 1 study, n = 274), and may have little or no effect on the mean duration of sleep bouts (MD -2.42 minutes, 95% CI -5.53 to 0.7; 1 study, n = 38). Adverse events were probably no more common among participants taking orexin antagonists than those taking placebo (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.99; 2 studies, n = 323). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We discovered a distinct lack of evidence to guide decisions about drug treatment of sleep problems in dementia. In particular, we found no RCTs of many widely prescribed drugs, including the benzodiazepine and non-benzodiazepine hypnotics, although there is considerable uncertainty about the balance of benefits and risks for these common treatments. We found no evidence for beneficial effects of melatonin (up to 10 mg) or a melatonin receptor agonist. There was evidence of some beneficial effects on sleep outcomes from trazodone and orexin antagonists and no evidence of harmful effects in these small trials, although larger trials in a broader range of participants are needed to allow more definitive conclusions to be reached. Systematic assessment of adverse effects in future trials is essential.

Non-GABA sleep medications, suvorexant as risk factors for falls: Case-control and case-crossover study.

The aim of this study was to examine the risk of falls associated with the use of non-gamma amino butyric acid (GABA) sleep medications, suvorexant and ramelteon. This case-control and case-crossover study was performed at the Kudanzaka Hospital, Chiyoda Ward, Tokyo. A total of 325 patients who had falls and 1295 controls matched by sex and age were included. The inclusion criteria for the case group were hospitalized patients who had their first fall and that for the control were patients who were hospitalized and did not have a fall, between January 2016 and November 2018. The internal sleep medications administered were classified as suvorexant, ramelteon, non-benzodiazepines, benzodiazepines, or kampo. In the case-control study, age, sex, clinical department, the fall down risk score, and hospitalized duration were adjusted in the logistic regression model. In the case-control study, multivariable logistic regression showed that the use of suvorexant (odds ratio [OR]: 2.61, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.29-5.28), nonbenzodiazepines (OR: 2.49, 95% CI: 1.73-3.59), and benzodiazepines (OR: 1.65, 95% CI: 1.16-2.34) was significantly associated with an increased OR of falls. However, the use of ramelteon (OR: 1.40, 95% CI: 0.60-3.16) and kampo (OR: 1.55, 95% CI: 0.75-3.19) was not significantly associated with an increased OR of falls. In the case-crossover study, the use of suvorexant (OR: 1.78, 95% CI: 1.05-3.00) and nonbenzodiazepines (OR: 1.63, 95% CI: 1.17-2.27) was significantly associated with an increased OR of falls. Similar patterns were observed in several sensitivity analyses. It was suggested that suvorexant increases the OR of falls. This result is robust in various analyses. This study showed that the risk of falls also exists for non-GABA sleep medication, suvorexant, and thus it is necessary to carefully prescribe hypnotic drugs under appropriate assessment.

Suvorexant for the prevention of delirium: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Delirium is a frequently encountered complication, which is associated with increased mortality. Suvorexant, an approved agent for the treatment of insomnia, is recently suggested to be also effective for prevention of delirium by some authors. However, a consensus has yet to be reached. The goal of this study was to perform a meta-analysis to overall estimate the effectiveness of suvorexant in preventing delirium and its related consequences. METHODS: Eligible studies were identified by searching online databases of PubMed, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library. The pooled OR was calculated for binary outcomes (e.g., the incidence of delirium, mortality, or adverse events), while standardized mean difference (SMD) were expressed for continuous outcomes (e.g., time to delirium onset, length of stay in hospital and ICU, time on ventilation). RESULTS: Seven studies which comprised 402 suvorexant treatment patients and 487 patients with control treatment were included in this meta-analysis. Overall, pooled analysis indicated the incidence of delirium could be significantly reduced (OR, 0.30; P < .001) and time to delirium onset was significantly lengthened (SMD, 0.44; P = .006) in patients undergoing suvorexant treatment compared with controls. Suvorexant had no beneficial effects on the secondary outcomes [length of stay in hospital (SMD, -0.65; P = .161) and ICU (SMD, 0.34; P = .297), time on ventilation (SMD, 1.09; P = .318), drug-related adverse events (OR, drug-related adverse events (OR, 1.66; P = .319) and mortality (OR, 2.21; P = .261)]. Subgroup analysis also confirmed the benefit of suvorexant on the development of delirium, which was significant in any subgroup. CONCLUSION: Suvorexant should be recommended for the prevention of delirium in clinic.

The role of suvorexant in the prevention of delirium during acute hospitalization: A systematic review.

PURPOSE: To assess the efficacy and safety of suvorexant for the prevention of delirium during acute hospitalization. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Pubmed (1946 to December 2019) and Embase (1947 to December 2019) were queried using the search term combination: delirium, confusion, cognitive defect, encephalopathy, critically ill patient, critical illness, or hospitalization and suvorexant or orexin receptor antagonist. Studies analyzed for relevance evaluated clinical outcomes of patients treated with suvorexant for prevention of delirium. Studies appropriate to the objective were evaluated, including two randomized controlled trials and four retrospective studies. RESULTS: In acutely hospitalized patients, treatment with suvorexant 15 to 20 mg alone or in combination with ramelteon resulted in a reduction in development of delirium, time until delirium onset, and length of hospital stay. When assessed, suvorexant was well tolerated and adverse effects were no worse than placebo. CONCLUSION: Based on the reviewed literature, suvorexant has shown positive outcomes in the prevention of delirium during an acute hospitalization. Larger trials comparing the efficacy of suvorexant to other sleep modulating options are necessary to further delineate its role for the prevention of delirium.

Association of Hypnotic Drug Use with Fall Incidents in Hospitalized Elderly Patients: A Case-Crossover Study.

We investigated whether use of hypnotic drugs, including benzodiazepine receptor agonists, as well as ramelteon and suvorexant are associated with fall incidents in elderly inpatients aged no less than 75 years, who were hospitalized at an acute care general hospital in Japan, between November 1st, 2016 and October 31st, 2017. Multivariate analysis results were reported as odds ratio (OR) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Following to a case-crossover study protocol, the time windows of the case and the control days were assigned to the day or the days, which are one day or 2-8 d before the fall incidents, respectively. In the enrolled 111 patients, the accumulated total available numbers of the cases and the control days were 111 and 554 patient days, respectively. Hypnotic drug use was significantly associated with fall incidents (OR: 2.85, 95% CI: 1.03-7.90, p = 0.04). Especially benzodiazepine receptor agonists (OR: 5.79, 95% CI: 1.52-22.1, p = 0.01) showed statistically significant association with fall incidents. In contrast, neither ramelteon (OR: 7.95, 95% CI: 0.72-87.9, p = 0.09) nor suvorexant (OR: 0.25, 95% CI: 0.06-1.06, p = 0.06) were significantly associated with fall incidents. Thus, benzodiazepine receptor agonists, but not ramelteon or suvorexant, showed significant association with fall incidents. Therefore, special care should be taken especially when benzodiazepine receptor agonists are administrated to elderly subjects. In contrast, fall risk may be much less in patients treated with ramelteon or suvorexant. These results could help us to conduct safer drug treatment for insomnia patients aged no less than 75 years.

Preclinical and Dose-Finding Phase I Trial Results of Combined Treatment with a TORC1/2 Inhibitor (TAK-228) and Aurora A Kinase Inhibitor (Alisertib) in Solid Tumors.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rational combination of TORC1/2 inhibitor TAK-228 and Aurora A kinase inhibitor alisertib in preclinical models of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and to conduct a phase I dose escalation trial in patients with advanced solid tumors. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: TNBC cell lines and patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models were treated with alisertib, TAK-228, or the combination and evaluated for changes in proliferation, cell cycle, mTOR pathway modulation, and terminal cellular fate, including apoptosis and senescence. A phase I clinical trial was conducted in patients with advanced solid tumors treated with escalating doses of alisertib and TAK-228 using a 3+3 design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). RESULTS: The combination of TAK-228 and alisertib resulted in decreased proliferation and cell-cycle arrest in TNBC cell lines. Treatment of TNBC PDX models resulted in significant tumor growth inhibition and increased apoptosis with the combination. In the phase I dose escalation study, 18 patients with refractory solid tumors were enrolled. The MTD was alisertib 30 mg b.i.d. days 1 to 7 of a 21-day cycle and TAK-228 2 mg daily, continuous dosing. The most common treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia, fatigue, nausea, rash, mucositis, and alopecia. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of TAK-228 to alisertib potentiates the antitumor activity of alisertib in vivo, resulting in increased cell death and apoptosis. The combination is tolerable in patients with advanced solid tumors and should be evaluated further in expansion cohorts with additional pharmacodynamic assessment.

Phase 1 study of the protein deubiquitinase inhibitor VLX1570 in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma.

This phase 1 study sought to characterize the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic behavior of VLX1570, a small molecule inhibitor of the deubiquitinases (DUBs) that remove sterically bulky ubiquitin chains from proteins during processing in the19S regulatory subunit of the proteasome, in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM). Fourteen patients were treated with escalating doses of VLX1570 ranging from 0.05 to 1.2 mg/kg as a brief intravenous (IV) infusion on Days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 of a 28-day cycle. Due to its poor aqueous solubility, VLX1570 was formulated in polyethylene glycol, polyoxyethylated castor oil, and polysorbate 80 and administered as a brief intravenous (IV) infusion via a central venous catheter. Anti-myeloma effects were noted at doses at or above 0.6 mg/kg, however, two patients treated at the 1.2 mg/kg dose level experienced severe, abrupt, and progressive respiratory insufficiency, which was associated with diffuse pulmonary infiltrates on imaging studies, similar to those rarely noted with bortezomib and other inhibitors of the 20S proteasome, culminating in death. Although the contribution of VLX1570's formulation to the pulmonary toxicity could not be ruled out, the severity and precipitous nature of the toxicity and the steep relationship between dose and toxicity, the study was discontinued. Despite the severe pulmonary toxicity noted with VLX1570, efforts directed at identifying DUB inhibitors with greater therapeutic indices appear warranted based on the unique mechanism of action, robustness of preclinical antitumor activity, and activity of the DUB inhibitors in MM resistant to PIs targeting the 20S proteasome subunit.

Alisertib plus induction chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with high-risk, acute myeloid leukaemia: a single-arm, phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Increased aurora A kinase (AAK) expression occurs in acute myeloid leukaemia; AAK inhibition is a promising therapeutic target in this disease. We therefore aimed to assess the activity of alisertib combined with 7 + 3 induction chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with high-risk acute myeloid leukaemia. METHODS: We did a single-arm, phase 2 trial of patients recruited from the Dana-Farber/Harvard Cancer Center in the USA. Eligible patients had previously untreated acute myeloid leukaemia, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2, and were at high risk of disease as defined by the presence of an adverse-risk karyotype, the presence of secondary acute myeloid leukaemia arising from previous myelodysplastic syndrome or myeloproliferative neoplasm, the presence of therapy-related acute myeloid leukaemia, or being 65 years or older. Enrolled patients received 7 + 3 induction chemotherapy of continuous infusion of cytarabine (100 mg/m2 per day on days 1-7) and intravenous bolus of idarubicin (12 mg/m2 per day on days 1-3). Oral alisertib (30 mg) was given twice per day on days 8-15. Patients could receive up to four consolidation cycles with cytarabine and alisertib, and alisertib maintenance for 12 months. The primary endpoint was a composite including the proportion of patients achieving complete remission and those with a complete remission with incomplete neutrophil or platelet count recovery. Analyses were per-protocol. This study is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT02560025, and has completed enrolment. FINDINGS: Between Dec 31, 2015, and Aug 1, 2017, we enrolled a total of 39 eligible patients. 19 (49%) of 39 patients had secondary acute myeloid leukaemia and three (8%) had therapy-related acute myeloid leukaemia. At mid-induction, 33 (85%) of 39 patients showed marrow aplasia, six (15%) received re-induction. The median follow-up was 13·7 months (IQR 12·7-14·4). Composite remission was 64% (two-stage 95% CI 48-79), with 20 (51%) of 39 patients achieving complete remission and five (13%) achieving complete remission with incomplete neutrophil or platelet count recovery. The most common grade 3 or 4 adverse events included febrile neutropenia (16 [41%] of 39), neutropenia (12 [31%]), thrombocytopenia (13 [33%]), anaemia (11 [28%]), anorexia (nine [23%]), and oral mucositis (four [10%]). No treatment-related deaths were observed. INTERPRETATION: These results suggest that alisertib combined with induction chemotherapy is active and safe in previously untreated patients with high-risk acute myeloid leukaemia. This study met criteria to move forward to a future randomised trial. FUNDING: Millennium Pharmaceuticals.