Impact of Treatment Modality and Route of Administration on Cytokine Release Syndrome in Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: A Meta-Analysis.

B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-targeting immunotherapies (e.g., chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-T) and bispecific antibodies (BsAbs)) have achieved remarkable clinical responses in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Their use is accompanied by exaggerated immune responses related to T-cell activation and cytokine elevations leading to cytokine release syndrome (CRS) in some patients, which can be potentially life-threatening. However, systematic evaluation of the risk of CRS with BCMA-targeting BsAb and CAR-T therapies, and comparisons across different routes of BsAb administration (intravenous (i.v.) vs. subcutaneous (s.c.)) have not previously been conducted. This study utilized a meta-analysis approach to compare the CRS profile in BCMA-targeting CAR-T vs. BsAb immunotherapies administered either i.v. or s.c. in patients with RRMM. A total of 36 studies including 1,560 patients with RRMM treated with BCMA-targeting CAR-T and BsAb therapies were included in the analysis. The current analysis suggests that compared with BsAbs, CAR-T therapies were associated with higher CRS incidences (88% vs. 59%), higher rates of grade ≥ 3 CRS (7% vs. 2%), longer CRS duration (5 vs. 2 days), and more prevalent tocilizumab use (44% vs. 25%). The proportion of CRS grade ≥ 3 may also be lower (0% vs. 4%) for BsAb therapies administered via the s.c. (3 studies, n = 311) vs. i.v. (5 studies, n = 338) route. This meta-analysis suggests that different types of BCMA-targeting immunotherapies and administration routes could result in a range of CRS incidence and severity that should be considered while evaluating the benefit-risk profiles of these therapies.

Case-control matching-guided exposure-efficacy relationship for avelumab in patients with urothelial carcinoma.

Exposure-response (E-R) analyses are an integral component of understanding the benefit/risk profile of novel oncology therapeutics. These analyses are typically conducted using data from the treatment arm to characterize the relationship between drug exposure (low vs. high) and efficacy or safety outcomes. For example, outcomes of patients with lower exposure in the treatment arm (e.g., Q1) might be compared to outcomes of those with higher drug exposure (Q2, Q3, and Q4). Outcomes from the lowest exposure quartile may be also compared to the control arm to evaluate whether the Q1 subgroup derived clinical benefit. However, the sample size and the distribution of patient baseline characteristics and disease risk factors are not balanced in such a comparison (Q1 vs. control), which may bias the analysis and causal interpretation of clinical benefit in the Q1 subgroup. Herein, we report the use of case-control matching to account for this bias and better understand the E-R relationship for avelumab in urothelial carcinoma, a PD-L1 inhibitor approved for the treatment of several cancers. Data from JAVELIN-100 was utilized which is a phase III study of avelumab in first-line maintenance treatment in patients with urothelial carcinoma; this clinical study demonstrated superiority of avelumab versus best-supportive care leading to approval in the United States, Europe, and other countries. A post hoc case-control matching method was implemented to compare the efficacy outcome between Q1 avelumab subgroup and matched patients extracted from the control arm with similar baseline characteristics, which showed a clinically relevant difference in overall survival in favor of the Q1 avelumab subgroup. This analysis demonstrates the importance of accounting for imbalance in important baseline covariates when comparing efficacy outcomes between subgroups within the treatment arm versus the control arm.

Elranatamab in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma: phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial results.

Elranatamab is a humanized B-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)-CD3 bispecific antibody. In the ongoing phase 2 MagnetisMM-3 trial, patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma received subcutaneous elranatamab once weekly after two step-up priming doses. After six cycles, persistent responders switched to biweekly dosing. Results from cohort A, which enrolled patients without prior BCMA-directed therapy (n = 123) are reported. The primary endpoint of confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review was met with an ORR of 61.0% (75/123); 35.0% ≥complete response. Fifty responders switched to biweekly dosing, and 40 (80.0%) improved or maintained their response for ≥6 months. With a median follow-up of 14.7 months, median duration of response, progression-free survival and overall survival (secondary endpoints) have not been reached. Fifteen-month rates were 71.5%, 50.9% and 56.7%, respectively. Common adverse events (any grade; grade 3-4) included infections (69.9%, 39.8%), cytokine release syndrome (57.7%, 0%), anemia (48.8%, 37.4%), and neutropenia (48.8%, 48.8%). With biweekly dosing, grade 3-4 adverse events decreased from 58.6% to 46.6%. Elranatamab induced deep and durable responses with a manageable safety profile. Switching to biweekly dosing may improve long-term safety without compromising efficacy. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04649359 .

Optimizing benefit/risk in oncology: Review of post-marketing dose optimization and reflections on the road ahead.

Oncology therapies shifted from chemotherapy to molecularly targeted agents and finally to the era of immune-oncology agents. In contrast to cytotoxic agents, molecularly targeted agents are more selective, exhibit a wider therapeutic window, and may maximally modulate tumor growth at doses lower than the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). However, first-in-patient oncology studies for molecularly targeted agents continued to evaluate escalating doses using limited number of patients per dose cohort assessing dose-limiting toxicities to identify the MTD which is commonly selected for further development adopting a 'more is better' approach that led to several post-marketing requirement (PMR) studies to evaluate alternative, typically lower, doses or dosing frequencies to optimize the benefit-risk profile. In this review, post-marketing dose optimization efforts were reviewed including those required by a regulatory pathway or voluntarily conducted by the sponsor to improve efficacy, safety, or method of administration. Lessons learned and future implications from this deep dive review are discussed considering the evolving regulatory landscape on dose optimization for oncology compounds.

Design and conduct considerations for studies in patients with hepatic impairment.

Despite the liver being the primary site for clearance of xenobiotics utilizing a myriad of mechanisms ranging from cytochrome P450 enzyme pathways, glucuronidation, and biliary excretion, there is a dearth of information available as to how the severity of hepatic impairment (HI) can alter drug absorption and disposition (i.e., pharmacokinetics [PK]) as well as their efficacy and safety or pharmacodynamics (PD). In general, regulatory agencies recommend conducting PK studies in subjects with HI when hepatic metabolism/excretion accounts for more than 20% of drug elimination or if the drug has a narrow therapeutic range. In this tutorial, we provide an overview of the global regulatory landscape, clinical measures for hepatic function assessment, methods to stage HI severity, and consequently the impact on labeling. In addition, we provide an in-depth practical guidance for designing and conducting clinical trials for patients with HI and on the application of modeling and simulation strategies in lieu of dedicated trials for dosing recommendations in patients with HI.

Plain language summary of the design of the TALAPRO-2 study comparing talazoparib and enzalutamide versus enzalutamide and placebo in men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This summary describes the design of an ongoing research study (also known as a clinical trial) called TALAPRO-2. The TALAPRO-2 trial is testing the combination of two medicines called talazoparib and enzalutamide as a first treatment in adult men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The study began in December 2017 and has enrolled 1037 adult men with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer from 26 countries. WHAT IS METASTATIC CASTRATION-RESISTANT PROSTATE CANCER?: Metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer is a type of cancer that has advanced beyond the prostate and continues to grow even when testosterone levels in the blood are suppressed. WHICH MEDICINES ARE BEING TESTED?: The combination of talazoparib plus enzalutamide will be compared with enzalutamide plus placebo. Enzalutamide is approved to treat men with prostate cancer. Talazoparib is not approved to treat men with prostate cancer. A placebo does not contain any active ingredients and is also known as a sugar pill. WHAT ARE THE AIMS OF THE TALAPRO-2 TRIAL?: The TALAPRO-2 trial will find out if combining talazoparib with enzalutamide increases the length of time the men in the study live without their cancer getting worse compared with enzalutamide plus placebo. The study will also measure how long men in the study live and any side effects the men have while they are taking the study medicines. Researchers are also testing the DNA from the tumor cells of all men in the study to find out if they have faulty DNA repair genes. Clinical Trial Registration: NCT0339519 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Talazoparib plus enzalutamide in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer: TALAPRO-2 phase III study design.

PARP inhibitors in combination with androgen receptor-targeted therapy have demonstrated potential in the treatment of metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC). Here, we describe the design and rationale of the multinational, phase III, two-part TALAPRO-2 study comparing talazoparib plus enzalutamide versus placebo plus enzalutamide as a first-line treatment for patients with mCRPC with or without DNA damage response (DDR) alterations. This study has two co-primary end points: radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) by blinded independent clinical review in all-comers (cohort 1) and in patients with DDR alterations (cohort 2). TALAPRO-2 will demonstrate whether talazoparib plus enzalutamide can significantly improve the efficacy of enzalutamide in terms of rPFS in both molecularly unselected and DDR-deficient patients with mCRPC (NCT03395197). Clinical Trial Registration: NCT03395197 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Analysis of US Food and Drug Administration Oncology Approvals on the Characterization of Hepatic Impairment Effect and Dosing Recommendations.

Patients with cancer and advanced hepatic impairment (HI) (i.e., moderate and severe impairment) are often excluded from first-in-patient, phase II, and phase III studies. Thus, dose recommendations for this subgroup of patients are often derived using a combination of dedicated phase I studies conducted in participants without cancer and a population pharmacokinetic (PK) modeling approach. A standardized risk-based approach to guide the evaluation of HI in patients with cancer is needed. In this review, we evaluated available oncology drug approvals by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) from 1999 to 2019, identified strategies utilized by sponsors to characterize the effect of HI on the PK of oncology drugs, and assessed regulatory expectations for each strategy. Finally, we constructed a decision tree that complements current FDA guidance to enable efficient evaluation of the effect of HI on PK and provide guidance for dose recommendations.

Discordance Between Child-Pugh and National Cancer Institute Classifications for Hepatic Dysfunction: Implications on Dosing Recommendations for Oncology Compounds.

Guidance from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the European Medicines Agency recommends using Child-Pugh classification for pharmacokinetic evaluation in noncancer subjects with hepatic impairment (HI). Therefore, dosing recommendations for oncology compounds for patients with HI are commonly based on Child-Pugh classification. In oncology clinical practice, National Cancer Institute classification (NCIc), is commonly used for evaluating hepatic function and dosing decisions for oncology patients. This work evaluated the discordance between the 2 systems and the impact on dosing recommendations. The classification system in HI studies was reviewed for FDA-approved oncology compounds. Discordance between Child-Pugh and NCIc was evaluated for sunitinib, dacomitinib, palbociclib, bosutinib, and axitinib. Pharmacokinetic (PK) analyses were conducted based on Child-Pugh classification and NCIc. Review of 117 approved oncology compounds showed prevalent use of Child-Pugh classification for dedicated HI studies in noncancer subjects. NCIc is commonly used in cancer patient studies. NCIc tended to classify subjects as less impaired versus Child-Pugh (64.9%, 73.7%, and 61.5% of subjects with mild, moderate, and severe HI, respectively, via Child-Pugh were classified as at least 1 category less impaired via NCIc). PK analyses by NCIc were consistent with Child-Pugh for sunitinib, dacomitinib, and palbociclib. For bosutinib, NCIc showed less impact of HI than Child-Pugh; an opposite trend was observed for axitinib. The impact of this considerable discordance between the 2 systems on dosing decisions bears consideration. When Child-Pugh is used for HI study enrollment, exploratory PK analyses based on NCIc should be conducted. Prescribers should attempt to use the same classification system in the product label for dosing decisions.

Towards better combination regimens of cytarabine and FLT3 inhibitors in acute myeloid leukemia.

BACKGROUND: AML patients with FLT3/ITD mutations have poor response to cytarabine-based chemotherapy. FLT3 inhibitors (FLT3i) may resensitize cells to cytarabine (CYT). Improving treatment outcome of this combination may benefit from a mechanistic extrapolation approach from in vitro data. METHODS: The effects of CYT and several FLT3i on cell proliferation and cell cycle kinetics were examined in AML cell lines. The effect of FLT3i (quizartinib, midostaurin, sorafenib) on cell proliferation and cell cycle kinetics was assessed in AML cell lines with differing FLT3 status; HEL (negligible expression of wild-type FLT3), EOL1 (wild-type FLT3), MV4-11 (FLT3-ITD resulting in constitutively active isoform). Semi-mechanistic cell cycle models for CYT and FLT3i were developed. Clinical CYT and quizartinib pharmacokinetic dosage regimens were modeled. Survival of AML patients was described via a hazard model. Simulations exploring different CYT/quizartinib regimens were conducted with the goal of improving treatment outcome. RESULTS: FLT3 status was associated with sensitivity to CYT (HEL cells most sensitive > EOL1 > MV4-11 cells). This order of sensitivity is reversed for FLT3i. Cytarabine induced apoptosis in the S-phase while all FLT3i induced apoptosis and cell cycle arrest at G1 phase. Simulations of candidate clinical regimens predict better cell kill upon adding quizartinib simultaneously with or immediately after CYT exposure. Overall survival was predicted to be significantly better with quizartinib 200 mg administered every 48 h vs every 24 h in patients with FLT3 aberrations. CONCLUSION: Simultaneous administration of quizartinib and CYT every other day is a promising combination regimen for AML patients with FLT3 mutations.

Ribociclib Drug-Drug Interactions: Clinical Evaluations and Physiologically-Based Pharmacokinetic Modeling to Guide Drug Labeling.

Ribociclib is approved in combination with endocrine therapy as initial endocrine-based therapy for HR-positive and HER2-negative advanced breast cancer. Ribociclib is primarily metabolized by CYP3A4 and, in vitro, is an inhibitor of CYP3A and CYP1A2. Ritonavir (a strong CYP3A inhibitor) increased ribociclib 400 mg single-dose area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC) by 3.2-fold, whereas rifampin (a strong CYP3A inducer) decreased ribociclib AUC by 89% in healthy volunteers (HVs). Multiple 400 mg ribociclib doses increased midazolam (CYP3A substrate) AUC by 3.8-fold and caffeine (CYP1A2 substrate) AUC by 1.2-fold vs. each agent alone. A physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model was developed integrating in vitro, preclinical, and clinical data of HVs and patients with cancer. Data predictions indicated that multiple 600 mg ribociclib doses increased midazolam AUC by 5.85-fold and ritonavir increased ribociclib 600 mg multiple dose AUC by 1.31-fold in cancer patients. Based on pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy data, and PBPK modeling, dosing modifications for ribociclib recommend avoiding concurrent use of strong CYP3A inhibitors/inducers, and caution regarding using CYP3A substrates with narrow therapeutic indices.

Talazoparib Exposure-Efficacy Analysis in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer and Germline BRCA1/2 Mutations in the EMBRACA Trial.

In the phase 3 EMBRACA trial, treatment with the poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor, talazoparib, led to significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with chemotherapy (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% confidence interval, 0.41-0.71; P < .0001). We conducted an exposure-efficacy analysis using EMBRACA data from 285 patients who were treated with talazoparib and had available pharmacokinetic parameters to evaluate the effect of talazoparib exposure (time-varying average talazoparib concentration [Cavg,t ]) and other baseline variables on PFS. Graphical examination of the relationship between Cavg,t and PFS and a Cox proportional model were used. Exposure-response analyses showed that higher talazoparib exposure, absence of visceral disease, lower baseline lactate dehydrogenase levels, and disease-free interval >12 months were independent covariates associated with longer PFS. The association of talazoparib exposure with PFS (higher exposure, longer PFS) suggests the recommended starting dose of 1 mg once daily (the maximum tolerated dose) is appropriate.

Exposure-Safety Analyses of Talazoparib in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer and Germline BRCA1/2 Mutations in the EMBRACA and ABRAZO Trials.

Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitors, such as talazoparib, may affect hematopoiesis. This analysis characterized the relationship between talazoparib exposure and the most common grade ≥ 3 hematopoietic adverse events (AEs) leading to dose modification in the phase 2 (ABRAZO) and phase 3 (EMBRACA) trials. The relationship between time-varying average talazoparib concentration (Cavg,t ), along with other baseline variables, and grade ≥ 3 anemia, thrombocytopenia, and neutropenia were evaluated both by graphical examination and using univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models. The results indicated that higher Cavg,t was associated with a higher risk of anemia and thrombocytopenia. A trend toward an association between higher Cavg,t and neutropenia was observed, although not statistically significant. Higher risk of all tested safety end points was associated with lower baseline hemoglobin. Higher risk of neutropenia was associated with lower baseline absolute neutrophil count and lower body weight. These findings support the proposed management of AEs through talazoparib dosing modification.

Talazoparib in Patients with a Germline BRCA-Mutated Advanced Breast Cancer: Detailed Safety Analyses from the Phase III EMBRACA Trial.

BACKGROUND: In the EMBRACA phase III study (NCT01945775), talazoparib was associated with a significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with physician's choice of chemotherapy (PCT) in germline BRCA1/2-mutated HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (ABC). Herein, the safety profile of talazoparib is explored in detail. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Overall, 412 patients received ≥1 dose of talazoparib (n = 286) or PCT (n = 126). Adverse events (AEs) were evaluated, including timing, duration, and potential overlap of selected AEs. The relationship between talazoparib plasma exposure and grade ≥3 anemia was analyzed. Time-varying Cox proportional hazard models assessed the impact of dose reductions on PFS. Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) in patients with common AEs and health resource utilization (HRU) were assessed in both treatment arms. RESULTS: The most common AEs with talazoparib were hematologic (195 [68.2%] patients) and typically occurred within the first 3-4 months of receiving talazoparib. Grade 3-4 anemia lasted approximately 7 days for both arms. Overlapping grade 3-4 hematologic AEs were infrequent with talazoparib. Higher talazoparib exposure was associated with grade ≥3 anemia. Permanent discontinuation of talazoparib due to hematologic AEs was low (<2%). A total of 150 (52.4%) patients receiving talazoparib had AEs associated with dose reduction. Hematologic toxicities were managed by supportive care medication (including transfusion) and dose modifications. Among patients with anemia or nausea and/or vomiting AEs, PROs favored talazoparib. After accounting for the treatment-emergent period, talazoparib was generally associated with a lower rate of hospitalization and supportive care medication use compared with chemotherapy. CONCLUSION: Talazoparib was associated with superior efficacy, favorable PROs, and lower HRU rate versus chemotherapy in gBRCA-mutated ABC. Toxicities were manageable with talazoparib dose modification and supportive care. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Talazoparib was generally well tolerated in patients with germline BRCA-mutated HER2-negative advanced breast cancer in the EMBRACA trial. Common toxicities with talazoparib were primarily hematologic and infrequently resulted in permanent drug discontinuation (<2% of patients discontinued talazoparib due to hematologic toxicity). Hematologic toxicities typically occurred during the first 3-4 months of treatment and were managed by dose modifications and supportive care measures. A significant efficacy benefit, improved patient-reported outcomes, lower rate of health resource utilization and a tolerable safety profile support incorporating talazoparib into routine management of germline BRCA-mutated locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer.

Effect of P-glycoprotein (P-gp) Inducers on Exposure of P-gp Substrates: Review of Clinical Drug-Drug Interaction Studies.

Understanding transporter-mediated drug-drug interactions (DDIs) for investigational agents is important during drug development to assess DDI liability, its clinical relevance, and to determine appropriate DDI management strategies. P-glycoprotein (P-gp) is an efflux transporter that influences the pharmacokinetics (PK) of various compounds. Assessing transporter induction in vitro is challenging and is not always predictive of in vivo effects, and hence there is a need to consider clinical DDI studies; however, there is no clear guidance on when clinical evaluation of transporter induction is required. Furthermore, there is no proposed list of index transporter inducers to be used in clinical studies. This review evaluated DDI studies with known P-gp inducers to better understand the mechanism and site of P-gp induction, as well as the magnitude of induction effect on the exposure of P-gp substrates. Our review indicates that P-gp and cytochrome P450 (CYP450) enzymes are co-regulated via the pregnane xenobiotic receptor (PXR) and the constitutive androstane receptor (CAR). The magnitude of the decrease in substrate drug exposure by P-gp induction is generally less than that of CYP3A. Most P-gp inducers reduced total bioavailability with a minor impact on renal clearance, despite known expression of P-gp at the apical membrane of the kidney proximal tubules. Rifampin is the most potent P-gp inducer, resulting in an average reduction in substrate exposure ranging between 20 and 67%. For other inducers, the reduction in P-gp substrate exposure ranged from 12 to 42%. A lower reduction in exposure of the P-gp substrate was observed with a lower dose of the inducer and/or if the administration of the inducer and substrate was simultaneous, i.e. not staggered. These findings suggest that clinical evaluation of the impact of P-gp inducers on the PK of investigational agents that are substrates for P-gp might be warranted only for compounds with a relatively steep exposure-efficacy relationship.

Evaluation of the effect of P-glycoprotein inhibition and induction on talazoparib disposition in patients with advanced solid tumours.

AIMS: In vitro data show that talazoparib is a substrate for P-glycoprotein (P-gp) and breast cancer resistance protein transporters. This open-label, 2-arm, drug-drug interaction Phase 1 study in patients with advanced solid tumours assessed the effect of a P-gp inhibitor (itraconazole) and a P-gp inducer (rifampicin) on the pharmacokinetics of a single dose of talazoparib. The safety and tolerability of a single dose of talazoparib with and without itraconazole or rifampicin were also assessed. METHODS: Thirty-six patients were enrolled (Arm A [itraconazole], n = 19; Arm B [rifampicin], n = 17). Patients in both arms received 2 single oral doses of talazoparib (0.5 mg, Arm A; 1 mg, Arm B) alone and with multiple daily oral doses of itraconazole (Arm A) or rifampicin (Arm B). RESULTS: Coadministration of itraconazole and talazoparib increased talazoparib area under the plasma concentration-time profile from time 0 extrapolated to infinity by ~56% and maximum observed plasma concentration by ~40% relative to talazoparib alone. Coadministration of rifampicin and talazoparib increased talazoparib maximum observed plasma concentration by approximately 37% (geometric mean ratio 136.6% [90% confidence interval 103.2-180.9]); area under the curve was not affected relative to talazoparib alone (geometric mean ratio 102.0% [90% confidence interval 94.0-110.7]). Talazoparib had an overall safety profile consistent with that observed in prior studies in which talazoparib was administered as a single dose. CONCLUSION: Coadministration of itraconazole increased talazoparib plasma exposure compared to talazoparib alone. A reduced talazoparib dose is recommended if coadministration of potent P-gp inhibitors cannot be avoided. Similar exposure was observed when talazoparib was administered alone and with rifampicin suggesting that the effect of rifampicin on talazoparib exposure is limited.

Pazopanib Exposure Relationship with Clinical Efficacy and Safety in the Adjuvant Treatment of Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

Purpose: PROTECT, a phase III, randomized, placebo-controlled study, evaluated pazopanib efficacy and safety in the adjuvant renal cell carcinoma setting. The relationship between pazopanib exposure (Ctrough) and efficacy and safety was evaluated.Patients and Methods: Evaluable steady-state blood trough concentrations were collected from 311 patients at week 3 or 5 (early Ctrough) and 250 patients at week 16 or 20 (late Ctrough). Pazopanib pharmacokinetic (PK) data were analyzed via a population model approach. Relationship between Ctrough or dose intensity and disease-free survival (DFS) was explored via Kaplan-Meier and multivariate analysis. Adverse events (AE) and AE-related treatment discontinuation proportions were summarized by Ctrough quartiles.Results: Most (>90%) patients with early or late Ctrough data started on 600 mg. Mean early and late Ctrough overlapped across dose levels. Patients with higher early Ctrough quartiles achieved longer DFS (adjusted HR, 0.58; 95% confidence interval, 0.42-0.82; P = 0.002). Patients achieving early or late Ctrough >20.5 µg/mL had significantly longer DFS: not estimable (NE) versus 29.5 months, P = 0.006, and NE versus 29.9 months, P = 0.008, respectively. Dose intensity up to week 8 did not correlate with DFS, consistent with population PK model-based simulations showing overlapping pazopanib exposure with 600 and 800 mg doses. The proportion of AE-related treatment discontinuation and grade 3/4 AEs, with the exception of hypertension, was not correlated to CtroughConclusions: In the adjuvant setting, higher pazopanib Ctrough was associated with improved DFS and did not increase treatment discontinuations or grade 3/4 AEs, with the exception of hypertension. Clin Cancer Res; 24(13); 3005-13. ©2018 AACRSee related commentary by Rini, p. 2979.

Ribociclib Bioavailability Is Not Affected by Gastric pH Changes or Food Intake: In Silico and Clinical Evaluations.

Ribociclib (KISQALI), a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor approved for the first-line treatment of HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer with an aromatase inhibitor, is administered with no restrictions on concomitant gastric pH-elevating agents or food intake. The influence of proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) on ribociclib bioavailability was assessed using 1) biorelevant media solubility, 2) physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) modeling, 3) noncompartmental analysis (NCA) of clinical trial data, and 4) population PK (PopPK) analysis. This multipronged approach indicated no effect of gastric pH changes on ribociclib PK and served as a platform for supporting ribociclib labeling language, stating no impact of gastric pH-altering agents on the absorption of ribociclib, without a dedicated drug-drug interaction trial. The bioequivalence of ribociclib exposure with or without a high-fat meal was demonstrated in a clinical trial. Lack of restrictions on ribociclib dosing may facilitate better patient compliance and therefore clinical benefit.

Phase I Study of the Prolactin Receptor Antagonist LFA102 in Metastatic Breast and Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer.

LESSONS LEARNED: Despite evidence for a role for prolactin signaling in breast and prostate tumorigenesis, a prolactin receptor-binding monoclonal antibody has not produced clinical efficacy.Increased serum prolactin levels may be a biomarker for prolactin receptor inhibition.Results from the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamics (PD) studies suggest that inappropriately long dosing intervals and insufficient exposure to LFA102 may have resulted in lack of antitumor efficacy.Based on preclinical data, combination therapy of LFA102 with those novel agents targeting hormonal pathways in metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer and metastatic breast cancer is promising.Given the PD evidence of prolactin receptor blockade by LFA102, this drug has the potential to be used in conditions such as hyperprolactinemia that are associated with high prolactin levels. BACKGROUND: Prolactin receptor (PRLR) signaling is implicated in breast and prostate cancer. LFA102, a humanized monoclonal antibody (mAb) that binds to and inhibits the PRLR, has exhibited promising preclinical antitumor activity. METHODS: Patients with PRLR-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) or metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) received doses of LFA102 at 3-60 mg/kg intravenously once every 4 weeks. Objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or recommended dose for expansion (RDE) to investigate the safety/tolerability of LFA102 and to assess pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and antitumor activity. RESULTS: A total of 73 patients were enrolled at 5 dose levels. The MTD was not reached because of lack of dose-limiting toxicities. The RDE was established at 60 mg/kg based on PK and PD analysis and safety data. The most common all-cause adverse events (AEs) were fatigue (44%) and nausea (33%) regardless of relationship. Grade 3/4 AEs reported to be related to LFA102 occurred in 4% of patients. LFA102 exposure increased approximately dose proportionally across the doses tested. Serum prolactin levels increased in response to LFA102 administration, suggesting its potential as a biomarker for PRLR inhibition. No antitumor activity was detected. CONCLUSION: Treatment with LFA102 was safe and well tolerated, but did not show antitumor activity as monotherapy at the doses tested.