Oral docetaxel plus encequidar - a phase 1 clinical trial.

PURPOSE: To determine the bioavailability, safety, and tolerability of a single dose of oral docetaxel plus encequidar (oDox + E) and compare its pharmacokinetic exposure with current standard of care IV docetaxel. INTRODUCTION: Docetaxel is a taxane widely used as an anti-neoplastic agent. Due to low oral bioavailability secondary to gut P-glycoprotein (P-gp) efflux, its current use is limited to intravenous administration. Oral docetaxel may provide a less resource intensive, more convenient, and tolerable alternative. Encequidar is a first in class, minimally absorbed, oral gut-specific P-gp inhibitor. We tested whether oDox + E can achieve comparable pharmacokinetic exposure to IV docetaxel. METHODS: A multicentre, phase I open-label, pharmacokinetic trial was undertaken to determine the bioavailability, safety, and tolerability of a single dose of oDox + E (at 75 mg/m2 + 15 mg, 150 mg/m2 + 15 mg, and 300 mg/m2 + 15 mg) in metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) patients compared to standard of care IV docetaxel as prescribed by their oncologists. The 15 mg of Encequidar at each dose level was given one hour prior to oral docetaxel. RESULTS: 11 patients were enrolled; 9 patients completed the study. Oral docetaxel exposure increased with dose, achieving the highest at 300 mg/m2 oDox + E (with AUC0 - infinity of 1343.3 ± 443.0 ng.h/mL compared to the IV docetaxel AUC0 - infinity of 2000 ± 325 ng.h/mL) and became non-linear at 300 mg/m2. The mean absolute bioavailability of oDox + E across all 3 dose levels was 16.14% (range: 8.19-25.09%). No patient deaths, dose limiting toxicity, treatment-related serious adverse event or grade 4 toxicity were observed. Maximal tolerated dose was not reached. CONCLUSION: oDox + E has a safe and tolerable adverse event profile in patients with metastatic prostate cancer. The increase in oral bioavailability of oDox + E suggests a multi-dose oDox + E regimen could theoretically achieve exposures comparable with standard of care IV docetaxel. Further development to examine the optimal multiple dose regimen of oDox + E is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: U1111-1173-5473.

A Sensitive Assay for Unbound Docetaxel Using Ultrafiltration plus HPLC-MS and Its Application to a Clinical Study.

INTRODUCTION: Docetaxel, a taxane used in the treatment of solid tumours, exerts pharmacological activity when in its unbound form. We report a sensitive assay to quantify unbound docetaxel after oral administration of docetaxel plus encequidar (oDox+E). Unbound drug quantification is important due to its direct correlation with drug-related toxicity and therapeutic efficacy. We improve on the sensitivity of current assay methods and demonstrate the utility of the assay on a novel formulation of oral docetaxel. METHODS: Ultrafiltration followed by high-performance liquid chromatography and tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS) was utilized. Long-term stability, precision, accuracy, and recovery experiments were conducted to validate the assay. Additionally, patient samples from a Phase I dose-escalation pharmacokinetic study were analyzed using the developed assay. RESULTS: The assay method exhibited long-term stability with an observed change between 0.8 and 6.9% after 131 days of storage at -60 °C. Precision and accuracy quality controls met the FDA acceptance criteria. An average recovery of 88% was obtained. Patient sample analysis demonstrated successful implementation of the assay. CONCLUSION: A validated sensitive assay was developed with an LLOQ of 0.084 ng/mL using 485 µL of human plasma. The sensitivity of the assay allowed quantification of unbound docetaxel concentrations in an early-phase oDox+E clinical study to compare it against IV docetaxel using pharmacokinetic modelling. Successful development of oDox+E represents an opportunity to replace the current IV docetaxel regimen with an oral regimen with lower cost, decreased side effects, and improve patient quality of life and experience.

Oral docetaxel plus encequidar - A pharmacokinetic model and evaluation against IV docetaxel.

The development of optimized dosing regimens plays a crucial role in oncology drug development. This study focused on the population pharmacokinetic modelling and simulation of docetaxel, comparing the pharmacokinetic exposure of oral docetaxel plus encequidar (oDox + E) with the standard of care intravenous (IV) docetaxel regimen. The aim was to evaluate the feasibility of oDox + E as a potential alternative to IV docetaxel. The article demonstrates an approach which aligns with the FDA's Project Optimus which aims to improve oncology drug development through model informed drug development (MIDD). The key question answered by this study was whether a feasible regimen of oDox + E existed. The purpose of this question was to provide an early GO / NO-GO decision point to guide drug development and improve development efficiency. METHODS:  A stepwise approach was employed to develop a population pharmacokinetic model for total and unbound docetaxel plasma concentrations after IV docetaxel and oDox + E administration. Simulations were performed from the final model to assess the probability of target attainment (PTA) for different oDox + E dose regimens (including multiple dose regimens) in relation to IV docetaxel using AUC over effective concentration (AUCOEC) metric across a range of effective concentrations (EC). A Go / No-Go framework was defined-the first part of the framework assessed whether a feasible oDox + E regimen existed (i.e., a PTA ≥ 80%), and the second part defined the conditions to proceed with a Go decision. RESULTS:  The overall population pharmacokinetic model consisted of a 3-compartment model with linear elimination, constant bioavailability, constant binding mechanics, and a combined error model. Simulations revealed that single dose oDox + E regimens did not achieve a PTA greater than 80%. However, two- and three-dose regimens at 600 mg achieved PTAs exceeding 80% for certain EC levels. CONCLUSION:  The study demonstrates the benefits of MIDD using oDox + E as a motivating example. A population pharmacokinetic model was developed for the total and unbound concentration in plasma of docetaxel after administration of IV docetaxel and oDox + E. The model was used to simulate oDox + E dose regimens which were compared to the current standard of care IV docetaxel regimen. A GO / NO-GO framework was applied to determine whether oDox + E should progress to the next phase of drug development and whether any conditions should apply. A two or three-dose regimen of oDox + E at 600 mg was able to achieve non-inferior pharmacokinetic exposure to current standard of care IV docetaxel in simulations. A Conditional GO decision was made based on this result and further quantification of the "effective concentration" would improve the ability to optimise the dose regimen.

Oral paclitaxel and encequidar in patients with breast cancer: a pharmacokinetic, safety, and antitumor activity study.

Background: Paclitaxel is widely used for the treatment of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). However, it has a low oral bioavailability due to gut extrusion caused by P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Oral paclitaxel (oPAC) may be more convenient, less resource-intensive, and more tolerable than its intravenous form. Encequidar (E) is a first-in-class, minimally absorbed, gut-specific oral P-gp inhibitor that facilitates the oral absorption of paclitaxel. Objectives: To investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK), overall response rate (ORR), and safety of weekly oral paclitaxel with encequidar (oPAC + E) in patients with advanced breast cancer. Design: This is a multicenter, single-arm, open-label study in six medical centers in Taiwan. Methods: Patients with advanced breast cancer were administered 205 mg/m2 oPAC and 12.9 mg E for 3 consecutive days weekly for up to 16 weeks. Plasma samples were collected at weeks 1 and 4. PK, ORR, and safety were evaluated. Results: In all, 28 patients were enrolled; 27 had MBC; 23 had prior chemotherapy; and 14 had ⩾2 lines of prior chemotherapy. PK were evaluable in 25 patients. Plasma paclitaxel area under the curve (AUC)(0-52 h) at week 1 (3419 ± 1475 ng h/ml) and week 4 (3224 ± 1150 ng h/ml) were equivalent. Best overall response in 28 evaluable patients was partial response (PR) in 11 (39.3%), 13 (46.4%) stable disease (SD), and 1 (3.6%) with progressive disease (PD). No patient achieved complete response (CR). The clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + SD) was 85.7%. Major adverse events among the 28 treated patients were grade 3 neutropenia (25%), grade 4 neutropenia (18%), with febrile neutropenia in 4%, and grade 3 diarrhea (4%). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Grade 2 peripheral neuropathy occurred in 1 (4%) patient and grade 3 peripheral neuropathy in 1 (4%) patient. Conclusions: oPAC + E produced a consistent therapeutic plasma paclitaxel exposure during treatment. There was a high rate of radiologically assessed clinical benefit, and a low rate of neurotoxicity which may provide advantages over IV paclitaxel. Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03165955.

A dose regimen-finding study to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and activity of oratecan in subjects with advanced malignancies.

PURPOSE: Irinotecan is a commonly used chemotherapeutic in solid tumor malignancies. Oratecan is an investigational product comprised of encequidar methanesulfonate, a novel minimally absorbed P-glycoprotein pump inhibitor, and irinotecan. This study sought to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of oratecan in patients with advanced malignancies. METHODS: Using a "3 + 3″ dose-escalation design, patients were treated with oratecan on day 1 every 21 days. The irinotecan dose was escalated from 20 to 320 mg/m2. The encequidar methanesulfonate dose was fixed at 15 mg (12.9 mg free base). PK sampling for irinotecan, encequidar and its major metabolites was performed following a single dose of oratecan during cycle 1. Patients were treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients were treated. The MTD was determined to be 280 mg/m2 every 21 days. Irinotecan and SN-38 plasma concentration-time profile showed that irinotecan exposure increased with dose and followed biexponential decay. Nine of 17 patients at oratecan dose levels 200 mg/m2 and above had SN-38 exposures comparable to those with intravenous irinotecan at standard dosing. None of the 35 patients achieved a radiologic response, ten patients had SD for > 8 weeks; the median progression-free survival for all treated patients was 9 weeks (95% CI 8.6-13.9). CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of oratecan was encequidar methanesulfonate 15 mg plus irinotecan 280 mg/m2. Exposure for irinotecan and SN-38 increased with increased dose. Potential antitumor activity was observed at the 280 and 320 mg/m2 dose levels. The safety profile of oratecan was comparable to that of intravenous irinotecan.

A phase Ib study of Oraxol (oral paclitaxel and encequidar) in patients with advanced malignancies.

PURPOSE: Oraxol is an oral formulation of paclitaxel administered with a novel, minimally absorbed P-glycoprotein inhibitor encequidar (HM30181A). This phase Ib study was conducted to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of Oraxol administered at a fixed dose for up to 5 consecutive days in patients with advanced malignancies. METHODS: Part 1 of this study utilized a 3 + 3 dose-escalation design to determine the MTD of oral paclitaxel 270 mg plus oral encequidar 15 mg administered daily. Dose escalation was achieved by increasing the number of consecutive dosing days per week (from 2 to 5 days per week). Dosing occurred for 3 consecutive weeks out of a 4-week cycle. Part 2 treated additional patients at the MTD to determine tolerability and recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Adverse events, tumor responses, and pharmacokinetic profiles were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 34 patients (n = 24 in Part 1, n = 10 in Part 2) received treatment. The MTD of Oraxol was determined to be 270 mg daily × 5 days per week per protocol definition and this was declared the RP2D. The most common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, neutropenia, and nausea/vomiting. Hypersensitivity-type reactions were not observed. Of the 28 patients evaluable for response, 2 (7.1%) achieved partial response and 18 (64.3%) achieved stable disease. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed rapid absorption of paclitaxel when administered orally following encequidar. Paclitaxel daily exposure was comparable following 2-5 days dose levels. CONCLUSION: The oral administration of encequidar with paclitaxel was safe, achieved clinically relevant paclitaxel levels, and showed evidence of anti-tumor activity.

Population pharmacokinetics for oral paclitaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors.

Oraxol consists of an oral dosage form of the chemotherapeutic agent paclitaxel administered with a novel P-glycoprotein inhibitor encequidar methanesulfonate monohydrate (formerly named HM30181A), which allows oral treatment of cancers that would otherwise be treated with intravenous paclitaxel. Here we describe the population pharmacokinetics (popPK) analyses for oral paclitaxel in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors to characterize pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles and quantify sources of PK variability. The best fit popPK model for oral paclitaxel, based on data from seven clinical studies (197 patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors), involves a linear two-compartment structural model containing first-order absorption with a short lag time and first-order elimination as well as a log additive error. In this popPK model, lower population estimates of central volume for Asian patients versus Caucasian patients did not translate into clinical meaningful differences in oral paclitaxel exposure. Age, sex, body weight or surface area, mild hepatic impairment, and mild to moderate renal impairment had no clinically meaningful effects on the systemic exposure of oral paclitaxel. Simulations were performed on clinical therapeutic dose (oral paclitaxel 205 mg/m2 once daily ×3 days per week) to predict exposure of oral paclitaxel and to support treatment benefits observed in a pivotal phase III trial.

Oral paclitaxel with encequidar compared to intravenous paclitaxel in patients with advanced cancer: A randomised crossover pharmacokinetic study.

AIMS: Paclitaxel is a widely used anti-neoplastic agent but has low oral bioavailability due to gut extrusion by P-glycoprotein (P-gp). Oral paclitaxel could be more convenient, less resource intensive, and more tolerable than intravenous administration. Encequidar (HM30181A) is a novel, minimally absorbed gut-specific P-gp inhibitor. We tested whether administration of oral paclitaxel with encequidar (oPac+E) achieved comparable AUC to intravenous paclitaxel (IVP) 80 mg/m2 . METHODS: We conducted a multi-centre randomised crossover study with two treatment periods. Patients (pts) with advanced cancer received either oral paclitaxel 615 mg/m2 divided over 3 days and encequidar 15 mg orally 1 hour prior, followed by IVP 80 mg/m2 , or the reverse sequence. PK blood samples were taken up to Day 9 for oPac+E and Day 5 for IVP. RESULTS: Forty-two patients were enrolled; 35 completed both treatment periods. AUC0-∞ was 5033.5 ± 1401.1 ng.h/mL for oPac+E and 5595.9 ± 1264.1 ng.h/mL with IVP. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) for AUC was 89.50% (90% CI 83.89-95.50). Mean absolute bioavailability of oPac+E was 12% (CV% = 23%). PK parameters did not change meaningfully after 4 weeks administration of oPac+E in an extension study. G3 treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in seven (18%) pts with oPac+E and two (5%) with IVP. Seventy-five per cent of patients preferred oPac+E over IVP. CONCLUSIONS: GMR for AUC was within the predefined acceptable range of 80-125% for demonstrating equivalence. oPac+E is tolerable and there is no evidence of P-gp induction with repeat administration. With further study, oPac+E could be an alternative to IVP.

Tirbanibulin Ointment 1% as a Novel Treatment for Actinic Keratosis: Phase 1 and 2 Results.

BACKGROUND: Current field-directed treatments of actinic keratosis (AK), a pre-malignant condition, are often limited by severe local reactions and/or complex treatment. Tirbanibulin, a novel potent anti-proliferative synthetic agent that inhibits tubulin polymerization and Src kinase signalling, is being developed as a convenient, safe, and effective field treatment of actinic keratosis. HYPOTHESIS: A short course of tirbanibulin ointment 1% safely reduces AK lesions. METHODS: In the Phase 1 study, 4 treatment cohorts with forearm lesions received tirbanibulin ointment 1% over 25 or 100 cm2 once daily for 3 or 5 days and were evaluated through day 45. In the Phase 2 study, 2 treatment cohorts with face or scalp lesions received tirbanibulin ointment 1% once daily for 3 or 5 days over 25 cm2 and were evaluated through day 57. Lesion reductions, clearance rates, safety, and pharmacokinetics were assessed. RESULTS: Forearm AK lesions were reduced by day 45 in all Phase 1 cohorts (N=30). Complete AK clearance at day 57 for face/scalp AK lesions in Phase 2 cohorts (N=168) was demonstrated in 43% and 32% of participants of the 5-day and 3-day cohorts, respectively. Adverse reactions were mainly transient mild local erythema and flaking/scaling, pruritus, and pain. Tirbanibulin plasma concentrations were low or undetectable. CONCLUSION: Tirbanibulin ointment 1% was well tolerated and active in AK reduction. Based on activity, the 5-day regimen was selected for Phase 3 development. Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02337205; NCT02838628 J Drugs Dermatol. 2020;19(11):1093-1100. doi:10.36849/JDD.2020.5576THIS ARTICLE HAD BEEN MADE AVAILABLE FREE OF CHARGE. PLEASE SCROLL DOWN TO ACCESS THE FULL TEXT OF THIS ARTICLE WITHOUT LOGGING IN. NO PURCHASE NECESSARY. PLEASE CONTACT THE PUBLISHER WITH ANY QUESTIONS.

Discovery of Novel Dual Mechanism of Action Src Signaling and Tubulin Polymerization Inhibitors (KX2-391 and KX2-361).

The discovery of potent, peptide site directed, tyrosine kinase inhibitors has remained an elusive goal. Herein we describe the discovery of two such clinical candidates that inhibit the tyrosine kinase Src. Compound 1 is a phase 3 clinical trial candidate that is likely to provide a first in class topical treatment for actinic keratosis (AK) with good efficacy and dramatically less toxicity compared to existing standard therapy. Compound 2 is a phase 1 clinical trial candidate that is likely to provide a first in class treatment of malignant glioblastoma and induces 30% long-term complete tumor remission in animal models. The discovery strategy for these compounds iteratively utilized molecular modeling, along with the synthesis and testing of increasingly elaborated proof of concept compounds, until the final clinical candidates were arrived at. This was followed with mechanism of action (MOA) studies that revealed tubulin polymerization inhibition as the second MOA.

A phase I trial of KX2-391, a novel non-ATP competitive substrate-pocket- directed SRC inhibitor, in patients with advanced malignancies.

BACKGROUND: Src kinase is central to tumor cell proliferation, apoptosis, and metastasis. KX2-391 is a synthetic, orally bioavailable small molecule inhibitor of Src tyrosine kinase (TK) signaling and tubulin polymerization. This compound is distinct from other Src kinase inhibitors by targeting the peptide substrate rather than the ATP binding site; the binding site on hetero-dimeric tubulin is novel and distinct from the taxanes and other known tubulin inhibitors. METHODS: This multicenter Phase I trial utilized a 4 + 2 study design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of KX2-391 in patients with refractory solid tumors. RESULTS: Forty-four (44) patients (18 M, 26 F; median age, 59) were enrolled in 9 dose cohorts. Dose-limiting toxicities, all reversible within 7 days, occurred in 7 patients and consisted of elevated AST (n = 4), ALT (n = 2), neutropenia (n = 1), thrombocytopenia (n = 1), failure to thrive (n = 1) and anorexia (n = 1). The MTD is 40 mg BID continuously. Eleven patients had stable disease for ≥ 4 months, including patients with ovarian, carcinoid, papillary thyroid, prostate, pancreas and head and neck cancer. Patients with prostate and pancreatic cancer also had significant biomarker decreases (PSA, 205 ng/mL to 39 ng/mL; CA19-9, 38,838 U/mL to 267 U/mL). The ovarian cancer patient has had stable disease > 12 months. KX2-391 was orally available, rapidly absorbed, and exposure was proportional to dose across the range investigated. CONCLUSIONS: KX2-391 has a favorable pharmacokinetic profile, is well tolerated, demonstrates preliminary evidence of biologic activity, and warrants further evaluation in Phase II trials.

Randomized controlled trials of the D1/D5 antagonist ecopipam for weight loss in obese subjects.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the selective dopamine D1/D5 antagonist ecopipam for the treatment of obesity. RESEARCH METHODS AND PROCEDURES: Four randomized, double-blind, multicenter trials compared ecopipam (n=1667) and placebo (n=1118) in obese subjects including type 2 diabetic subjects. Subjects received oral ecopipam 10, 30, or 100 mg daily for 12 weeks (Phase 2) or 50 or 100 mg daily for 52 weeks (Phase 3) combined with a weight loss program. Primary efficacy variables were the proportion of subjects with>or=5% weight loss from baseline at 12 weeks (Phase 2) or the distribution of percentage weight loss from baseline at 52 weeks (Phase 3). RESULTS: In the Phase 2 study, 26% of subjects administered ecopipam 100 mg vs. 6% of placebo subjects achieved>or=5% weight loss after 12 weeks (p<0.01). In the Phase 3 studies, ecopipam 100 mg produced a 3.1% to 4.3% greater weight loss than placebo at 52 weeks. More subjects administered ecopipam vs. placebo achieved a 5% to 10% or >10% weight loss in two non-diabetic phase 3 trials. Ecopipam-treated subjects also maintained more weight loss compared with placebo subjects at 52 weeks. Phase 3 studies were discontinued because of unexpected psychiatric adverse events (ecopipam 31% vs. placebo 15%), including depression, anxiety, and suicidal ideation. DISCUSSION: Ecopipam was effective for achieving and maintaining weight loss in obese subjects, including type 2 diabetic subjects; however, the adverse effects on mood observed in the Phase 3 studies exclude its projected use in weight management.