Oral decitabine-cedazuridine versus intravenous decitabine for myelodysplastic syndromes and chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia (ASCERTAIN): a registrational, randomised, crossover, pharmacokinetics, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: The DNA methyltransferase inhibitors azacitidine and decitabine for individuals with myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia are available in parenteral form. Oral therapy with similar exposure for these diseases would offer potential treatment benefits. We aimed to compare the safety and pharmacokinetics of oral decitabine plus the cytidine deaminase inhibitor cedazuridine versus intravenous decitabine. METHODS: We did a registrational, multicentre, open-label, crossover, phase 3 trial of individuals with myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia and individuals with acute myeloid leukaemia, enrolled as separate cohorts; results for only participants with myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia are reported here. In 37 academic and community-based clinics in Canada and the USA, we enrolled individuals aged 18 years or older who were candidates to receive intravenous decitabine, with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 or 1 and a life expectancy of at least 3 months. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive 5 days of oral decitabine-cedazuridine (one tablet once daily containing 35 mg decitabine and 100 mg cedazuridine as a fixed-dose combination) or intravenous decitabine (20 mg/m2 per day by continuous 1-h intravenous infusion) in a 28-day treatment cycle, followed by 5 days of the other formulation in the next treatment cycle. Thereafter, all participants received oral decitabine-cedazuridine from the third cycle on until treatment discontinuation. The primary endpoint was total decitabine exposure over 5 days with oral decitabine-cedazuridine versus intravenous decitabine for cycles 1 and 2, measured as area under the curve in participants who received the full treatment dose in cycles 1 and 2 and had decitabine daily AUC0-24 for both oral decitabine-cedazuridine and intravenous decitabine (ie, paired cycles). On completion of the study, all patients were rolled over to a maintenance study. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03306264. FINDINGS: Between Feb 8, 2018, and June 7, 2021, 173 individuals were screened, 138 (80%) participants were randomly assigned to a treatment sequence, and 133 (96%) participants (87 [65%] men and 46 [35%] women; 121 [91%] White, four [3%] Black or African-American, three [2%] Asian, and five [4%] not reported) received treatment. Median follow-up was 966 days (IQR 917-1050). Primary endpoint of total exposure of oral decitabine-cedazuridine versus intravenous decitabine was 98·93% (90% CI 92·66-105·60), indicating equivalent pharmacokinetic exposure on the basis of area under the curve. The safety profiles of oral decitabine-cedazuridine and intravenous decitabine were similar. The most frequent adverse events of grade 3 or worse were thrombocytopenia (81 [61%] of 133 participants), neutropenia (76 [57%] participants), and anaemia (67 [50%] participants). The incidence of serious adverse events in cycles 1-2 was 31% (40 of 130 participants) with oral decitabine-cedazuridine and 18% (24 of 132 participants) with intravenous decitabine. There were five treatment-related deaths; two deemed related to oral therapy (sepsis and pneumonia) and three to intravenous treatment (septic shock [n=2] and pneumonia [n=1]). INTERPRETATION: Oral decitabine-cedazuridine was pharmacologically and pharmacodynamically equivalent to intravenous decitabine. The results support use of oral decitabine-cedazuridine as a safe and effective alternative to intravenous decitabine for treatment of individuals with myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia. FUNDING: Astex Pharmaceuticals.

A commentary on the use of pharmacoenhancers in the pharmaceutical industry and the implication for DMPK drug discovery strategies.

Paxlovid, a drug combining nirmatrelvir and ritonavir, was designed for the treatment of COVID-19 and its rapid development has led to emergency use approval by the FDA to reduce the impact of COVID-19 infection on patients.In order to overcome potentially suboptimal therapeutic exposures, nirmatrelvir is dosed in combination with ritonavir to boost the pharmacokinetics of the active product.Here we consider examples of drugs co-administered with pharmacoenhancers.Pharmacoenhancers have been adopted for multiple purposes such as ensuring therapeutic exposure of the active product, reducing formation of toxic metabolites, changing the route of administration, and increasing the cost-effectiveness of a therapy.We weigh the benefits and risks of this approach, examining the impact of technology developments on drug design and how enhanced integration between cross-discipline teams can improve the outcome of drug discovery.

A validated liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectroscopy method for the quantification of tolinapant in human plasma.

Tolinapant (ASTX660), a pan-selective inhibitor of apoptosis protein antagonist with dual cIAP/XIAP activity, was identified as a clinical candidate in preclinical efficacy, pharmacokinetic and safety studies. In order to assess tolinapant in first-in-human Phase I/II clinical trials, a validated bioanalytical method was required to determine plasma pharmacokinetics. Tolinapant and d4-tolinapant were extracted from human plasma using liquid-liquid extraction. Separation chromatography was performed on a Acquity BEH C18 1.7 µM, 50 mm × 2.1 mm i.d. column, using a mobile phase of 0.1% formic acid in water and 0.1% formic acid in acetonitrile. Mass spectrometry detection was performed by positive turbo ion spray ionisation, in multiple reaction monitoring mode. The method was validated according to the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines. The method has a quantifiable linear range of 1-500 ng/mL (r 2 = 0.999). The intra- and inter-day coefficients of variation were < 11.4%. Dilution QC samples agreed with prepared concentrations, with a precision of 1.5% and accuracy of 101%. Tolinapant mean recoveries ranged from 85.1-94.4 % with negligible matrix effects. A highly sensitive and selective LC-MS/MS bioanalytical method was developed and validated. The method was successfully applied in Phase 1/2 clinical trials to determine the human pharmacokinetic profile of tolinapant.

Role of cedazuridine/decitabine in the management of myelodysplastic syndrome and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia.

Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) are clonal hematopoietic stem cell disorders. Complex disease biology has posed significant challenge to the development of novel therapeutics. Despite myriad clinical trials, none have been superior to azacitidine and decitabine (DEC) therapy. These therapies present a substantial burden for patients with 5 and 7 days of parenteral treatment in an infusion clinic. To overcome this limitation, a fixed drug combination of oral DEC-cedazuridine (C-DEC), a cytidine deaminase inhibitor with documented safety profile was developed. This drug was recently approved by the US FDA, Australian TGA and Health Canada for newly diagnosed or previously treated intermediate or high risk by international prognostic scoring system, MDS and CMML. In this review, we detail the pharmacokinetic and clinical activity of C-DEC in the management of MDS and CMML.

Lay abstract Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) and chronic myelomonocytic leukemia are rare types of blood cancers. When treatment for these conditions is required, azacitidine or decitabine are the most commonly used chemotherapies. These medications are administered into blood through a medical port. Since these cancers are common in elderly, management of the port and frequent visits to infusion centers for treatment leads to noncompliance with treatment plan. With addition of a new compound by name cedazuridine to decitabine, now a new US FDA-approved medication, INQOVI^® (decitabine and cedazuridine) can be taken by mouth at home. This new treatment has shown to be equally effective with a similar safety profile to decitabine. In this review article, we describe the investigational details and drug development of the oral medication, INQOVI^®.

Oral cedazuridine/decitabine for MDS and CMML: a phase 2 pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic randomized crossover study.

This phase 2 study was designed to compare systemic decitabine exposure, demethylation activity, and safety in the first 2 cycles with cedazuridine 100 mg/decitabine 35 mg vs standard decitabine 20 mg/m2 IV. Adults with International Prognostic Scoring System intermediate-1/2- or high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) or chronic myelomonocytic leukemia (CMML) were randomized 1:1 to receive oral cedazuridine/decitabine or IV decitabine in cycle 1, followed by crossover to the other treatment in cycle 2. All patients received oral cedazuridine/decitabine in subsequent cycles. Cedazuridine and decitabine were given initially as separate capsules in a dose-confirmation stage and then as a single fixed-dose combination (FDC) tablet. Primary end points: mean decitabine systemic exposure (geometric least-squares mean [LSM]) of oral/IV 5-day area under curve from time 0 to last measurable concentration (AUClast), percentage long interspersed nuclear element 1 (LINE-1) DNA demethylation for oral cedazuridine/decitabine vs IV decitabine, and clinical response. Eighty patients were randomized and treated. Oral/IV ratios of geometric LSM 5-day AUClast (80% confidence interval) were 93.5% (82.1-106.5) and 97.6% (80.5-118.3) for the dose-confirmation and FDC stages, respectively. Differences in mean %LINE-1 demethylation between oral and IV were ≤1%. Clinical responses were observed in 48 patients (60%), including 17 (21%) with complete response. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events regardless of causality were neutropenia (46%), thrombocytopenia (38%), and febrile neutropenia (29%). Oral cedazuridine/decitabine (100/35 mg) produced similar systemic decitabine exposure, DNA demethylation, and safety vs decitabine 20 mg/m2 IV in the first 2 cycles, with similar efficacy. This study is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT02103478.

Oral Azacitidine and Cedazuridine Approximate Parenteral Azacitidine Efficacy in Murine Model.

BACKGROUND: DNA methyltransferase inhibitors (DNMTis) improve survival for patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and those with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) unable to receive standard cytotoxic chemotherapy and are, accordingly, the backbone of standard-of-care treatment for these conditions. Standard regimens with DNMTIs, decitabine (DEC) or azacitidine (AZA) include daily subcutaneous (s.c.) or intravenous (i.v.) administration for 5-7 consecutive days. Attempts to provide the therapy orally have been limited given rapid clearance of the agents by the enzyme cytidine deaminase (CDA), which is ubiquitous in the gut and liver as part of first-pass metabolism. Recently, cedazuridine (CDZ), an oral inhibitor of CDA, was successfully combined with DEC to approximate the pharmacokinetics of i.v. DEC in patients. OBJECTIVE: To determine if an oral dosing strategy might be feasible in the clinic with AZA, we attempted to increase the bioavailability of oral AZA through the use of CDZ, in a murine model. METHODS: Following pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic assessment of oral AZA dosed with CDZ in murine and monkey models, we tested this regimen in vivo with a human cell line-derived xenograft transplantation experiment (CDX). Following this we combined the regimen with venetoclax (VEN) to test the efficacy of an all-oral regimen in a patient-derived xenograft (PDX) model. RESULTS: Parenteral AZA and oral AZA + CDZ exhibited similar pharmacokinetic profiles, and efficacy against human AML cells. Tumor regression was seen with AZA + CDZ in MOLM-13 CDX and PDX models. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that oral AZA when combined with CDZ achieves successful tumor regression in both CDX and PDX models. Furthermore, the combination of AZA + CDZ with VEN in a PDX model emulated responses seen with VEN + AZA in the clinic, implying a potential all-oral VEN-based therapy opportunity in myeloid diseases.

A Phase I Study of ASTX660, an Antagonist of Inhibitors of Apoptosis Proteins, in Adults with Advanced Cancers or Lymphoma.

PURPOSE: This first-in-human, phase I study evaluated ASTX660, an oral, small-molecule antagonist of cellular/X-linked inhibitors of apoptosis proteins in patients with advanced solid tumors or lymphoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: ASTX660 was administered orally once daily on a 7-day-on/7-day-off schedule in a 28-day cycle. Dose escalation followed a standard 3+3 design to determine the MTD and recommended phase II dose (RP2D). Dose expansion was conducted at the RP2D. RESULTS: Forty-five patients received ASTX660 (range 15-270 mg/day). Dose-limiting toxicity of grade 3 increased lipase with or without increased amylase occurred in 3 patients at 270 mg/day and 1 patient at 210 mg/day. The MTD was determined to be 210 mg/day and the RP2D 180 mg/day. Common treatment-related adverse events included fatigue (33%), vomiting (31%), and nausea (27%). Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 7 patients, most commonly anemia (13%), increased lipase (11%), and lymphopenia (9%). ASTX660 was rapidly absorbed, with maximum concentration achieved at approximately 0.5-1.0 hour. An approximately 2-fold accumulation in AUC exposures was observed on day 7 versus 1. ASTX660 suppressed cellular inhibitor of apoptosis protein-1 in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, which was maintained into the second cycle beyond the off-therapy week at the 180-mg/day RP2D and above. Clinical activity was seen in a patient with cutaneous T-cell lymphoma. CONCLUSIONS: ASTX660 demonstrated a manageable safety profile and exhibited evidence of pharmacodynamic and preliminary clinical activity at the 180-mg/day RP2D. The phase II part of the study is ongoing.

Mass balance and metabolite profiling of 14C-guadecitabine in patients with advanced cancer.

Purpose The objective of this mass balance trial was to determine the excretory pathways and metabolic profile of the novel anticancer agent guadecitabine in humans after administration of a 14C-radiolabeled dose of guadecitabine. Experimental design Included patients received at least one cycle of 45 mg/m2 guadecitabine subcutaneously as once-daily doses on Days 1 to 5 of a 28-day cycle, of which the 5th (last) dose in the first cycle was spiked with 14C-radiolabeled guadecitabine. Using different mass spectrometric techniques in combination with off-line liquid scintillation counting, the exposure and excretion of 14C-guadecitabine and metabolites in the systemic circulation, excreta, and intracellular target site were established. Results Five patients were enrolled in the mass balance trial. 14C-guadecitabine radioactivity was rapidly and almost exclusively excreted in urine, with an average amount of radioactivity recovered of 90.2%. After uptake in the systemic circulation, guadecitabine was converted into ß-decitabine (active anomer), and from ß-decitabine into the presumably inactive metabolites M1-M5. All identified metabolites in plasma and urine were ß-decitabine related products, suggesting almost complete conversion via cleavage of the phosphodiester bond between ß-decitabine and deoxyguanosine prior to further elimination. ß-decitabine enters the intracellular activation pathway, leading to detectable ß-decitabine-triphosphate and DNA incorporated ß-decitabine levels in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, providing confirmation that the drug reaches its DNA target site. Conclusion The metabolic and excretory pathways of guadecitabine and its metabolites were successfully characterized after subcutaneous guadecitabine administration in cancer patients. These data support the clinical evaluation of safety and efficacy of the subcutaneous guadecitabine drug product.

A Randomized Phase II Trial of Epigenetic Priming with Guadecitabine and Carboplatin in Platinum-resistant, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer.

PURPOSE: Platinum resistance in ovarian cancer is associated with epigenetic modifications. Hypomethylating agents (HMA) have been studied as carboplatin resensitizing agents in ovarian cancer. This randomized phase II trial compared guadecitabine, a second-generation HMA, and carboplatin (G+C) against second-line chemotherapy in women with measurable or detectable platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients received either G+C (guadecitabine 30 mg/m2 s.c. once-daily for 5 days and carboplatin) or treatment of choice (TC; topotecan, pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, paclitaxel, or gemcitabine) in 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS); secondary endpoints were RECIST v1.1 and CA-125 response rate, 6-month PFS, and overall survival (OS). RESULTS: Of 100 patients treated, 51 received G+C and 49 received TC, of which 27 crossed over to G+C. The study did not meet its primary endpoint as the median PFS was not statistically different between arms (16.3 weeks vs. 9.1 weeks in the G+C and TC groups, respectively; P = 0.07). However, the 6-month PFS rate was significantly higher in the G+C group (37% vs. 11% in TC group; P = 0.003). The incidence of grade 3 or higher toxicity was similar in G+C and TC groups (51% and 49%, respectively), with neutropenia and leukopenia being more frequent in the G+C group. CONCLUSIONS: Although this trial did not show superiority for PFS of G+C versus TC, the 6-month PFS increased in G+C treated patients. Further refinement of this strategy should focus on identification of predictive markers for patient selection.

Guadecitabine Plus Ipilimumab in Unresectable Melanoma: The NIBIT-M4 Clinical Trial.

PURPOSE: The immunomodulatory activity of DNA hypomethylating agents (DHAs) suggests they may improve the effectiveness of cancer immunotherapies. The phase Ib NIBIT-M4 trial tested this hypothesis using the next-generation DHA guadecitabine combined with ipilimumab. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with unresectable stage III/IV melanoma received escalating doses of guadecitabine 30, 45, or 60 mg/m2/day subcutaneously on days 1 to 5 every 3 weeks, and ipilimumab 3 mg/kg intravenously on day 1 every 3 weeks, starting 1 week after guadecitabine, for four cycles. Primary endpoints were safety, tolerability, and MTD of treatment; secondary were immune-related (ir) disease control rate (DCR) and objective response rate (ORR); and exploratory were changes in methylome, transcriptome, and immune contextures in sequential tumor biopsies, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Nineteen patients were treated; 84% had grade 3/4 adverse events, and neither dose-limiting toxicities per protocol nor overlapping toxicities were observed. Ir-DCR and ir-ORR were 42% and 26%, respectively. Median CpG site methylation of tumor samples (n = 8) at week 4 (74.5%) and week 12 (75.5%) was significantly (P < 0.05) lower than at baseline (80.3%), with a median of 2,454 (week 4) and 4,131 (week 12) differentially expressed genes. Among the 136 pathways significantly (P < 0.05; Z score >2 or ←2) modulated by treatment, the most frequently activated were immune-related. Tumor immune contexture analysis (n = 11) demonstrated upregulation of HLA class I on melanoma cells, an increase in CD8+, PD-1+ T cells and in CD20+ B cells in posttreatment tumor cores. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of guadecitabine combined with ipilimumab is safe and tolerable in advanced melanoma and has promising immunomodulatory and antitumor activity.

Pharmacodynamic and Clinical Results from a Phase I/II Study of the HSP90 Inhibitor Onalespib in Combination with Abiraterone Acetate in Prostate Cancer.

PURPOSE: Onalespib is a potent, fragment-derived second-generation HSP90 inhibitor with preclinical activity in castration-resistant prostate cancer (CPRC) models. This phase I/II trial evaluated onalespib in combination with abiraterone acetate (AA) and either prednisone or prednisolone (P) in men with CRPC progressing on AA/P. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with progressing CRPC were randomly assigned to receive 1 of 2 regimens of onalespib combined with AA/P. Onalespib was administered as intravenous infusion starting at 220 mg/m2 once weekly for 3 of 4 weeks (regimen 1); or at 120 mg/m2 on day 1 and day 2 weekly for 3 of 4 weeks (regimen 2). Primary endpoints were response rate and safety. Secondary endpoints included evaluation of androgen receptor (AR) depletion in circulating tumor cells (CTC) and in fresh tumor tissue biopsies. RESULTS: Forty-eight patients were treated with onalespib in combination with AA/P. The most common ≥grade 3 toxicities related to onalespib included diarrhea (21%) and fatigue (13%). Diarrhea was dose limiting at 260 and 160 mg/m2 for regimens 1 and 2, respectively. Transient decreases in CTC counts and AR expression in CTC were observed in both regimens. HSP72 was significantly upregulated following onalespib treatment, but only a modest decrease in AR and GR was shown in paired pre- and posttreatment tumor biopsy samples. No patients showed an objective or PSA response. CONCLUSIONS: Onalespib in combination with AA/P showed mild evidence of some biological effect; however, this effect did not translate into clinical activity, hence further exploration of this combination was not justified.

An oral fixed-dose combination of decitabine and cedazuridine in myelodysplastic syndromes: a multicentre, open-label, dose-escalation, phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: Decitabine, a DNA methyltransferase 1 inhibitor or DNA hypomethylating compound, is not readily orally bioavailable because of rapid clearance by cytidine deaminase (CDA) in the gut and liver. This dose-escalation study, guided by pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic observations, evaluated whether simultaneous oral administration with the novel CDA inhibitor cedazuridine increases decitabine bioavailability for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes. METHODS: In this phase 1 study, we enrolled patients aged 18 years or older with myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia. Eligible patients were assigned to cohorts to receive escalating oral doses of decitabine and cedazuridine. The starting dose was decitabine 20 mg and cedazuridine 40 mg. Treatment cycles lasted 28 days, with 5 days of drug administration. In cycle 1, each patient received a cohort-defined dose of oral decitabine on day -3, a 1-h intravenous infusion of decitabine 20 mg/m2 on day 1, and cohort-defined doses of oral decitabine plus cedazuridine on days 2-5. In cycles 2 and beyond, the oral decitabine and cedazuridine were given on days 1-5. The dose of cedazuridine was escalated first and decitabine was escalated once CDA inhibition by cedazuridine approached the maximum effect. The drug dose was escalated if mean decitabine area under the curve (AUC) of the oral drug was less than 90% of that for intravenous decitabine in the cohort and if no dose-limiting toxicity was observed. Dose-limiting toxicity was defined as a grade 3 or greater non-haematologic toxicity or grade 4 haematologic toxicity lasting more than 14 days and unrelated to the underlying disease. Once the decitabine AUC target range set as the primary endpoint, and established with intravenous decitabine, was reached at a dose deemed to be safe, the cohort that most closely approximated intravenous decitabine exposure was expanded to 18 evaluable patients. The primary objectives were to assess the safety of decitabine plus cedazuridine, and to determine the dose of each drug needed to achieve a mean AUC for decitabine exposure similar to that for intravenous decitabine exposure. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT02103478. FINDINGS: Between Oct 28, 2014, and Nov 13, 2015, we enrolled 44 eligible patients (of 75 screened) with previously treated or newly diagnosed myelodysplastic syndromes or chronic myelomonocytic leukaemia; 43 of the enrolled patients were evaluable. Participants were treated in five cohorts: cohorts 1-4 included six evaluable patients each; cohort 5 included 19 patients in a 13-patient expansion. Dose-dependent increases in decitabine AUC and peak plasma concentration occurred with each cohort dose escalation. There was no evident increase in toxicity compared with that reported for intravenous decitabine. Decitabine 30 mg and 40 mg plus cedazuridine 100 mg produced mean day-5 decitabine AUCs (146 ng × h/mL for decitabine 30 mg, and 221 ng × h/mL for decitabine 40 mg) closest to the mean intravenous-decitabine AUC (164 ng × h/mL). The most common grade 3 or more adverse events were thrombocytopenia (18 [41%] of 44 patients), neutropenia (13 [30%]), anaemia (11 [25%]), leukopenia (seven [16%]), febrile neutropenia (seven [16%]), and pneumonia (seven [16%]). Four (9%) patients died because of adverse events, none of which was considered drug related, and three (7%) patients died more than 30 days after discontinuing treatment because of progressive disease (two [5%]) and respiratory failure (one [2%]). INTERPRETATION: Oral decitabine plus cedazuridine emulated the pharmacokinetics of intravenous decitabine, with a similar safety profile and dose-dependent demethylation. Clinical responses were similar to intravenous decitabine treatment for 5 days. Further study of decitabine plus cedazuridine as an alternative to parenteral therapy or in combination with other new oral agents for myeloid disorders is warranted. FUNDING: Astex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Development and validation of LC-MS/MS methods for the quantification of the novel anticancer agent guadecitabine and its active metabolite ß­decitabine in human plasma, whole blood and urine.

Guadecitabine (SGI-110), a dinucleotide of ߭decitabine and deoxyguanosine, is currently being evaluated in phase II/III clinical trials for the treatment of hematological malignancies and solid tumors. This article describes the development and validation of bioanalytical assays to quantify guadecitabine and its active metabolite ߭decitabine in human plasma, whole blood and urine using high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (HPLC-MS/MS). Since ߭decitabine is rapidly metabolized further by cytidine deaminase, plasma and whole blood samples were kept on ice-water after collection and stabilized with tetrahydrouridine (THU) directly upon sample collection. Sample preparation consisted of protein precipitation for plasma and whole blood and dilution for urine samples and was further optimized for each matrix and analyte separately. Final extracts were injected onto a C6-phenyl column for guadecitabine analysis, or a Nova-Pak Silica column for ߭decitabine analysis. Gradient elution was applied for both analytes using the same eluents for each assay and detection was performed on triple quadrupole mass spectrometers operating in the positive ion mode (Sciex QTRAP 5500 and QTRAP 6500). The assay for guadecitabine was linear over a range of 1.0-200 ng/mL (plasma, whole blood) and 10-2000 ng/mL (urine). For ߭decitabine the assay was linear over a range of 0.5-100 ng/mL (plasma, whole blood) and 5-1000 ng/mL (urine). The presented methods were successfully validated according to the latest FDA and EMA guidelines for bioanalytical method validation and applied in a guadecitabine clinical mass balance trial in patients with advanced cancer.

Development, validation, and clinical application of a high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry assay for the quantification of total intracellular ß-decitabine nucleotides and genomic DNA incorporated ß-decitabine and 5-methyl-2'-deoxycytidine.

DNA hypermethylation is an epigenetic event that is commonly found in malignant cells and is used as a therapeutic target for ß-decitabine (ß-DEC) containing hypomethylating agents (eg Dacogen® and guadecitabine). ß-DEC requires cellular uptake and intracellular metabolic activation to ß-DEC triphosphate before it can get incorporated into the DNA. Once incorporated in the DNA, ß-DEC can exert its hypomethylating effect by trapping DNA methyltransferases (DNMTs), resulting in reduced 5-methyl-2'-deoxycytidine (5mdC) DNA content. ß-DEC DNA incorporation and its effect on DNA methylation, however, have not yet been investigated in patients treated with ß-DEC containing therapies. For this reason, we developed and validated a sensitive and selective LC-MS/MS method to determine total intracellular ß-DEC nucleotide (ß-DEC-XP) concentrations, as well as to quantify ß-DEC and 5mdC DNA incorporation relative to 2'-deoxycytidine (2dC) DNA content. The assay was successfully validated according to FDA and EMA guidelines in a linear range from 0.5 to 100 ng/mL (ß-DEC), 50 to 10,000 ng/mL (2dC), and 5 to 1,000 ng/mL (5mdC) in peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) lysate. An additional calibrator at a concentration of 0.1 ng/mL was added for ß-DEC to serve as a limit of detection (LOD). Clinical applicability of the method was demonstrated in patients treated with guadecitabine. Our data support the use of the validated LC-MS/MS method to further explore the intracellular pharmacokinetics in patients treated with ß-DEC containing hypomethylating agents.

A Phase I Trial of a Guadecitabine (SGI-110) and Irinotecan in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients Previously Exposed to Irinotecan.

PURPOSE: Chemotherapeutic resistance eventually develops in all patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Gene silencing through promoter demethylation is one potential reversible mechanism of resistance with administration of hypomethylating agents. We evaluated the safety and tolerability of guadecitabine and irinotecan in patients with mCRC previously treated with irinotecan. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this 3+3 dose-escalation study, patients with mCRC previously exposed to irinotecan received guadecitabine days 1 to 5 of a 28-day cycle and irinotecan 125 mg/m2 days 8 and 15 [dose level (DL) 1, guadecitabine 45 mg/m2; DL -1: guadecitabine 30 mg/m2; DL -1G: guadecitabine 30 mg/m2 with growth factor support (GFS); DL 1G: guadecitabine 45 mg/m2 with GFS]. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were treated across four DLs. Dose-limiting toxicities were neutropenic fever (DL 1 and -1G), biliary drain infection (DL -1), colonic obstruction (DL -1), and severe dehydration (DL 1G). Most common toxicities were neutropenia (82% any grade, 77% Grade 3/4), neutropenic fever (23%), leukopenia (73% any grade, 50% Grade 3/4), and injection site reactions (64% total, 0% Grade 3/4). Patients received a median of 4.5 cycles of treatment; 12/17 evaluable patients had stable disease as best response, with one having initial disease progression but subsequently durable partial response. Circulating tumor DNA showed decrease in global demethylation by LINE-1 after treatment. CONCLUSIONS: We report the first study of chemo-priming with epigenetic therapy in gastrointestinal cancers. Guadecitabine 45 mg/m2 and irinotecan 125 mg/m2 with GFS was safe and tolerable in patients with mCRC, with early indication of benefit. These data have provided the basis for an ongoing phase II randomized, multicenter trial.

A Phase I Clinical Trial of Guadecitabine and Carboplatin in Platinum-Resistant, Recurrent Ovarian Cancer: Clinical, Pharmacokinetic, and Pharmacodynamic Analyses.

Purpose: Epigenetic changes are implicated in acquired resistance to platinum. Guadecitabine is a next-generation hypomethylating agent (HMA). Here, we report the clinical results, along with pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic analyses of the phase I study of guadecitabine and carboplatin in patients with recurrent, platinum-resistant high-grade serous ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal carcinoma (PPC), or fallopian tube cancer (FTC).Experimental Design: Guadecitabine was administered once daily on days 1 to 5 followed by carboplatin i.v. on day 8 of a 28-day cycle. Patients had either measurable or detectable disease. Safety assessments used CTCAE v4.Results: Twenty patients were enrolled and treated. Median age was 56 years (38-72 years). The median number of prior regimens was 7 (1-14). In the first cohort (N = 6), the starting doses were guadecitabine 45 mg/m2 and carboplatin AUC5. Four patients experienced dose-limiting toxicity (DLT; neutropenia and thrombocytopenia), leading to dose deescalation of guadecitabine to 30 mg/m2 and of carboplatin to AUC4. No DLTs were observed in the subsequent 14 patients. Grade ≥3 adverse events ≥10% were neutropenia, leukopenia, anemia, nausea, vomiting, ascites, constipation, hypokalemia, pulmonary embolism, small-intestinal obstruction, and thrombocytopenia. Three patients had a partial response (PR), and 6 patients had stable disease (SD) >3 months, for an overall response rate (ORR) and clinical benefit rate of 15% and 45%, respectively. LINE-1 demethylation in PBMCs and promoter demethylation/gene reexpression in paired tumor biopsies/ascites were recorded.Conclusions: Guadecitabine and carboplatin were tolerated and induced clinical responses in a heavily pretreated platinum-resistant ovarian cancer population, supporting a subsequent randomized phase II trial. Clin Cancer Res; 24(10); 2285-93. ©2018 AACR.

Simultaneous Modeling of Biomarker and Toxicity Response Predicted Optimal Regimen of Guadecitabine (SGI-110) in Myeloid Malignancies.

Guadecitabine (SGI-110) is a novel next-generation hypomethylating agent (HMA) administered as s.c. injection with extended decitabine exposure. Dose/exposure-response analyses of longitudinal measures of long interspersed nucleotide element-1 (LINE-1) methylation and absolute neutrophil counts (ANC) pooled from 79 and 369 patients in 2 phase I/II trials, respectively, were performed to assist, through modeling and simulation, the selection of dosing regimens for phase III. Simulation of ANC predicted a decrease after a 5-day regimen of 60 mg/m2 with partial recovery before the next cycle, whereas the nadir of 90 mg/m2 on the same schedule was below 100/µl. ANC following a 60 mg/m2 10-day regimen was predicted to be suppressed below 100/µl as long as treatment continued without recovery. The developed models provided useful tools to assist simultaneous evaluation of the relative dynamics of the two effects (DNA demethylation and the effect on ANC).

Dose-escalation study of a second-generation non-ansamycin HSP90 inhibitor, onalespib (AT13387), in combination with imatinib in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumour.

BACKGROUND: Gastrointestinal stromal tumours (GIST) treated with the tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) imatinib can become resistant when additional mutations in the receptor tyrosine kinases KIT or PDGFRA block imatinib activity. Mutated KIT requires the molecular chaperone heat-shock protein 90 (HSP90) to maintain stability and activity. Onalespib (AT13387) is a potent non-ansamycin HSP90 inhibitor. We hypothesised that the combination of onalespib and imatinib may be safe and effective in managing TKI-resistant GIST. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this dose-escalation study, we evaluated the safety and efficacy of combination once-weekly intravenous onalespib for 3 weeks and daily oral imatinib in 28-d cycles. Twenty-six patients with TKI-resistant GIST were enrolled into four sequential dose cohorts of onalespib (dose range, 150-220 mg/m(2)) and imatinib 400 mg. The relationship between tumour mutational status (KIT/PDGFRA) and efficacy of treatment was explored. RESULTS: Common onalespib-related adverse events were diarrhoea (58%), nausea (50%), injection site events (46%), vomiting (39%), fatigue (27%), and muscle spasms (23%). Overall, 81% of patients reported more than one onalespib-related gastrointestinal disorder. Nine patients (35%) had a best response of stable disease, including two patients who had KIT mutations known to be associated with resistance to imatinib and sunitinib. Disease control at 4 months was achieved in five patients (19%), and median progression-free survival was 112 d (95% confidence interval 43-165). One patient with PDGFRA-mutant GIST had a partial response for more than 376 d. CONCLUSION: The combination of onalespib plus imatinib was well tolerated but exhibited limited antitumour activity as dosed in this TKI-resistant GIST patient population. Trial registration ID: clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01294202.

Safety and tolerability of guadecitabine (SGI-110) in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukaemia: a multicentre, randomised, dose-escalation phase 1 study.

BACKGROUND: Hypomethylating agents are used to treat cancers driven by aberrant DNA methylation, but their short half-life might limit their activity, particularly in patients with less proliferative diseases. Guadecitabine (SGI-110) is a novel hypomethylating dinucleotide of decitabine and deoxyguanosine resistant to degradation by cytidine deaminase. We aimed to assess the safety and clinical activity of subcutaneously given guadecitabine in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia or myelodysplastic syndrome. METHODS: In this multicentre, open-label, phase 1 study, patients from nine North American medical centres with myelodysplastic syndrome or acute myeloid leukaemia that was refractory to or had relapsed after standard treatment were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive subcutaneous guadecitabine, either once-daily for 5 consecutive days (daily × 5), or once-weekly for 3 weeks, in a 28-day treatment cycle. Patients were stratified by disease. A 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was used in which we treated patients with guadecitabine doses of 3-125 mg/m(2) in separate dose-escalation cohorts. A twice-weekly treatment schedule was added to the study after a protocol amendment. The primary objective was to assess safety and tolerability of guadecitabine, determine the maximum tolerated and biologically effective dose, and identify the recommended phase 2 dose of guadecitabine. Safety analyses included all patients who received at least one dose of guadecitabine. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic analyses to determine the biologically effective dose included all patients for whom samples were available. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01261312. FINDINGS: Between Jan 4, 2011, and April 11, 2014, we enrolled and treated 93 patients: 35 patients with acute myeloid leukaemia and nine patients with myelodysplastic syndrome in the daily × 5 dose-escalation cohorts, 28 patients with acute myeloid leukaemia and six patients with myelodysplastic syndrome in the once-weekly dose-escalation cohorts, and 11 patients with acute myeloid leukaemia and four patients with myelodysplastic syndrome in the twice-weekly dose-escalation cohorts. The most common grade 3 or higher adverse events were febrile neutropenia (38 [41%] of 93 patients), pneumonia (27 [29%] of 93 patients), thrombocytopenia (23 [25%] of 93 patients), anaemia (23 [25%] of 93 patients), and sepsis (16 [17%] of 93 patients). The most common serious adverse events were febrile neutropenia (29 [31%] of 93 patients), pneumonia (26 [28%] of 93 patients), and sepsis (16 [17%] of 93 patients). Six of the 74 patients with acute myeloid leukaemia and six of the 19 patients with myelodysplastic syndrome had a clinical response to treatment. Two dose-limiting toxicities were noted in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome at 125 mg/m(2) daily × 5, thus the maximum tolerated dose in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome was 90 mg/m(2) daily × 5. The maximum tolerated dose was not reached in patients with acute myeloid leukaemia. Potent dose-related DNA demethylation occurred on the daily × 5 regimen, reaching a plateau at 60 mg/m(2) (designated as the biologically effective dose). INTERPRETATION: Guadecitabine given subcutaneously at 60 mg/m(2) daily × 5 is well tolerated and is clinically and biologically active in patients with myelodysplastic syndrome and acute myeloid leukaemia. Guadecitabine 60 mg/m(2) daily × 5 is the recommended phase 2 dose, and these findings warrant further phase 2 studies. FUNDING: Astex Pharmaceuticals, Stand Up To Cancer.

Phase 1B study of amuvatinib in combination with five standard cancer therapies in adults with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Amuvatinib is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor that suppresses RAD51, inhibits mutant c-KIT and platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha, and has synergistic activity with DNA-damaging agents and topoisomerase inhibitors such as etoposide, doxorubicin, and topotecan. We conducted a phase 1B study to estimate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) levels of amuvatinib with standard chemotherapy regimens and to define the safety profiles of specific amuvatinib + standard regimens. METHODS: Five therapies each co-administered with amuvatinib 100-800 mg/day every 21 days were evaluated in treatment-naïve or moderately pre-treated subjects: paclitaxel IV followed by carboplatin IV; carboplatin IV followed by etoposide; topotecan IV; docetaxel IV; and erlotinib by mouth. RESULTS: Among 97 treated subjects, no treatment arm reached the MTD. Dose-limiting toxicities included febrile neutropenia and diarrhea. No pharmacokinetic interactions of amuvatinib with any cancer regimens occurred. Of 12/97 (12 %) partial responses overall, 11 were seen in the amuvatinib and paclitaxel/carboplatin or carboplatin/etoposide arms and most commonly in the neuroendocrine (NE), non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and small cell lung cancer (SCLC) tumors. Forty-four subjects (45 %) had stable disease. Adverse events reflected combination treatment and were primarily non-hematologic (fatigue, alopecia, diarrhea, nausea, anorexia) and hematologic (neutropenia, anemia, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia). Pharmacodynamic effects as measured by decreased levels of RAD51 and increased residual DNA damage (53BP1 foci) were seen in skin punch biopsies. CONCLUSION: Amuvatinib was well tolerated, modulated RAD51, and showed antitumor activity when combined with paclitaxel/carboplatin and carboplatin/etoposide in NE, NSCLC, and SCLC tumors.