Dabrafenib plus Trametinib in Pediatric Glioma with BRAF V600 Mutations.

BACKGROUND: Detection of the BRAF V600E mutation in pediatric low-grade glioma has been associated with a lower response to standard chemotherapy. In previous trials, dabrafenib (both as monotherapy and in combination with trametinib) has shown efficacy in recurrent pediatric low-grade glioma with BRAF V600 mutations, findings that warrant further evaluation of this combination as first-line therapy. METHODS: In this phase 2 trial, patients with pediatric low-grade glioma with BRAF V600 mutations who were scheduled to receive first-line therapy were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib or standard chemotherapy (carboplatin plus vincristine). The primary outcome was the independently assessed overall response (complete or partial response) according to the Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria. Also assessed were the clinical benefit (complete or partial response or stable disease for ≥24 weeks) and progression-free survival. RESULTS: A total of 110 patients underwent randomization (73 to receive dabrafenib plus trametinib and 37 to receive standard chemotherapy). At a median follow-up of 18.9 months, an overall response occurred in 47% of the patients treated with dabrafenib plus trametinib and in 11% of those treated with chemotherapy (risk ratio, 4.31; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.7 to 11.2; P<0.001). Clinical benefit was observed in 86% of the patients receiving dabrafenib plus trametinib and in 46% receiving chemotherapy (risk ratio, 1.88; 95% CI, 1.3 to 2.7). The median progression-free survival was significantly longer with dabrafenib plus trametinib than with chemotherapy (20.1 months vs. 7.4 months; hazard ratio, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.55; P<0.001). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 47% of the patients receiving dabrafenib plus trametinib and in 94% of those receiving chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Among pediatric patients with low-grade glioma with BRAF V600 mutations, dabrafenib plus trametinib resulted in significantly more responses, longer progression-free survival, and a better safety profile than standard chemotherapy as first-line therapy. (Funded by Novartis; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02684058.).

Phase II Trial of Dabrafenib Plus Trametinib in Relapsed/Refractory BRAF V600-Mutant Pediatric High-Grade Glioma.

PURPOSE: BRAF V600 mutation is detected in 5%-10% of pediatric high-grade gliomas (pHGGs), and effective treatments are limited. In previous trials, dabrafenib as monotherapy or in combination with trametinib demonstrated activity in children and adults with relapsed/refractory BRAF V600-mutant HGG. METHODS: This phase II study evaluated dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with relapsed/refractory BRAF V600-mutant pHGG. The primary objective was overall response rate (ORR) by independent review by Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology criteria. Secondary objectives included ORR by investigator determination, duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: A total of 41 pediatric patients with previously treated BRAF V600-mutant HGG were enrolled. At primary analysis, median follow-up was 25.1 months, and 51% of patients remained on treatment. Sixteen of 20 discontinuations were due to progressive disease in this relapsed/refractory pHGG population. Independently assessed ORR was 56% (95% CI, 40 to 72). Median DOR was 22.2 months (95% CI, 7.6 months to not reached [NR]). Fourteen deaths were reported. Median OS was 32.8 months (95% CI, 19.2 months to NR). The most common all-cause adverse events (AEs) were pyrexia (51%), headache (34%), and dry skin (32%). Two patients (5%) had AEs (both rash) leading to discontinuation. CONCLUSION: In relapsed/refractory BRAF V600-mutant pHGG, dabrafenib plus trametinib improved ORR versus previous trials of chemotherapy in molecularly unselected patients with pHGG and was associated with durable responses and encouraging survival. These findings suggest that dabrafenib plus trametinib is a promising targeted therapy option for children and adolescents with relapsed/refractory BRAF V600-mutant HGG.

Evaluation of Nicotine Pharmacokinetics and Subjective Effects following Use of a Novel Nicotine Delivery System.

Introduction: Novel nicotine delivery systems represent an evolving part of the tobacco harm reduction strategy. The pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of nicotine delivered by P3L, a pulmonary nicotine delivery system, and its effects on smoking urges and craving relief in relation to Nicorette inhalator were evaluated. Methods: This open-label, ascending nicotine levels study was conducted in 16 healthy smokers. Three different nicotine delivery levels, 50, 80, and 150 µg/puff, delivered by the P3L system were evaluated consecutively on different days after the use of the Nicorette inhalator. Venous nicotine PK, subjective effects, and tolerability were assessed. Results: Geometric least-squares means for maximum plasma nicotine concentration (Cmax), generated by the mixed-effect model for exposure comparison, were 9.7, 11.2, and 9.8 ng/mL for the 50, 80, and 150 µg/puff P3L variants, respectively, compared to 6.1 ng/mL after Nicorette inhalator use. Median time from product use start to Cmax was 7.0 minutes for all P3L, compared to 30.0 minutes for the Nicorette inhalator. Craving reduction was slightly faster than with the Nicorette inhalator as assessed with the visual analog scale craving score. The mean Questionnaire of Smoking Urges -brief total scores did not differ for both products. P3L was well tolerated. Conclusions: At all three nicotine levels tested, the inhalation of the nicotine lactate aerosol delivered with the P3L provided plasma nicotine concentrations higher and faster compared to the Nicorette inhalator. The plasma nicotine concentration-time profile supports a pulmonary route of absorption for P3L compared to the oromucosal absorption of the Nicorette inhalator. Implications: The combination of nicotine and lactic acid with the P3L device shows potential over existing nicotine delivery systems by delivering nicotine with kinetics close to published data on conventional cigarettes and without exogenous carrier substances as used in current electronic nicotine delivery systems. Altogether, the PK profile, subjective effects, and safety profile obtained in this study suggest P3L is an innovative nicotine delivery product that will be acceptable to adult smokers as an alternative to cigarettes.

Bayesian dose escalation in oncology with sharing of information between patient populations.

We present a Phase I dose escalation trial design based on a modified continual reassessment method that allows for sharing of information between populations. We describe our approach in the context of a trial for patients with acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) that is currently being conducted. The ALL trial enrolls both adult and pediatric patient populations. Dose escalation and the determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) are performed separately for each population, but to increase efficiency, information about the dose-toxicity curve is shared. Dose escalation rules allow pediatric patients to skip dose levels provided safety has been shown in adults and the dose level is estimated to be safe for pediatric patients. Trial objectives are to efficiently determine the MTD for each population and to minimize the number of pediatric patients required for dose escalation.

Randomized phase IIb study of low-dose cytarabine and lintuzumab versus low-dose cytarabine and placebo in older adults with untreated acute myeloid leukemia.

Improving outcomes in older adults with acute myeloid leukemia remains a formidable challenge. Lintuzumab (SGN-33; HuM195) is a humanized monoclonal antibody directed against CD33, which is expressed on the majority of myeloblasts in acute myeloid leukemia. The primary objective of this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial was to determine whether addition of lintuzumab to low-dose cytarabine would increase overall survival in adults aged 60 years and over with untreated acute myeloid leukemia. Randomization was stratified by age, previous hematologic disorder, and performance status. All patients received cytarabine (20 mg subcutaneously twice daily) on Days 1-10 of each 28-day cycle. Patients received lintuzumab (600 mg) or placebo intravenously once weekly in Cycle 1 and once every other week in Cycles 2-12. A total of 211 patients (107 lintuzumab, 104 placebo) were randomized. Median age was 70 years (range 60-90). Survival was not significantly prolonged with lintuzumab treatment (hazard ratio 0.96; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.72-1.28; P=0.7585). Median survival was similar between treatment arms (4.7 months lintuzumab vs. 5.1 months placebo) and in the subgroup of patients with high-risk cytogenetics (4.5 months). Infusion-related reactions, predominantly Grades 1-2, occurred more commonly in the lintuzumab arm (51% vs. 7% placebo); no other clinically significant difference in safety was noted. These results confirm that lintuzumab in combination with low-dose cytarabine did not prolong survival and that low-dose cytarabine remains a valid comparator for trials of non-intensive therapies in older patients with acute myeloid leukemia, regardless of cytogenetic profile.

Randomized phase III trial comparing single-agent paclitaxel Poliglumex (CT-2103, PPX) with single-agent gemcitabine or vinorelbine for the treatment of PS 2 patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and impaired performance status (PS >or= 2) have limited life expectancies and decreased tolerance for drug-induced toxicities. Current treatment guidelines indicate that PS 2 patients benefit from systemic therapy. Further refinement of treatment in these patients requires reduction of treatment-associated toxicities while maintaining or improving efficacy. Paclitaxel poliglumex (PPX), a macromolecular polymer-drug conjugate of paclitaxel and poly-l-glutamic acid, may enhance the therapeutic index of paclitaxel. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive PS 2 patients with advanced NSCLC randomly received single-agent PPX (175 mg/m) or a comparator (single-agent vinorelbine or gemcitabine). The primary end point of this study was overall survival. RESULTS: Overall survival was similar between treatment arms (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.95; log-rank p = 0.686). Median and 1-year survival were 7.3 months and 26%, respectively, for PPX versus 6.6 months and 26% for the control arm. There was a nonsignificant trend toward improved survival in women in the PPX arm compared with standard single agents (HR = 0.65; p = 0.069). The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events in the treatment versus control arm were dyspnea (13% versus 17%, respectively) and fatigue (10% versus 9%). Grade 3/4 neutropenia and anemia were reduced in the PPX arm (2% versus 8% and 3% versus 9%, respectively). Neuropathy, a taxane-specific toxicity, was more common in the PPX arm; grade 3 neuropathy was limited to 3%. CONCLUSIONS: Single-agent PPX, dosed at 175 mg/m, is active and well tolerated in PS 2 patients with advanced NSCLC. Patients on PPX required fewer red blood cell transfusions, hematopoietic growth factors, opioid analgesics, and clinic visits than patients receiving gemcitabine or vinorelbine.

Phase III trial comparing paclitaxel poliglumex (CT-2103, PPX) in combination with carboplatin versus standard paclitaxel and carboplatin in the treatment of PS 2 patients with chemotherapy-naïve advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: Performance status (PS) 2 patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) experience more toxicity, lower response rates, and shorter survival times than healthier patients treated with standard chemotherapy. Paclitaxel poliglumex (PPX), a macromolecule drug conjugate of paclitaxel and polyglutamic acid, reduces systemic exposure to peak concentrations of free paclitaxel and may lead to increased concentrations in tumors due to enhanced vascular permeability. METHODS: Chemotherapy-naive PS 2 patients with advanced NSCLC were randomized to receive carboplatin (area under the curve = 6) and either PPX (210 mg/m/10 min without routine steroid premedication) or paclitaxel (225 mg/m/3 h with standard premedication) every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. RESULTS: A total of 400 patients were enrolled. Alopecia, arthralgias/myalgias, and cardiac events were significantly less frequent with PPX/carboplatin, whereas grade > or =3 neutropenia and grade 3 neuropathy showed a trend of worsening. There was no significant difference in the incidence of hypersensitivity reactions despite the absence of routine premedication in the PPX arm. Overall survival was similar between treatment arms (hazard ratio, 0.97; log rank p = 0.769). Median and 1-year survival rates were 7.9 months and 31%, for PPX versus 8 months and 31% for paclitaxel. Disease control rates were 64% and 69% for PPX and paclitaxel, respectively. Time to progression was similar: 3.9 months for PPX/carboplatin versus 4.6 months for paclitaxel/carboplatin (p = 0.210). CONCLUSION: PPX/carboplatin failed to provide superior survival compared with paclitaxel/carboplatin in the first-line treatment of PS 2 patients with NSCLC, but the results with respect to progression-free survival and overall survival were comparable and the PPX regimen was more convenient.