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.

Phase IA/IB study of single-agent tislelizumab, an investigational anti-PD-1 antibody, in solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: The programmed cell death-1/programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-1/PD-L1) axis plays a central role in suppressing antitumor immunity; axis dysregulation can be used by cancer cells to evade the immune system. Tislelizumab, an investigational monoclonal antibody with high affinity and binding specificity for PD-1, was engineered to minimize binding to FcγR on macrophages to limit antibody-dependent phagocytosis, a potential mechanism of resistance to anti-PD-1 therapy. The aim of this phase IA/IB study was to investigate the safety/tolerability, antitumor effects and optimal dose and schedule of tislelizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients (aged ≥18 years) enrolled in phase IA received intravenous tislelizumab 0.5, 2, 5 or 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks; 2 or 5 mg/kg administered every 2 weeks or every 3 weeks; or 200 mg every 3 weeks; patients in phase IB received 5 mg/kg every 3 weeks. Primary objectives were to assess tislelizumab's safety/tolerability profile by adverse event (AE) monitoring and antitumor activity using RECIST V.1.1. PD-L1 expression was assessed retrospectively with the VENTANA PD-L1 (SP263) Assay. RESULTS: Between May 2015 and October 2017, 451 patients (n=116, IA; n=335, IB) were enrolled. Fatigue (28%), nausea (25%) and decreased appetite (20%) were the most commonly reported AEs. Most AEs were grade 1-2 severity; anemia (4.9%) was the most common grade 3-4 AE. Treatment-related AEs led to discontinuation in 5.3% of patients. Grade 5 AEs were reported in 14 patients; 2 were considered related to tislelizumab. Pneumonitis (2%) and colitis (1%) were the most common serious tislelizumab-related AEs. As of May 2019, 18% of patients achieved a confirmed objective response in phase IA and 12% in phase IB; median follow-up duration was 13.6 and 7.6 months, respectively. Pharmacokinetics, safety and antitumor activity obtained from both phase IA and IB determined the tislelizumab recommended dose; ultimately, tislelizumab 200 mg intravenous every 3 weeks was the dose and schedule recommended to be taken into subsequent clinical trials. CONCLUSIONS: Tislelizumab monotherapy demonstrated an acceptable safety/tolerability profile. Durable responses were observed in heavily pretreated patients with advanced solid tumors, supporting the evaluation of tislelizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks, as monotherapy and in combination therapy, for the treatment of solid tumors and hematological malignancies. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02407990.

A case-control study to assess the ability of the thymine challenge test to predict patients with severe to life threatening fluoropyrimidine-induced gastrointestinal toxicity.

AIMS: A previous study suggested that a thymine (THY) challenge dose could detect aberrant pharmacokinetics in known cases of fluoropyrimidine toxicity compared with healthy volunteers. The preliminary data suggested that urine sampling also could detect this aberrant disposition. The aim of this case-control study was to assess the ability of the urinary THY challenge test to discriminate cases of severe gastrointestinal toxicity in a cohort of patients treated with 5-fluorouracil or capecitabine. METHODS: Patients (n = 37) received a 250 mg (per os) dose of THY and a cumulative urine sample was collected for 0-4 h. The urinary amounts of THY and metabolite dihydrothymine (DHT) were determined by liquid chromatography/mass spectrometry. Genomic DNA was analysed for DPYD gene variants. Renal function was estimated from blood creatinine levels. Cases (n = 9) and noncases (n = 23) of severe (grade ≥ 3) gastrointestinal toxicity were defined based on Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events. RESULTS: The median THY/DHT ratios were 6.2 (interquartile range 2.9-6.4) in cases, including the 2 patients who were DPYD heterozygous carriers. However, this was not significantly different (P = .07) from the THY/DHT in noncases (median 2.6, interquartile range 2.8-4.2). Although creatinine clearance was lower (P = .001) in cases, renal function could not discriminate cases from noncases. However, logistic regression analysis using both of these explanatory variables could discriminate most cases (receiver operating characteristic area 0.8792, 95% confidence interval 0.72-1.00). CONCLUSIONS: The THY challenge test combined with a patient's renal function may be useful as a phenotypic diagnostic test to detect risk of life-threatening fluoropyrimidine gastrointestinal toxicity.