Population Pharmacokinetics of an Anti-PD-L1 Antibody, Durvalumab in Patients with Hematologic Malignancies.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Durvalumab, a human monoclonal antibody targeting programmed cell death ligand 1, has been approved for urothelial carcinoma and stage III non-small cell lung cancer by the US Food and Drug Administration and is being evaluated in various malignancies. The objective of this study was to develop a population-pharmacokinetic model of durvalumab in patients with various hematologic malignancies and to investigate the effects of demographic and disease factors on the pharmacokinetics in this population. METHODS: A total of 1812 concentrations from 267 patients with myelodysplastic syndromes, acute myeloid leukemia, multiple myeloma, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, or Hodgkin lymphoma were included in the analysis. RESULTS: The pharmacokinetics of durvalumab was adequately described by a two-compartment model with first-order elimination. A decrease in durvalumab clearance over time was mainly explained by incorporation of time-dependent changes in albumin (in all patients) and immunoglobulin G (in patients with multiple myeloma) into the model. For multiple myeloma, patients with immunoglobulin G ≥ 20 g/L showed a 30% lower area under the concentration-time curve at cycle 1 compared with patients with immunoglobulin G < 20 g/L. The impact of any baseline covariates on durvalumab pharmacokinetics did not appear to be clinically relevant. The pharmacokinetics of durvalumab in hematologic malignancies was generally consistent with previously reported pharmacokinetics in solid tumors. CONCLUSIONS: These results support the same dosing regimen (1500 mg every 4 weeks) for both solid tumors and hematologic malignancies from the perspective of adequate exposure. Additionally, total immunoglobulin G level could be a critical covariate for the pharmacokinetics of monoclonal antibodies in patients with multiple myeloma.

Cereblon gene expression and correlation with clinical outcomes in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma treated with pomalidomide: an analysis of STRATUS.

We analyzed gene expression levels of CRBN, cMYC, IRF4, BLIMP1, and XBP1 in 224 patients with multiple myeloma treated with pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone in the STRATUS study (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01712789; EudraCT number: 2012-001888-78). Clinical responses were observed at all CRBN expression levels. A trend in progression-free survival (PFS; p = .038) and a potential trend in overall survival (OS; p = .059) favoring high CRBN expressers were observed; however, no notable difference in overall response rate (ORR) was observed. ORR (30%), median PFS (17.7 weeks), and median OS (52.3 weeks) in low-CRBN expressers were comparable to those in the STRATUS intent-to-treat population (ORR, 33%; median PFS, 20.0 weeks; median OS, 51.7 weeks). A trend in ORR (p = .050) favoring higher cMYC expressers was observed with no notable difference in PFS or OS. This analysis does not support exploring CRBN as a biomarker for selecting patients for pomalidomide therapy.

Population pharmacokinetics of pomalidomide in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma with various degrees of impaired renal function.

Pomalidomide is an immunomodulatory drug for treatment of relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (rrMM) in patients who often have comorbid renal conditions. To assess the impact of renal impairment on pomalidomide exposure, a population pharmacokinetics (PPK) model of pomalidomide in rrMM patients with various degrees of impaired renal function was developed. Intensive and sparse pomalidomide concentration data collected from two clinical studies in rrMM patients with normal renal function, moderately impaired renal function, severely impaired renal function not requiring dialysis, and with severely impaired renal function requiring dialysis were pooled over the dose range of 2 to 4 mg, to assess specifically the influence of the impaired renal function as a categorical variable and a continuous variable on pomalidomide clearance and plasma exposure. In addition, pomalidomide concentration data collected on dialysis days from both the withdrawal (arterial) side and from the returning (venous) side of the dialyzer, from rrMM patients with severely impaired renal function requiring dialysis, were used to assess the extent to which dialysis contributes to the removal of pomalidomide from blood circulation. PPK analyses demonstrated that moderate to severe renal impairment not requiring dialysis has no influence on pomalidomide clearance or plasma exposure, as compared to those patients with normal renal function, while pomalidomide exposure increased approximately 35% in patients with severe renal impairment requiring dialysis on nondialysis days. In addition, dialysis increased total body pomalidomide clearance from 5 L/h to 12 L/h, indicating that dialysis will significantly remove pomalidomide from the blood circulation. Thus, pomalidomide should be administered post-dialysis on the days of dialysis.

Adverse event management in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma taking pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone: A pooled analysis.

OBJECTIVES: Heavily pretreated patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma are susceptible to treatment-related adverse events (AEs). Managing AEs are important to ensure patients continue therapy long enough to receive the best clinical benefit. Data from the MM-002, MM-003, and MM-010 trials were pooled to further characterize the safety profile of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and AE management. METHODS: This analysis included 1088 patients who received ≥ 2 prior therapies, including lenalidomide and bortezomib, and progressed ≤ 60 days of last therapy. Patients received 28-day cycles of pomalidomide 4 mg/day on days 1-21 and low-dose dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg if aged > 75 years) weekly until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Thromboprophylaxis was required. RESULTS: The most common grade 3/4 AEs were neutropenia (56.2%), anemia (32.3%), and thrombocytopenia (25.8%), which occurred within the first few cycles of treatment. Grade 3/4 infections occurred in 33.7% patients, of whom 13.9% had pneumonia, and 40.3% had neutropenia. Pomalidomide dose reductions or interruptions were reported in 24.2% and 66.0% of patients, respectively. AEs were managed by dose modifications and/or supportive care. CONCLUSIONS: Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone showed an acceptable safety profile, and AEs were well managed according to study protocols and established guidelines.

Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and moderate renal impairment: a pooled analysis of three clinical trials.

Renal impairment (RI) is a major comorbidity in patients with multiple myeloma (MM). Here we present the pooled safety and efficacy analysis of three clinical trials (MM-002, MM-003, and MM-010) of pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone (POM + LoDEX) in patients with moderate RI (creatinine clearance [CrCl] ≥ 30 to <60 mL/min) and without RI (≥ 60 mL/min). Trial protocols were approved by the institutional review board of each site involved. Patients with RI were older than patients without RI, although other baseline characteristics were similar. The dosing and safety profile of POM + LoDEX was similar across RI subgroups. Median overall response rate, progression-free survival, time to progression, and duration of response were not significantly different between RI subgroups. However, patients with vs. without RI had significantly shorter median overall survival (10.5 vs. 14.0 months, respectively; p = .004). This analysis demonstrates that POM + LoDEX is a safe and effective treatment for patients with moderate RI. The trials were registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT00833833 (MM-002), NCT01311687 (MM-003), and NCT01712789 (MM-010) and at EudraCT as 2010-019820-30 (MM-003) and 2012-001888-78 (MM-010).

Relationship of response and survival in patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma treated with pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in the MM-003 trial randomized phase III trial (NIMBUS).

Relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients have poor overall survival (OS). Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (POM + LoDEX) significantly extends OS in RRMM vs. high-dose dexamethasone. Survival of patients with stable disease (SD) was compared to patients with progressive disease (PD) or ≥ partial response (≥PR) at cycles (C) 3, 5, and 7. Among 302 patients randomized to POM + LoDEX, at C3 19.2% achieved ≥ PR, 38.4% SD, and 14.6% PD. Patients with SD at C3 (17.4%) and C5 (13.6%) showed improved responses at C7. Median OS from randomization by response at C3 was 22.4 months for ≥ PR (n = 58, HR 0.66; 95% CI 0.40-1.08, p = 0.0976 vs. SD), 16.2 months for SD (n = 116), and 6.3 months for PD (n = 44, HR 3.43; 95% CI 2.23-5.27, p < 0.0001 vs. SD). Similar patterns were observed for C5 and C7. Results show that POM + LoDEX should be a standard treatment after lenalidomide and bortezomib, including in SD patients.

Safety and efficacy of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in STRATUS (MM-010): a phase 3b study in refractory multiple myeloma.

Patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) have poor prognosis. The STRATUS study assessed safety and efficacy of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in the largest cohort to date of patients with RRMM. Patients who failed treatment with bortezomib and lenalidomide and had adequate prior alkylator therapy were eligible. Pomalidomide 4 mg was given on days 1-21 of 28-day cycles with low-dose dexamethasone 40 mg (20 mg for patients aged >75 years) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 until progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. Safety was the primary end point; secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Among 682 patients enrolled, median age was 66 years, and median time since diagnosis was 5.3 years. Median number of prior regimens was 5. Most patients were refractory to both lenalidomide and bortezomib (80.2%). Median follow-up was 16.8 months; median duration of treatment was 4.9 months. Most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were hematologic (neutropenia [49.7%], anemia [33.0%], and thrombocytopenia [24.1%]). Most common grade 3/4 nonhematologic toxicities were pneumonia (10.9%) and fatigue (5.9%). Grade 3/4 venous thromboembolism and peripheral neuropathy were rare (1.6% each). The ORR was 32.6%, and the median DOR was 7.4 months. Median PFS and OS were 4.6 months and 11.9 months, respectively. We present the largest trial to date evaluating pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone in patients with RRMM, further confirming that this regimen offers clinically meaningful benefit and is generally well tolerated. www.Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01712789.

Analysis of renal impairment in MM-003, a phase III study of pomalidomide + low - dose dexamethasone versus high - dose dexamethasone in refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma.

Pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone is effective and well tolerated for refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma after bortezomib and lenalidomide failure. The phase III trial MM-003 compared pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone with high-dose dexamethasone. This subanalysis grouped patients by baseline creatinine clearance ≥ 30 - < 60 mL/min (n=93, pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone; n=56, high-dose dexamethasone) or ≥ 60 mL/min (n=205, pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone; n=93, high-dose dexamethasone). Median progression-free survival was similar for both subgroups and favored pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone versus high-dose dexamethasone: 4.0 versus 1.9 months in the group with baseline creatinine clearance ≥ 30 - < 60 mL/min (P<0.001) and 4.0 versus 2.0 months in the group with baseline creatinine clearance ≥ 60 mL/min (P<0.001). Median overall survival for pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone versus high-dose dexamethasone was 10.4 versus 4.9 months (P=0.030) and 15.5 versus 9.2 months (P=0.133), respectively. Improved renal function, defined as an increase in creatinine clearance from < 60 to ≥ 60 mL/min, was similar in pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone and high-dose dexamethasone patients (42% and 47%, respectively). Improvement in progression-free and overall survival in these patients was comparable with that in patients without renal impairment. There was no increase in discontinuations of therapy, dose modifications, and adverse events in patients with moderate renal impairment. Pomalidomide at a starting dose of 4 mg + low-dose dexamethasone is well tolerated in patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, and of comparable efficacy if moderate renal impairment is present. This trial was registered with clinicaltrials.gov identifier 01311687 and EudraCT identifier 2010-019820-30.

Cytogenetics and long-term survival of patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma treated with pomalidomide and low-dose dexamethasone.

Patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma who no longer receive benefit from novel agents have limited treatment options and short expected survival. del(17p) and t(4;14) are correlated with shortened survival. The phase 3 MM-003 trial demonstrated significant progression-free and overall survival benefits from treatment with pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone compared to high-dose dexamethasone among patients in whom bortezomib and lenalidomide treatment had failed. At an updated median follow-up of 15.4 months, the progression-free survival was 4.0 versus 1.9 months (HR, 0.50; P<0.001), and median overall survival was 13.1 versus 8.1 months (HR, 0.72; P=0.009). Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone, compared with high-dose dexamethasone, improved progression-free survival in patients with del(17p) (4.6 versus 1.1 months; HR, 0.34; P <0.001), t(4;14) (2.8 versus 1.9 months; HR, 0.49; P=0.028), and in standard-risk patients (4.2 versus 2.3 months; HR, 0.55; P<0.001). Although the majority of patients treated with high-dose dexamethasone took pomalidomide after discontinuation, the overall survival of patients treated with pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone or high-dose dexamethasone was 12.6 versus 7.7 months (HR, 0.45; P=0.008) in patients with del(17p), 7.5 versus 4.9 months (HR, 1.12; P=0.761) in those with t(4;14), and 14.0 versus 9.0 months (HR, 0.85; P=0.380) in standard-risk subjects. The overall response rate was higher in patients treated with pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone than in those treated with high-dose dexamethasone both among standard-risk patients (35.2% versus 9.7%) and those with del(17p) (31.8% versus 4.3%), whereas it was similar in patients with t(4;14) (15.9% versus 13.3%). The safety of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone was consistent with initial reports. In conclusion, pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone is efficacious in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma and del(17p) and/or t(4;14). This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov as NCT01311687 and with EudraCT as 2010-019820-30.

Impact of prior treatment and depth of response on survival in MM-003, a randomized phase 3 study comparing pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone versus high-dose dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma.

Pomalidomide is a distinct oral IMiD(®) immunomodulatory agent with direct antimyeloma, stromal-support inhibitory, and immunomodulatory effects. The pivotal, multicenter, open-label, randomized phase 3 trial MM-003 compared pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone vs high-dose dexamethasone in 455 patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma after failure of bortezomib and lenalidomide treatment. Initial results demonstrated significantly longer progression-free survival and overall survival with an acceptable tolerability profile for pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone vs high-dose dexamethasone. This secondary analysis describes patient outcomes by treatment history and depth of response. Pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone significantly prolonged progression-free survival and favored overall survival vs high-dose dexamethasone for all subgroups analyzed, regardless of prior treatments or refractory status. Both univariate and multivariate analyses showed that no variable relating to either the number (≤ or > 3) or type of prior treatment was a significant predictor of progression-free survival or overall survival. No cross-resistance with prior lenalidomide or thalidomide treatment was observed. Patients achieving a minimal response or better to pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone treatment experienced a survival benefit, which was even higher in those achieving at least a partial response (17.2 and 19.9 months, respectively, as compared with 7.5 months for patients with less than minimal response). These data suggest that pomalidomide + low-dose dexamethasone should be considered a standard of care in patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma regardless of prior treatment. ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01311687; EudraCT: 2010-019820-30.

Pomalidomide and Low-Dose Dexamethasone Improves Health-Related Quality of Life and Prolongs Time to Worsening in Relapsed/Refractory Patients With Multiple Myeloma Enrolled in the MM-003 Randomized Phase III Trial.

BACKGROUND: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is an important element for consideration in treatment decisions in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). The pivotal MM-003 (A Phase 3, Multicenter, Randomized, Open-Label Study to Compare the Efficacy and Safety of Pomalidomide in Combination With Low-Dose Dexamethasone vs. High-Dose Dexamethasone in Patients With Refractory Multiple Myeloma or Relapsed and Refractory Multiple Myeloma and Companion Study [NIMBUS]) randomized, open-label, multicenter, phase III trial demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS) and prolonged overall survival (OS) with pomalidomide (POM) plus low-dose dexamethasone (POM + LoDEX) versus high-dose dexamethasone (HiDEX) in patients with RRMM in whom lenalidomide (LEN) and bortezomib (BORT) had failed. MM-003 also investigated HRQoL as a predefined secondary end point. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Recruited patients (n = 455) were refractory to their last treatment and had failed LEN and BORT after ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of each (alone or in combination). Eight clinically relevant and validated HRQoL domains from the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) QLQ-C30, EORTC QLQ-MY20, and EQ-5D questionnaires were selected for analysis. Time to symptom worsening based on minimally important differences (MIDs) was calculated. RESULTS: Clinically meaningful improvements in HRQoL as determined by MIDs, regression analyses, and best response analyses were observed more frequently in patients receiving POM + LoDEX than in those receiving HiDEX. POM + LoDEX significantly extended median time to clinically meaningful worsening in HRQoL versus HiDEX in 4 HRQoL domains and demonstrated a trend in an additional 3 domains. Patients in the HiDEX arm experienced earlier HRQoL deterioration compared with those in the POM + LoDEX arm in each domain analyzed. CONCLUSION: POM + LoDEX offer good clinical outcomes that lead to improved and prolonged HRQoL compared with HiDEX in patients with RRMM and end-stage disease.

Overall survival of relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma patients after adjusting for crossover in the MM-003 trial for pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone.

In the phase III MM-003 trial, pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone (POM+LoDEX) improved overall survival (OS) versus high-dose dexamethasone (HiDEX) in 455 patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) after treatment with bortezomib and lenalidomide. Here, a two-stage Weibull method was used to adjust for the crossover of patients in the HiDEX arm to pomalidomide-based therapy. The adjusted difference in median OS between patients in the POM+LoDEX and HiDEX arms was 7·0 months (12·7 vs. 5·7 months, respectively). These findings provide important evidence for understanding the clinical efficacy of pomalidomide on OS benefits seen in RRMM patients.

Intravenous aflibercept in patients with platinum-resistant, advanced ovarian cancer: results of a randomized, double-blind, phase 2, parallel-arm study.

BACKGROUND: In this randomized phase 2 study, the authors assessed the efficacy and safety of intravenous aflibercept at 2 different doses (2 mg/kg or 4 mg/kg) in patients with recurrent, platinum-resistant ovarian, peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer who developed disease progression after receiving topotecan and/or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin. METHODS: Patients were randomized to receive intravenous aflibercept at a dose of either 2 mg/kg or 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks until they developed disease progression or significant toxicity. The primary endpoint was to evaluate Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumor response rates (overall response rate [ORR] = complete responses plus partial responses) and to test the null hypothesis (ORR, >5%). Secondary endpoints included time to tumor progression, safety, progression-free survival/overall survival, drug pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. In total, 67 evaluable patients per cohort were planned based on a Simon 2-stage design, and, if those patients responded, then enrollment could extend to 200 patients. Tumor radiographic response was assessed by investigators and by an independent review committee. RESULTS: After the first 84 evaluable patients, 8 unconfirmed partial responders were noted (ORR, 10%) across both arms; the Independent Data Monitoring Committee recommended continuing blinded accrual. At study completion, 215 evaluable patients were accrued, including 1 responder of 106 patients (0.9%) in the 2-mg/kg cohort and 5 responders of 109 patients (4.6%) in the 4-mg/kg cohort according to the independent review committee. The clinical benefit rate (ORR plus stable disease >6 months) was 12.3% and 11% in the 2-mg/kg and 4-mg/kg cohorts, respectively. Treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events included hypertension (25.5% and 27.5% in the 2-mg/kg and 4-mg/kg cohorts, respectively), proteinuria (9.4% and 7.3%, respectively), and fatigue (5.7% and 3.7%, respectively). The gastrointestinal perforation rate was low (3 patients; 1.4%). CONCLUSIONS: Aflibercept at a dose of either 2 mg/kg or 4 mg/kg was generally well tolerated but did not meet the primary endpoint for response.

Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone versus high-dose dexamethasone alone for patients with relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (MM-003): a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Few effective treatments exist for patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma not responding to treatment with bortezomib and lenalidomide. Pomalidomide alone has shown limited efficacy in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma, but synergistic effects have been noted when combined with dexamethasone. We compared the efficacy and safety of pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone with high-dose dexamethasone alone in these patients. METHODS: This multicentre, open-label, randomised phase 3 trial was undertaken in Australia, Canada, Europe, Russia, and the USA. Patients were eligible if they had been diagnosed with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma, and had failed at least two previous treatments of bortezomib and lenalidomide. They were assigned in a 2:1 ratio with a validated interactive voice and internet response system to either 28 day cycles of pomalidomide (4 mg/day on days 1-21, orally) plus low-dose dexamethasone (40 mg/day on days 1, 8, 15, and 22, orally) or high-dose dexamethasone (40 mg/day on days 1-4, 9-12, and 17-20, orally) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Stratification factors were age (≤75 years vs >75 years), disease population (refractory vs relapsed and refractory vs bortezomib intolerant), and number of previous treatments (two vs more than two). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01311687, and with EudraCT, number 2010-019820-30. FINDINGS: The accrual for the study has been completed and the analyses are presented. 302 patients were randomly assigned to receive pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and 153 high-dose dexamethasone. After a median follow-up of 10·0 months (IQR 7·2-13·2), median PFS with pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone was 4·0 months (95% CI 3·6-4·7) versus 1·9 months (1·9-2·2) with high-dose dexamethasone (hazard ratio 0·48 [95% CI 0·39-0·60]; p<0·0001). The most common grade 3-4 haematological adverse events in the pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and high-dose dexamethasone groups were neutropenia (143 [48%] of 300 vs 24 [16%] of 150, respectively), anaemia (99 [33%] vs 55 [37%], respectively), and thrombocytopenia (67 [22%] vs 39 [26%], respectively). Grade 3-4 non-haematological adverse events in the pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone and high-dose dexamethasone groups included pneumonia (38 [13%] vs 12 [8%], respectively), bone pain (21 [7%] vs seven [5%], respectively), and fatigue (16 [5%] vs nine [6%], respectively). There were 11 (4%) treatment-related adverse events leading to death in the pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone group and seven (5%) in the high-dose dexamethasone group. INTERPRETATION: Pomalidomide plus low-dose dexamethasone, an oral regimen, could be considered a new treatment option in patients with refractory or relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma. FUNDING: Celgene Corporation.

A phase I study of subcutaneously administered aflibercept (VEGF trap) in a new formulation in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Targeting angiogenesis is a valid anti-cancer strategy. Aflibercept is designed to sequester circulating vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) by preventing VEGF from binding to its receptors. This phase I study was to evaluate a new formulation of subcutaneously administered aflibercept in patients with advanced solid tumors. Here we report our experience with the toxicity, pharmacokinetic profile and efficacy of the new 100 mg/mL subcutaneous (SC) formulation of aflibercept administered at a dose of at 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks.

A phase II study of aflibercept in patients with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer and symptomatic malignant ascites.

OBJECTIVE: The recombinant fusion protein, aflibercept binds and neutralizes vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) A, B and placental growth factor (PlGF). Aflibercept inhibits ascites formation and reduces tumor burden in an ovarian cancer model. This open-label, single-arm, multicenter phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of aflibercept in patients with advanced chemo-resistant epithelial ovarian cancer and symptomatic malignant ascites. METHODS: Patients who required ≥3 previous paracenteses at 1-4 paracenteses per month received intravenous aflibercept 4mg/kg every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was repeat paracentesis response rate (RPRR), with response defined as at least a two-fold increase in time to repeat paracentesis compared with the baseline interval. RESULTS: Ten out of 16 enrolled patients achieved a response; the RPRR was 62.5% (95% CI 35.4%-84.8%). Aflibercept was considered effective based on a hypothesis that the RPRR was ≥60%. Median time to repeat paracentesis was 76.0 (95% CI 64.0-178.0) days, which was 4.5 times longer than the baseline interval (16.8 days). Median progression-free survival was 59.5 (95% CI 41.0-83.0) days. Twelve patients experienced adverse events considered related to aflibercept treatment including hypertension (7 patients), headache, anorexia, and dysphonia (3 patients each). Two patients experienced Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (Grade 3 hypertension and weight loss in one patient, Grade 3 intestinal perforation in one patient). CONCLUSION: Aflibercept 4mg/kg every 2 weeks was effective at controlling malignant ascites, reducing the interval between repeat paracenteses. The safety profile was consistent with that reported for anti-VEGF agents.

A multicenter, phase 2 study of vascular endothelial growth factor trap (Aflibercept) in platinum- and erlotinib-resistant adenocarcinoma of the lung.

INTRODUCTION: Aflibercept (vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] trap), a recombinant fusion protein, blocks the activity of VEGF-A and placental growth factor and has demonstrated activity in pretreated patients with lung cancer in a phase I trial. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of intravenous aflibercept in patients with platinum- and erlotinib-resistant lung adenocarcinoma. METHODS: An open-label, single arm, multicenter trial was conducted, with the primary end point of response rate (modified RECIST). Additional endpoints included safety, duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Patients with platinum- and erlotinib-resistant lung adenocarcinoma were eligible. Aflibercept 4.0 mg/kg intravenous every 2 weeks was administered until progression of disease or intolerable toxicity. RESULTS: Ninety-eight patients were enrolled; 89 were evaluable for response. Median age was 60 years, 41% were men with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1/2 in 35/55/9% of patients. The overall response rate was 2.0%, (95% confidence interval, 0.2-7.2%). Median progression-free survival was 2.7 months, and overall was survival 6.2 months. Six- and 12-month survival rates were 54 and 29%, respectively. A median of four cycles was administered (range 1-22). Common grade 3/4 toxicities included dyspnea (21%), hypertension (23%), and proteinuria (10%). Two cases of grade 5 hemoptysis were reported, and one case each of tracheoesophageal fistula, decreased cardiac ejection fraction, cerebral ischemia, and reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy. CONCLUSIONS: Aflibercept has minor single agent activity in heavily pretreated lung adenocarcinoma, and is well tolerated, with no unexpected toxicities. Further studies evaluating aflibercept in lung cancer, in combination with chemotherapy and other targeted therapies, are ongoing.

Phase I study of intravenous vascular endothelial growth factor trap, aflibercept, in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) Trap (aflibercept) is an angiogenesis inhibitor comprising portions of the extracellular domains of human VEGF receptors 1 and 2 fused to the Fc portion of human immunoglobulin G. This phase I study was designed to evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of VEGF Trap administered intravenously (IV) every 2 weeks. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with refractory solid tumors or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma with adequate organ function were eligible. Pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic markers included measurement of plasma VEGF bound to VEGF Trap and free VEGF Trap. Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI) was incorporated to measure the biologic effects of the drug on tumor vascularity and permeability. RESULTS: The study enrolled 47 patients at doses ranging from 0.3 to 7.0 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks. Dose-limiting toxicities were rectal ulceration and proteinuria at the 7.0 mg/kg dose. Other mechanism-specific toxicities included hypertension. On the basis of these observations and on pharmacokinetics, the recommended phase II dose of VEGF Trap as a single agent is 4 mg/kg every 2 weeks. Three RECIST (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors) -defined partial responses were observed, one at the 3.0 mg/kg and two at the 7.0 mg/kg dose level. Maximum plasma concentration of free VEGF Trap increased proportionally with dose. Maximal VEGF-bound VEGF Trap complex levels were reached at doses > or = 2.0 mg/kg. Changes in volume transfer constant measured by DCE-MRI at baseline and at 24 hours after administration indicate a possible dose-related change in this pharmacodynamic marker. CONCLUSION: IV VEGF Trap was well tolerated at the dose levels tested. Pharmacodynamic and pharmacokinetic markers were indicative of VEGF blockade.