Successful Trastuzumab-Deruxtecan Rechallenge After Interstitial Lung Disease: A Case Report.

Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) is used to treat human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-positive advanced breast cancer. Interstitial lung disease (ILD) is a severe adverse event associated with T-DXd. Current guidelines recommend permanent discontinuation of T-DXd after Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) grade ≥ 2 ILD. Here, we describe a case of successful rechallenge with T-DXd after CTCAE grade 2 treatment-induced ILD. After discontinuation of T-DXd, ILD was treated with steroids until complete resolution. Given the initial beneficial antitumor response, retreatment was discussed during disease progression. In a shared decision with the patient, T-DXd was restarted at the lowest registered dose, along with low-dose steroids. ILD did not reoccur. Importantly, both clinical and radiological responses to the treatment were observed, with an improvement in the patient's quality of life. This case demonstrates that retreatment with T-DXd after a grade 2 ILD event is feasible and yields clinical benefit.

Development of a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic model for various oral paclitaxel formulations co-administered with ritonavir and thrombospondin-1 based on data from early phase clinical studies.

PURPOSE: Orally administered paclitaxel offers increased patient convenience while providing a method to prolong exposure without long continuous, or repeated, intravenous infusions. The oral bioavailability of paclitaxel is improved through co-administration with ritonavir and application of a suitable pharmaceutical formulation, which addresses the dissolution-limited absorption of paclitaxel. We aimed to characterize the pharmacokinetics of different paclitaxel formulations, co-administered with ritonavir, and to investigate a pharmacodynamic relationship between low-dose metronomic (LDM) treatment with oral paclitaxel and the anti-angiogenic marker thrombospondin-1 (TSP-1). METHODS: Fifty-eight patients treated with different oral paclitaxel formulations were included for pharmacokinetic analysis. Pharmacodynamic data was available for 36 patients. All population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling was performed using non-linear mixed-effects modelling. RESULTS: A pharmacokinetic model consisting of gut, liver, central, and peripheral compartments was developed for paclitaxel. The gastrointestinal absorption rate was modelled with a Weibull function. Relative gut bioavailabilities of the tablet and capsule formulations, as fractions of the gut bioavailability of the drinking solution, were estimated to be 0.97 (95%CI: 0.67-1.33) and 0.46 (95%CI: 0.34-0.61), respectively. The pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship between paclitaxel and TSP-1 was modelled using a turnover model with paclitaxel plasma concentrations driving an increase in TSP-1 formation rate following an Emax relationship with an EC50 of 284 ng/mL (95%CI: 122-724). CONCLUSION: The developed pharmacokinetic model adequately described the paclitaxel plasma concentrations for the different oral formulations co-administered with ritonavir. This model, and the established pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic relationship with TSP-1, may facilitate future development of oral paclitaxel.

Transtympanic Sodium Thiosulfate for Prevention of Cisplatin-Induced Ototoxicity: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

OBJECTIVES: To determine safety, feasibility, and preliminary activity of transtympanic injection of sodium thiosulfate (STS) against cisplatin-induced hearing loss (CIHL).DESIGN Randomized controlled trial.SETTING Tertiary cancer hospital.PATIENTS Adults to be treated with high-dose cisplatin (≥ 75 mg/m2).INTERVENTION Selected by randomization, 0.1 M STS gel on one side and placebo gel on the other side was transtympanically applied to the middle ear 3 hours before cisplatin administration. After amendment, the placebo ear was left untreated. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Primary outcome was safety and feasibility. Secondary outcomes included pharmacokinetic analysis of systemic cisplatin and preliminary activity of STS. Clinically relevant CIHL was defined as a ≥ 10 dB threshold shift at pure-tone average 8-10-12.5 kHz (PTA8-12.5). Response to STS was defined as a threshold shift at PTA8-12.5 in the STS-treated ear of ≥ 10 dB smaller than the untreated ear. RESULTS: Twelve patients were treated. Average CIHL at PTA8-12.5 was 12.7 dB in untreated ears and 8.8 dB SPL in STS-treated ears (p = 0.403). Four patients did not develop CIHL. Four out of eight patients with CIHL responded to STS: CIHL at PTA8-12.5 in STS-treated ears was 18.4 dB less compared to untreated ears (p = 0.068). Grade 1 adverse events were reported. Pharmacokinetic results were available for 11 patients. CONCLUSION: Transtympanic application of STS was safe and feasible. Based on our pharmacokinetic analysis, we postulate that transtympanic STS does not interfere with the systemically available cisplatin. Our results provide a preliminary proof of concept for transtympanic application of STS in preventing CIHL and warrants further evaluation on a larger scale.

Pharmacokinetics of docetaxel and ritonavir after oral administration of ModraDoc006/r in patients with prostate cancer versus patients with other advanced solid tumours.

PURPOSE: ModraDoc006 is a novel oral formulation of docetaxel. The clearance of intravenous docetaxel is higher in medically castrated prostate cancer patients as compared to patients with other types of solid tumours. Oral docetaxel requires co-administration ritonavir (r), which might further impact the pharmacokinetics (PK). We now compare the PK of docetaxel and ritonavir between patients with Hormone Sensitive Prostate Cancer (HSPC), metastatic Castration-Resistant Prostate Cancer (mCRPC) and other metastatic solid tumours, treated on the same dose and weekly schedule of ModraDoc006/r. METHODS: The docetaxel and ritonavir PK were compared between four patient groups from three clinical phase I trials, including eight male and eight female patients with different types of solid tumours (study 1), seven patients with HSPC (study 2) and five patients with mCRPC (study 3). All patients were treated with ModraDoc006 30 mg and ritonavir 100 mg in the morning, followed by ModraDoc006 20 mg and ritonavir 100 mg in the evening (ModraDoc006/r 30-20/100-100). For comparative purposes, the PK of six mCRPC patients that received 30-20/200-100 in study 3 were also evaluated. RESULTS: The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) was significantly lower for both docetaxel and ritonavir in the prostate cancer patients as compared to the patients with other types of solid tumours treated at ModraDoc006/r 30-20/100-100. The docetaxel area under the plasma concentration versus time curve (AUC) was significantly different at this dose, with a mean AUC0-48 of 1359 ± 374 ng/mL*h (N = 8) in female patients and 894 ± 223 ng/mL*h (N = 8) in male patients with different solid tumours (study 1), 321 ± 81 (N = 7) in HSPC (study 2) and 367 ± 182 ng/mL*h (N = 5) in mCRPC (study 3). A similar pattern was observed for ritonavir. ModraDoc006/r 30-20/200-100 in six mCRPC patients led to a comparable ritonavir exposure as compared to the patients at 30-20/100-100 in study 1 and increased the docetaxel AUC0-48 to 1266 ± 473 ng/mL*h (N = 6). CONCLUSION: The exposure to docetaxel and ritonavir was significantly lower in prostate cancer patients as compared to patients with other types of solid tumours, treated on ModraDoc006/r 30-20/100-100. An increase of the ritonavir dose increased the docetaxel exposure in mCRPC patients. Therefore, a different RP2D of ModraDoc006/r is pursued in castrated prostate cancer patients as compared to patients with other types of solid tumours. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Study 1: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01173913, date of registration August 2, 2010. Study 2: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03066154, date of registration February 28, 2017. Study 3: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT03136640, date of registration May 2, 2017.

Effect of Food on the Pharmacokinetics of the Oral Docetaxel Tablet Formulation ModraDoc006 Combined with Ritonavir (ModraDoc006/r) in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumours.

INTRODUCTION: ModraDoc006 is a novel docetaxel tablet formulation that is co-administrated with the cytochrome P450 3A4 and P-glycoprotein inhibitor ritonavir (r): ModraDoc006/r. OBJECTIVES: This study evaluated the effect of food consumed prior to administration of ModraDoc006/r on the pharmacokinetics of docetaxel and ritonavir. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid tumours were enrolled in this randomized crossover study to receive ModraDoc006/r in a fasted state in week 1 and after a standardized high-fat meal in week 2 and vice versa. Pharmacokinetic sampling was conducted until 48 h after both study drug administrations. Docetaxel and ritonavir plasma concentrations were determined using liquid chromatography with tandem mass spectrometry. Safety was evaluated with the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 4.03. RESULTS: In total, 16 patients completed the food-effect study. The geometric mean ratio (GMR) for the docetaxel area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC)0-48, AUC0-inf and maximum concentration (Cmax) were 1.11 (90% confidence interval [CI] 0.93-1.33), 1.19 (90% CI 1.00-1.41) and 1.07 (90% CI 0.81-1.42) in fed versus fasted conditions, respectively. For the ritonavir Cmax, the GMR was 0.79 (90% CI 0.69-0.90), whereas the AUC0-48 and AUC0-inf were bioequivalent. The most frequent treatment-related toxicities were grade ≤ 2 diarrhoea and fatigue. Hypokalaemia was the only observed treatment-related grade 3 toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: The docetaxel and ritonavir exposure were not bioequivalent, as consumption of a high-fat meal prior to administration of ModraDoc006/r resulted in a slightly higher docetaxel exposure and lower ritonavir Cmax. Since docetaxel exposure is the only clinically relevant parameter in our patient population, the overall conclusion is that combined ModraDoc006 and ritonavir treatment may be slightly affected by concomitant intake of a high-fat meal. In view of the small effect, it is most likely that the intake of a light meal will not affect the systemic exposure to docetaxel. CLINICALTRIALS. GOV IDENTIFIER: NCT03147378, date of registration: May 10 2017.

A Phase 1 Dose-Escalation Study of Low-Dose Metronomic Treatment With Novel Oral Paclitaxel Formulations in Combination With Ritonavir in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors.

ModraPac001 (MP1) and ModraPac005 (MP5) are novel oral paclitaxel formulations that are coadministered with the cytochrome P450 3A4 inhibitor ritonavir (r), enabling daily low-dose metronomic (LDM) treatment. The primary aim of this study was to determine the safety, pharmacokinetics and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of MP1/r and MP5/r. The second aim was to establish the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) as LDM treatment. This was an open-label phase 1 trial. Patients with advanced solid tumors were enrolled according to a classical 3+3 design. After initial employment of the MP1 capsule, the MP5 tablet was introduced. Safety was assessed using the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events version 4.02. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed on days 1, 2, 8, and 22 for determination of paclitaxel and ritonavir plasma concentrations. In this study, 37 patients were treated with up to twice-daily 30-mg paclitaxel combined with twice-daily 100-mg ritonavir (MP5/r 30-30/100-100) in 9 dose levels. Dose-limiting toxicities were nausea, (febrile) neutropenia, dehydration and vomiting. At the MTD/RP2D of MP5/r 20-20/100-100, the maximum paclitaxel plasma concentration and area under the concentration-time curve until 24 hours were 34.6 ng/mL (coefficient of variation, 79%) and 255 ng • h/mL (coefficient of variation, 62%), respectively. Stable disease was observed as best response in 15 of 31 evaluable patients. Based on these results, LDM therapy with oral paclitaxel coadministrated with ritonavir was considered feasible and safe. The MTD and RP2D were determined as MP5/r 20-20/100-100. Further clinical development of MP5/r as an LDM concept, including potential combination treatment, is warranted.

No relation between docetaxel administration route and high-grade diarrhea incidence.

Oral administration of docetaxel in combination with the CYP3A4 inhibitor ritonavir is used in clinical trials to improve oral bioavailability of docetaxel. Diarrhea was the most commonly observed and dose-limiting toxicity. This study combined preclinical and clinical data and investigated incidence, severity and cause of oral docetaxel-induced diarrhea. In this study, incidence and severity of diarrhea in patients were compared to exposure to orally administered docetaxel. Intestinal toxicity after oral or intraperitoneal administration of docetaxel was further explored in mice lacking Cyp3a and mice lacking both Cyp3a and P-glycoprotein. In patients, severity of diarrhea increased significantly with an increase in AUC and Cmax (P = .035 and P = .025, respectively), but not with an increase in the orally administered dose (P = .11). Furthermore, incidence of grade 3/4 diarrhea after oral docetaxel administration was similar as reported after intravenous docetaxel administration. Intestinal toxicity in mice was only observed at high systemic exposure to docetaxel and was similar after oral and intraperitoneal administration of docetaxel. In conclusion, our data show that the onset of severe diarrhea after oral administration of docetaxel in humans is similar after oral and intravenous administration of docetaxel and is caused by the concentration of docetaxel in the systemic blood circulation. Mouse experiments confirmed that intestinal toxicity is caused by a high systemic exposure and not by local intestinal exposure. Severe diarrhea in patients after oral docetaxel is reversible and is not related to the route of administration of docetaxel.

Quantification of the pharmacokinetic-toxicodynamic relationship of oral docetaxel co-administered with ritonavir.

Introduction Oral formulations of docetaxel have successfully been developed as an alternative for intravenous administration. Co-administration with the enzyme inhibitor ritonavir boosts the docetaxel plasma exposure. In dose-escalation trials, the maximum tolerated doses for two different dosing regimens were established and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were recorded. The aim of current analysis was to develop a pharmacokinetic (PK)-toxicodynamic (TOX) model to quantify the relationship between docetaxel plasma exposure and DLTs. Methods A total of 85 patients was included in the current analysis, 18 patients showed a DLT in the four-week observation period. A PK-TOX model was developed and simulations based on the PK-TOX model were performed. Results The final PK-TOX model was characterized by an effect compartment representing the toxic effect of docetaxel, which was linked to the probability of developing a DLT. Simulations of once-weekly, once-daily 60 mg and once-weekly, twice-daily 30 mg followed by 20 mg of oral docetaxel suggested that 14% and 34% of patients, respectively, would have a probability >25% to develop a DLT in a four-week period. Conclusions A PK-TOX model was successfully developed. This model can be used to evaluate the probability of developing a DLT following treatment with oral docetaxel and ritonavir in different dosing regimens.

A Population Pharmacokinetic Model of Oral Docetaxel Coadministered With Ritonavir to Support Early Clinical Development.

Oral administration of docetaxel is an attractive alternative for conventional intravenous (IV) administration. The low bioavailability of docetaxel, however, hinders the application of oral docetaxel in the clinic. The aim of the current study was to develop a population pharmacokinetic (PK) model for docetaxel and ritonavir based on the phase 1 studies and to support drug development of this combination treatment. PK data were collected from 191 patients who received IV docetaxel and different oral docetaxel formulations (drinking solution, ModraDoc001 capsule, and ModraDoc006 tablet) coadministered with ritonavir. A PK model was first developed for ritonavir. Subsequently, a semiphysiological PK model was developed for docetaxel, which incorporated the inhibition of docetaxel metabolism by ritonavir. The uninhibited intrinsic clearance of docetaxel was estimated based on data on IV docetaxel as 1980 L/h (relative standard error, 11%). Ritonavir coadministration extensively inhibited the hepatic metabolism of docetaxel to 9.3%, which resulted in up to 12-fold higher docetaxel plasma concentrations compared to oral docetaxel coadministered without ritonavir. In conclusion, a semiphysiological PK model for docetaxel and ritonavir was successfully developed. Coadministration of ritonavir resulted in increased plasma concentrations of docetaxel after administration of the oral formulations of ModraDoc. Furthermore, the oral ModraDoc formulations showed lower variability in plasma concentrations between and within patients compared to the drinking solution. Comparable exposure could be reached with the oral ModraDoc formulations compared to IV administration.

[Een rood en gezwollen gelaat na heffen van de armen]. / Een rood en gezwollen gelaat na heffen van de armen.

An 82-year-old woman attended our outpatient clinic because of a swollen right arm and hoarseness. Upon raising both arms, the patient developed a red and swollen face (Pemberton's sign). An MRI of the thorax showed a large intrathoracic goitre, which compressed venous structures and limited blood flow even when she lowered her arms.

Sensorineural Hearing Loss After Adoptive Cell Immunotherapy for Melanoma Using MART-1 Specific T Cells: A Case Report and Its Pathophysiology.

OBJECTIVE: To illustrate a case of sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) after immunotherapy based on T cell receptor (TCR) gene therapy using modified T cells recognizing melanoma antigen recognized by T cells 1 for disseminated melanoma. PATIENT: We present a 59-year-old woman with profound subacute bilateral SNHL including unilateral deafness after immunotherapy based on TCR gene therapy using modified T cells recognizing melanoma antigen recognized by T cells 1 for disseminated melanoma. Ten days after treatment, the patient developed hearing loss of 57 dB hearing loss air conduction at pure-tone average 0.5-1-2-4 kHz in the right ear, and >100 dB hearing loss air conduction at pure-tone average 0.5-1-2-4 in the left ear. The right ear recovered partially, while the left ear remained deaf, despite oral prednisolone (1.0 mg/kg) and salvage treatment with three transtympanic injections of 0.5 ml dexamethasone (4.0 mg/ml). CONCLUSION: Based on our presented case and a vast amount of literature there is circumstantial evidence that TCR gene therapy for melanoma targets the perivascular macrophage-like melanocytes in the stria vascularis, resulting in SNHL. We suggest that SNHL after TCR gene therapy may be caused by a disruption of the blood-labyrinth-barrier and the endolymphatic potential and/or a sterile inflammation of the stria vascularis. In severe cases like our subject, we posit that endolymphatic hydrops or hair cell loss may cause irreversible and asymmetrical deafness. Steroid prophylaxis via transtympanic application is debatable.

A Phase I Dose Escalation Study of Once-Weekly Oral Administration of Docetaxel as ModraDoc001 Capsule or ModraDoc006 Tablet in Combination with Ritonavir.

PURPOSE: Oral bioavailability of docetaxel is poor. Absorption could be improved by development of pharmaceutical formulations based on docetaxel solid dispersions, denoted ModraDoc001 capsule and ModraDoc006 tablet (both 10 mg) and coadministration of ritonavir, an inhibitor of CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein. In this study, the safety, MTD, recommended phase II dose (RP2D), pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of oral docetaxel combined with ritonavir in a once-weekly continuous schedule was investigated. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with metastatic solid tumors were included. Dose escalation was performed using a classical 3+3 design. Pharmacokinetic sampling was performed for up to 48 hours after drug administration. Safety was evaluated using CTCAE v3.0. Antitumor activity was assessed according to RECIST v1.0. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients were treated at weekly docetaxel dosages ranging from 30 to 80 mg in combination with 100- or 200-mg ritonavir. Most common toxicities were nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and fatigue, mostly of grade 1-2 severity. No hypersensitivity reactions were observed. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-48) of docetaxel at the RP2D of once-weekly 60-mg ModraDoc001 capsule with 100-mg ritonavir was 1,000 ± 687 ng/mL/hour and for once-weekly 60-mg ModraDoc006 tablet with 100-mg ritonavir, the AUC0-48 was 1,790 ± 819 ng/mL/hour. Nine partial responses were reported as best response to treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Oral administration of once-weekly docetaxel as ModraDoc001 capsule or ModraDoc006 tablet in combination with ritonavir is feasible. The RP2D for both formulations is 60-mg ModraDoc with 100-mg ritonavir. Antitumor activity is considered promising.

A phase I study of the HDM2 antagonist SAR405838 combined with the MEK inhibitor pimasertib in patients with advanced solid tumours.

BACKGROUND: This phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of combination therapy with the HDM2 inhibitor SAR405838 and the MEK1/2 inhibitor pimasertib administered orally once daily (QD) or twice daily (BID) in locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours (NCT01985191). METHODS: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours with documented wild-type TP53 and RAS or RAF mutations were enroled. A 3 + 3 dose-escalation design was employed. The primary objective was to assess maximum tolerated dose (MTD). RESULTS: Twenty-six patients were treated with SAR405838 200 or 300 mg QD plus pimasertib 60 mg QD or 45 mg BID. The MTD was SAR405838 200 mg QD plus pimasertib 45 mg BID. The most common dose-limiting toxicity was thrombocytopenia. The most frequently occurring treatment-related adverse events were diarrhoea (81%), increased blood creatine phosphokinase (77%), nausea (62%) and vomiting (62%). No significant drug-drug interactions were observed. The biomarkers MIC-1 and pERK were, respectively, upregulated and downregulated in response to study treatment. In 24 efficacy-evaluable patients, one patient (4%) had a partial response and 63% had stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of SAR405838 and pimasertib combined was consistent with the safety profiles of both drugs. Preliminary antitumour activity was observed.

A drug-drug interaction study to assess the effect of the CYP1A2 inhibitor fluvoxamine on the pharmacokinetics of dovitinib (TKI258) in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Dovitinib is an orally available multi tyrosine kinase inhibitor which inhibits VEGFR 1-3, FGFR 1-3, and PDGFR. This study was performed to investigate the potential drug-drug interaction of dovitinib with the CYP1A2 inhibitor fluvoxamine in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Non-smoking patients of ≥ 18 years with advanced solid tumors, excluding breast cancer, were included. Patients were treated with a dose of 300 mg in 5 days on/2 days off schedule. Steady-state pharmacokinetic assessments of dovitinib were performed with or without fluvoxamine. RESULTS: Forty-five patients were enrolled; 24 were evaluable for drug-drug interaction assessment. Median age was 60 years (range 30-85). At steady state the geometric mean for dovitinib (coefficient of variation%) of the area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-72h) and maximum concentration (C max) were 2880 ng/mL h (47%) and 144 ng/mL (41%), respectively. Following administration of dovitinib in combination with fluvoxamine the geometric mean of dovitinib AUC0-72h and C max were 8290 ng/mL h (60%) and 259 ng/mL (45%), respectively. The estimated geometric mean ratios for dovitinib AUC0-72h and C max (dovitinib + fluvoxamine vs. dovitinib alone) were 2.88 [90% confidence interval (CI) 2.58, 3.20] and 1.80 (90% CI 1.66, 1.95). This effect is considered a moderate drug-drug interaction. CONCLUSIONS: Fluvoxamine co-administration resulted in a 80% increase in C max and a 188% increase in AUC0-72h of dovitinib. Given the increase in exposure to dovitinib observed, patients are at risk of dovitinib related toxicity. Dovitinib should, therefore, not be co-administered with moderate and strong CYP1A2 inhibitors, without dose reduction.

Enrichment of Circulating Endothelial Cells by CD34 Microbeads Followed by Enumeration Using Flow Cytometry.

Background Circulating endothelial cells (CECs) are a potential biomarker of angiogenesis. CECs increase in numbers after vessel injury. Higher CEC numbers are reported in cancer patients. Most methods for CEC detection and enumeration rely on flow cytometry (FCM); however, there is no agreement on CEC phenotype and the detection method to be used. This leads to uncertainty about the clinical applicability and variation between studies on CEC numbers reported. Objective To develop a selective and accurate method for CEC enumeration in peripheral blood by enrichment, followed by FCM in healthy volunteers (HV) and cancer patients. Methods Samples were enriched using CD34 microbeads, stained with nuclear dye and anti-CD14, CD15, CD45, CD34 and CD146 antibodies. Putative CECs were examined for Weibel­Palade bodies (WPBs) using anti­von Willebrand factor (vWF) antibody and fluorescence microscopy. Linear range of detection (R 2), recovery and precision (coefficient of variation percentage [CV%]) were defined in three experiments by spiking a known number (range 12­12,800 CECs/4 mL) of surrogate endothelial cells in peripheral blood. Sample storage was determined at ­80°C for up to 2 months. Results Sorted CECs showed vWF in the WPBs. The relationship between spiked and detected surrogate cells was R 2 = 1.0, recovery of 94.0 to 101.4% and CV% of 1.0 to 18.4%. Recovery ± standard deviation (within-run days 1, 2 and 3) were, respectively, 102.5% ± 8.2, 97.8% ± 4.6, 99.1% ± 7.7, and after 2 months 94.3% ± 15.3. The median CECs/mL in patients was 24.1 versus 14.4 in HVs. Conclusion This method for selective, sensitive and reliable CEC analysis by FCM allows for investigation of CECs as a biomarker in clinical research.

A dose-escalation study of bi-daily once weekly oral docetaxel either as ModraDoc001 or ModraDoc006 combined with ritonavir.

INTRODUCTION: Two solid dispersions of docetaxel (denoted ModraDoc001 capsule and ModraDoc006 tablet (both 10 mg)) were co-administered with 100 mg ritonavir (/r) and investigated in a bi-daily once weekly (BIDW) schedule. Safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics (PK) and preliminary activity were explored. METHODS: Adult patients with metastatic solid tumours were included in two dose-escalation arms. PK sampling was performed during the first week and the second or third week. Safety was evaluated using US National Cancer Institute's Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (NCI-CTCAE) version 3.0. Antitumour activity was assessed every 6 weeks according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) version 1.0. RESULTS: ModraDoc001 capsule/r and ModraDoc006 tablet/r were administered to 17 and 28 patients, respectively. The most common adverse events were nausea, vomiting, diarrhoea and fatigue, mostly of grade 1-2 severity. Grade 3/4 neutropenia/neutropenic fever was observed in 2 patients (4%). The MTD was determined as 20/20 mg ModraDoc001/r and 30/20 mg ModraDoc006/r (morning/afternoon dose) once weekly. The mean area under the plasma concentration-time curve (AUC0-48) ± standard deviation at the MTD for ModraDoc001/r and ModraDoc006/r were 686 ± 388 ng/ml*h and 1126 ± 382 ng/ml*h, respectively. Five partial responses were reported as best response to treatment. CONCLUSION: Oral administration of BIDW ModraDoc001/r or ModraDoc006/r is feasible. The once weekly 30/20 mg ModraDoc006 tablet/r dose-level was selected for future clinical development. Antitumour activity is promising.

A phase I study of SAR405838, a novel human double minute 2 (HDM2) antagonist, in patients with solid tumours.

PURPOSE: In tumours with wild-type TP53, the tumour-suppressive function of p53 is frequently inhibited by HDM2. This phase I, dose-escalating study investigated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of SAR405838, an HDM2 inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumours (NCT01636479). METHODS: In dose escalation, patients with any locally advanced/metastatic solid tumour with TP53 mutation prevalence below 40%, or documented as TP53 wild-type, were eligible. In the MTD expansion cohort, only patients with de-differentiated liposarcoma were included. Primary end-points were MTD and efficacy in the MTD expansion cohort. Secondary end-points included safety, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics biomarkers. RESULTS: Seventy-four patients were treated with SAR405838 (50-800 mg once daily [QD], 800-1800 mg weekly and 1800 mg twice weekly). Two patients treated with SAR405838 400 mg QD had thrombocytopaenia as a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). The MTD for the QD schedule of SAR405838 was 300 mg QD. No DLTs were observed with the weekly schedule; one patient had a DLT of nausea with the 1800 mg twice-weekly dose. Treatment with SAR405838 was associated with increased plasma MIC-1, reflecting p53 pathway activation. In the de-differentiated liposarcoma MTD cohort, 89% of the patients had HDM2 amplification at baseline and no TP53 mutations were observed; best response was stable disease in 56% and progression-free rate at 3 months was 32%. CONCLUSION: SAR405838 had an acceptable safety profile with limited activity in patients with advanced solid tumours. The MTD of SAR405838 was 300 mg QD; MTD was not reached with the weekly schedule.

Extent and Location of Tumor-Infiltrating Lymphocytes in Microsatellite-Stable Colon Cancer Predict Outcome to Adjuvant Active Specific Immunotherapy.

PURPOSE: To determine the prognostic and predictive value of tumor-infiltrating lymphocytes (TIL) in colon cancer in a cohort of patients who previously took part in a trial on adjuvant active specific immunotherapy (ASI). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: We determined the number and location of CD3 and CD8 positive T cells in archival tumor samples of 106 colon cancers. We correlated stromal and epithelial TIL numbers with tumor stage and treatment and determined the effects on disease-specific survival (DSS) and recurrence-free interval (RFI). RESULTS: On the basis of the data presented, we concluded that (i) high numbers of stromal CD3 T cells have positive prognostic value measured as DSS for patients with stage II microsatellite-stable tumors and (ii) high numbers of epithelial CD8-positive T cells have positive prognostic value measured as RFI for the group of patients with stage II microsatellite-stable tumors as well as for the whole group (so stage II plus stage III together). Furthermore, we concluded that high numbers of pre-existing stromal CD3-positive T cells are of positive predictive value in adjuvant ASI treatment measured as DSS as well as RFI. CONCLUSIONS: ASI therapy may contribute to an improved DSS and RFI in patients with microsatellite-stable colon tumors harboring high numbers of pre-existing stromal CD3(+) TIL. Validation in future clinical trials is awaited.

Cellular and clinical pharmacology of the taxanes docetaxel and paclitaxel--a review.

Paclitaxel and docetaxel are active against a range of human cancers. Their antitumor activity is based on stabilization of the microtubule dynamics and thereby disruption of the cell cycle. The taxanes are administered as intravenous solutions in a short administration schedule. Distribution of both taxanes is rapid, with large volumes of distribution and significant binding to plasma proteins. The metabolism of paclitaxel is mediated primarily by the P450 cytochrome enzymes CYP2C8 and CYP3A, whereas docetaxel is only metabolized by CYP3A4. The most common toxicities after intravenous administration are neutropenia, hypersensitivity reactions, neurotoxicity, and alopecia. Several new administration forms are in development; albumin-bound paclitaxel (Abraxane) has recently been registered. Oral formulations of taxanes have been developed, and several are now undergoing phase I trials. New formulations might improve efficacy and safety and could be easier to use.

Clinical effects of adjuvant active specific immunotherapy differ between patients with microsatellite-stable and microsatellite-instable colon cancer.

PURPOSE: Active specific immunotherapy (ASI) consisting of an autologous tumor cell vaccine given as adjuvant treatment has been shown to improve recurrence-free survival of patients with colon cancer. The aim of the current retrospective study was to investigate whether the beneficial effects of ASI given as adjuvant treatment correlated with microsatellite instability (MSI), which is considered an important biologic determinant of colon cancer. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Microsatellite status was assessed on archival tumor material from patients with stage II and III colon cancer. Microsatellite status was next associated with clinical outcome in control and ASI treatment groups using Kaplan-Meier analysis. RESULTS: We identified 162 (83%) microsatellite-stable tumors (MSS) and 34 (17%) MSI tumors. Patients with MSI tumors did well in recurrence-free interval (RFI) as well as disease-specific survival (DSS) irrespective of treatment arm and tumor stage. Patients with MSI tumors had significantly fewer recurrences and prolonged DSS than those with MSS tumors. Patients with MSS Dukes B tumors who received ASI treatment showed a significantly improved recurrence-free survival compared with controls. ASI treatment did not improve recurrence-free interval or DSS for patients with MSS Dukes C tumors. CONCLUSION: This retrospective study indicated that patients with MSI tumors did well, irrespective of treatment arm and tumor stage. The data also indicate that the clinical benefit, measured as recurrence-free survival, from adjuvant ASI treatment of patients with colon cancer was restricted to patients with MSS Dukes B tumors.