Vandetanib with docetaxel as second-line treatment for advanced breast cancer: a double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized Phase II study.

PURPOSE: The aim of this Phase II study was to assess the efficacy and safety of vandetanib in combination with docetaxel in patients with pretreated advanced breast cancer. METHODS: The primary study objective was to compare the number of progression events in patients receiving once-daily oral vandetanib (100 mg) in combination with docetaxel (100 mg/m(2) iv every 21 days) versus placebo plus docetaxel. Sixty-four patients were randomized to receive study treatment (n = 35, vandetanib; n = 29, placebo). RESULTS: A slightly greater number of patients had experienced a progression event by the data cut-off in the vandetanib group (24 [69%]) compared with the placebo group (18 [62%]); HR = 1.19, two-sided 80% CI: 0.79-1.81; two-sided P = 0.59), suggesting that the addition of vandetanib to docetaxel did not affect the risk of disease progression compared with placebo plus docetaxel. The safety and tolerability profile of the combination therapy reflected those of both drugs as monotherapy agents. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced breast cancer, vandetanib plus docetaxel was generally well tolerated. Clinical benefit was not different to that observed with placebo plus docetaxel. However, due to the small patient number it was not possible to yield robust results, further research is required to identify predictive factors for patient selection.

A Phase II, open-label, randomised study to assess the efficacy and safety of the MEK1/2 inhibitor AZD6244 (ARRY-142886) versus capecitabine monotherapy in patients with colorectal cancer who have failed one or two prior chemotherapeutic regimens.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of the MEK1/2 inhibitor AZD6244 (ARRY-142886) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer who had failed one or two previous chemotherapeutic regimens that included oxaliplatin and/or irinotecan. METHODS: This was a Phase II, multicentre, open-label, randomised, two-arm, parallel-group study comparing AZD6244 with capecitabine monotherapy. Patients received either 100 mg twice daily oral AZD6244 free-base suspension every day or 1,250 mg/m(2) twice daily oral capecitabine, for 2 weeks, followed by a 1-week rest period, in 3-weekly cycles. The primary endpoint was the number of patients experiencing disease progression events. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients were randomised in the study (34 and 35 patients in the AZD6244 and capecitabine groups, respectively). Disease progression events were experienced by 28 patients (~80%) in both the AZD6244 and capecitabine treatment groups. Median progression-free survival was 81 days and 88 days in the AZD6244 and capecitabine groups, respectively. Ten patients in the AZD6244 treatment arm had a best response of stable disease. For capecitabine, best response was a partial response in one patient, with stable disease in a further 15 patients. The most frequently observed adverse events reported with AZD6244 were acneiform dermatitis, diarrhoea, asthenia and peripheral oedema, compared with hand-foot syndrome, diarrhoea, nausea and abdominal pain with capecitabine. CONCLUSIONS: AZD6244 showed similar efficacy to capecitabine in terms of the number of patients with a disease progression event and of progression-free survival. AZD6244 is currently undergoing evaluation in Phase II trials in combination with other chemotherapeutic agents.

A phase 1 dose escalation study of the oncolytic adenovirus enadenotucirev, administered intravenously to patients with epithelial solid tumors (EVOLVE).

BACKGROUND: Enadenotucirev is a chimeric adenovirus with demonstrated preclinical tumor-selective cytotoxicity and a short half-life. Further clinical mechanism of action data showed that enadenotucirev can gain access to and replicate within different types of epithelial tumors. This phase 1 dose escalation study assessed intravenous (IV) dose escalation with enadenotucirev to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and subsequently identify a suitable schedule for repeated cycles. METHODS: Sixty-one patients with advanced epithelial tumors unresponsive to conventional therapy were enrolled and received enadenotucirev monotherapy as part of this study. During the phase 1a dose escalation (n = 22) and expansion (n = 9), delivery of enadenotucirev between 1 × 1010 and 1 × 1013 viral particles (vp) on days 1, 3, and 5 (single cycle) was used to determine an appropriate MTD. Subsequent treatment cohorts (phase 1a, n = 6 and phase 1b, n = 24) examined the feasibility of repeated dosing cycles in either 3-weekly or weekly dosing regimens. RESULTS: Enadenotucirev displayed a predictable and manageable safety profile at doses up to the MTD of 3 × 1012 vp, irrespective of infusion time or dosing schedule. The most commonly reported treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) of grade 3 or higher were hypoxia, lymphopenia, and neutropenia. The frequency of all TEAEs (notably pyrexia and chills) was highest within 24 h of the first enadenotucirev infusion and decreased upon subsequent dosing. Additionally, delivery of three doses of enadenotucirev over 5 days optimized pharmacokinetic and chemokine profiles in the circulation over time. CONCLUSIONS: This study provides key clinical data in patients with solid epithelial tumors following treatment with IV enadenotucirev monotherapy and supports further investigation of enadenotucirev in combination with other therapeutic agents at doses up to the MTD of 3 × 1012 vp. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ( ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02028442 ). Trial registration date: 07 January 2014 - Retrospectively registered.

A phase II, open-label, randomized study to assess the efficacy and safety of AZD6244 (ARRY-142886) versus pemetrexed in patients with non-small cell lung cancer who have failed one or two prior chemotherapeutic regimens.

INTRODUCTION: AZD6244 (ARRY-142886) is a potent, selective MEK inhibitor. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of AZD6244 versus pemetrexed as second- or third-line treatment in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In this randomized phase II study, patients received either 100 mg oral AZD6244 free-base suspension twice daily or 500 mg/m(2) intravenous pemetrexed once every 3 weeks after pretreatment with a corticosteroid, folic acid, and vitamin B12. The primary end point of the study was the disease progression event count. RESULTS: Eighty-four patients were randomized. Disease progression events were experienced by 28 (70%) and 26 (59%) patients in the AZD6244 and pemetrexed groups, respectively. Median progression-free survival was not statistically significantly different between the AZD6244 and pemetrexed groups (67 versus 90 days, respectively; hazard ratio 1.08, two-sided 80% confidence interval = 0.75-1.54; p = 0.79). Two patients in the AZD6244 group had a best response to treatment of partial response. In the pemetrexed group, one patient achieved a complete response and one patient a partial response. Dermatitis acneiform, diarrhea, nausea, and vomiting were the most frequently reported adverse events with AZD6244, compared with fatigue, anemia, nausea, anorexia, and dermatitis acneiform with pemetrexed. CONCLUSIONS: Oral AZD6244 showed clinical activity as second- or third-line therapy for patients with advanced NSCLC. In an unselected NSCLC population, there is no suggestion that AZD6244 monotherapy offers any advantage over standard treatment with pemetrexed. Based on preclinical data and recent clinical observations, further development of AZD6244 in NSCLC should focus on BRAF or RAS mutation-positive patients and/or AZD6244-based combination regimens.

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study of vandetanib plus docetaxel/prednisolone in patients with hormone-refractory prostate cancer.

Vandetanib (ZACTIMA) is a once-daily oral anticancer drug that selectively inhibits vascular endothelial growth factor receptor, epidermal growth factor receptor, and rearranged during transfection signaling. This randomized (1:1), double-blind study evaluated vandetanib (100 mg/day) or placebo in combination with docetaxel (D; 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks) and prednisolone (P; 2 x 5 mg/day) in 86 patients with metastatic hormone-refractory prostate cancer (mHRPC). The primary assessment was prostate-specific antigen (PSA) response (confirmed reduction of >or=50% from baseline) and a greater number of patients showed a PSA response with placebo + DP (67%) versus vandetanib + DP (40%); hazard ratio = 2.23 (one-sided 80% confidence limit = 2.90; one-sided p = 0.99). More patients experienced progression events (disease progression or death from any cause) with vandetanib + DP (65%) versus placebo + DP (60%); hazard ratio = 1.13 (one-sided 80% confidence limit = 1.44; one-sided p = 0.67). The overall incidence of adverse events was similar in both groups, although more patients experienced adverse events, leading to permanent discontinuation with vandetanib + DP (28%) versus placebo + DP (12%). However, the safety and tolerability profile for vandetanib was similar to that previously reported; adverse events that occurred more frequently in the vandetanib + DP arm were hypertension (14% vs. 2%), erythematous rash (14% vs. 2%), and exfoliative rash (12% vs. 2%). In this study of patients with mHRPC, vandetanib + DP did not demonstrate any efficacy benefit, compared with placebo + DP.