Harnessing the effects of hypoxia-like inhibition on homology-directed DNA repair.

Hypoxia is a hallmark feature of the tumor microenvironment which can promote mutagenesis and instability. This increase in mutational burden occurs as a result of the downregulation of DNA repair systems. Deficits in the DNA damage response can be exploited to induce cytotoxicity and treat advanced stage cancers. With the advent of precision medicine, agents such as Poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors have been used to achieve synthetic lethality in homology directed repair (HDR) deficient cancers. However, most cancers lack these predictive biomarkers. Treatment for the HDR proficient population represents an important unmet clinical need. There has been interest in the use of anti-angiogenic agents to promote tumor hypoxia and induce deficiency in a HDR proficient background. For example, the use of cediranib to inhibit PDGFR and downregulate enzymes of the HDR pathway can be used synergistically with a PARP inhibitor. This combination can improve therapeutic responses in HDR proficient cancers. Preclinical results and Phase II and III clinical trial data support the mechanistic rationale for the efficacy of these agents in combination. Future investigations should explore the effectiveness of cediranib and other anti-angiogenic agents with a PARP inhibitor to elicit an antitumor response and sensitize cancers to immunotherapy.

NRG-GY012: Randomized phase 2 study comparing olaparib, cediranib, and the combination of cediranib/olaparib in women with recurrent, persistent, or metastatic endometrial cancer.

PURPOSE: This paper reports the efficacy of the poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib alone and in combination with the antiangiogenesis agent cediranib compared with cediranib alone in patients with advanced endometrial cancer. METHODS: This was open-label, randomized, phase 2 trial (NCT03660826). Eligible patients had recurrent endometrial cancer, received at least one (<3) prior lines of chemotherapy, and were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 2. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1:1), stratified by histology (serous vs. other) to receive cediranib alone (reference arm), olaparib, or olaparib and cediranib for 28-day cycles until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. Homologous repair deficiency was explored using the BROCA-GO sequencing panel. RESULTS: A total of 120 patients were enrolled and all were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Median age was 66 (range, 41-86) years and 47 (39.2%) had serous histology. Median progression-free survival for cediranib was 3.8 months compared with 2.0 months for olaparib (hazard ratio, 1.45 [95% CI, 0.91-2.3] p = .935) and 5.5 months for olaparib/cediranib (hazard ratio, 0.7 [95% CI, 0.43-1.14] p = .064). Four patients receiving the combination had a durable response lasting more than 20 months. The most common grade 3/4 toxicities were hypertension in the cediranib (36%) and olaparib/cediranib (33%) arms, fatigue (20.5% olaparib/cediranib), and diarrhea (17.9% cediranib). The BROCA-GO panel results were not associated with response. CONCLUSION: The combination of cediranib and olaparib demonstrated modest clinical efficacy; however, the primary end point of the study was not met. The combination was safe without unexpected toxicity.

A phase 2 trial exploring the significance of homologous recombination status in patients with platinum sensitive or platinum resistant relapsed ovarian cancer receiving combination cediranib and olaparib.

OBJECTIVE: Combination cediranib/olaparib has reported activity in relapsed ovarian cancer. This phase 2 trial investigated the activity of cediranib/olaparib in relapsed ovarian cancer and its association with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD). METHODS: Seventy patients were enrolled to cohorts of either platinum-sensitive or platinum-resistant ovarian cancer and received olaparib tablets 200 mg twice daily and cediranib tablets 30 mg once daily under a continuous dosing schedule. HRD testing was performed on pre-treatment, on-treatment and archival biopsies by sequencing key homologous recombination repair (HRR) genes and by genomic LOH analysis. The primary objective for the platinum-sensitive cohort was the association of HRD, defined as presence of HRR gene mutation, with progression-free survival (PFS). The primary objective for the platinum-resistant cohort was objective response rate (ORR), with a key secondary endpoint evaluating the association of HRD status with activity. RESULTS: In platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (N = 35), ORR was 77.1% (95% CI 59.9-89.6%) and median PFS was 16.4 months (95% CI 13.2-18.6). Median PFS in platinum-sensitive HRR-HRD cancers (N = 22) was 16.8 months (95% CI 11.3-18.6), and 16.4 months (95% CI 9.4-NA) in HRR-HR proficient cancers (N = 13; p = 0.57). In platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (N = 35), ORR was 22.9% (95% CI 10.4-40.1%) with median PFS 6.8 months (95% CI 4.2-9.1). Median PFS in platinum-resistant HRR-HRD cancers (N = 7) was 10.5 months (95% CI 3.6-NA) and 5.6 months (95% CI 3.6-7.6) in HRR-HR proficient cancers (N = 18; p = 0.23). CONCLUSIONS: Cediranib/olaparib had clinical activity in both platinum-sensitive and -resistant ovarian cancer. Presence of HRR gene mutations was not associated with cediranib/olaparib activity in either setting.

A multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase II study of cediranib with or without lenalidomide in iodine 131-refractory differentiated thyroid cancer.

BACKGROUND: Multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) pathway have activity in differentiated thyroid cancer (DTC). Lenalidomide demonstrated preliminary efficacy in DTC, but its safety and efficacy in combination with VEGFR-targeted TKIs is unknown. We sought to determine the safety and efficacy of cediranib, a VEGFR-targeted TKI, with or without lenalidomide, in the treatment of iodine 131-refractory DTC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase II clinical trial, 110 patients were enrolled and randomized to cediranib alone or cediranib with lenalidomide. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included response rate, duration of response, toxicity, and overall survival (OS). Patients (≥18 years of age) with DTC who were refractory to further surgical or radioactive iodine (RAI) therapy as reviewed at a multispecialty tumor board conference, and evidence of disease progression within the previous 12 months and no more than one prior line of systemic therapy were eligible. RESULTS: Of the 110 patients, 108 started therapy and were assessable for efficacy. The median PFS was 14.8 months [95% confidence interval (CI) 8.5-23.8 months] in the cediranib arm and 11.3 months (95% CI 8.7-18.9 months) in the cediranib with lenalidomide arm (P = 0.36). The 2-year OS was 64.8% (95% CI 43.3% to 86.4%) and 75.3% (95% CI 59.4% to 91.0%), respectively (P = 0.80). The serious adverse event rate was 41% in the cediranib arm and 46% in the cediranib with lenalidomide arm. CONCLUSIONS: Single-agent therapy with cediranib showed promising efficacy in RAI-refractory DTC similar to other VEGFR-targeted TKIs, while the addition of lenalidomide did not result in clinically meaningful improvements in outcomes.

Vitamin D Modulates the Response of Patient-Derived Metastatic Melanoma Cells to Anticancer Drugs.

Melanoma is considered a lethal and treatment-resistant skin cancer with a high risk of recurrence, making it a major clinical challenge. Our earlier studies documented that 1,25(OH)2D3 and its low-calcaemic analogues potentiate the effectiveness of dacarbazine and cediranib, a pan-VEGFR inhibitor. In the current study, a set of patient-derived melanoma cultures was established and characterised as a preclinical model of human melanoma. Thus, patient-derived cells were preconditioned with 1,25(OH)2D3 and treated with cediranib or vemurafenib, a BRAF inhibitor, depending on the BRAF mutation status of the patients enrolled in the study. 1,25(OH)2D3 preconditioning exacerbated the inhibition of patient-derived melanoma cell growth and motility in comparison to monotherapy with cediranib. A significant decrease in mitochondrial respiration parameters, such as non-mitochondrial oxygen consumption, basal respiration and ATP-linked respiration, was observed. It seems that 1,25(OH)2D3 preconditioning enhanced cediranib efficacy via the modulation of mitochondrial bioenergetics. Additionally, 1,25(OH)2D3 also decreased the viability and mobility of the BRAF+ patient-derived cells treated with vemurafenib. Interestingly, regardless of the strict selection, cancer-derived fibroblasts (CAFs) became the major fraction of cultured cells over time, suggesting that melanoma growth is dependent on CAFs. In conclusion, the results of our study strongly emphasise that the active form of vitamin D, 1,25(OH)2D3, might be considered as an adjuvant agent in the treatment of malignant melanoma.

Phase I study of cediranib, an oral VEGFR inhibitor, in combination with selumetinib, an oral MEK inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

PURPOSE: Targeting the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway improves progression free survival in multiple advanced malignancies but durable responses are uncommon. Inhibition of the VEGF pathway at multiple levels of signal transduction may improve clinical outcomes. Preclinical data with cediranib, an inhibitor of all 3 VEGF receptors, in combination with selumetinib, an inhibitor of MEK 1/2, demonstrated improved tumor control experimentally. This phase I trial was designed to test the two agents in combination to evaluate the tolerability, safety and assess disease response. METHODS: Patients with advanced solid malignancies were enrolled into this phase I trial. Cediranib and selumetinib were dosed using a toxicity-adaptive isotonic design for the dose escalation/de-escalation of each agent. Both cediranib and selumetinib were administered daily and continuously. Cycles were 28 days in length. RESULTS: Eighteen patients were enrolled. At all dose levels, dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were observed, which limited dose escalation and further evaluation. The maximum tolerated dose of cediranib and selumetinib in combination could not be determined. The best response of stable disease was observed in eight patients. CONCLUSIONS: Cediranib and selumetinib in combination on a continuous schedule was not tolerable, with patients experiencing cardiovascular and other DLTs. Intermittent schedules may be needed to establish a safe and tolerable combination of cediranib and selumetinib.

Randomized phase II trial of weekly paclitaxel vs. cediranib-olaparib (continuous or intermittent schedule) in platinum-resistant high-grade epithelial ovarian cancer.

BACKGROUND: Previous findings showed that cediranib-olaparib increased PFS in women with recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer compared to olaparib alone. METHODS: BAROCCO trial randomized 123 patients: 80mg/m2 paclitaxel weekly up to 24 weeks (control), olaparib 300mg tablets twice daily together with 20mg cediranib daily (continuous schedule) or with 20mg cediranib 5 days/week (intermittent schedule) until progression. The primary objective was the PFS comparison between each experimental arm and the control (alpha one-sided 5%; power 80%; HR 0.5). RESULTS: The median platinum-free interval was 1.9 months, 60% of patients had been pretreated with 3 or more chemotherapy lines. Median PFS for paclitaxel, the continuous, and the intermittent schedules were 3.1, 5.6, and 3.8 months. The HR for PFS in the continuous arm vs control was 0.76 (90% CI: 0.50-1.14, p = 0.265). The HR for PFS in the intermittent arm vs control was 1.03 (90% CI: 0.68-1.55, p = 0.904). Treatment was discontinued due to adverse events in 15%, 20%, and 5% of patients in the control, continuous and intermittent arms. Grade ≥ 3 anemia and diarrhea and hypertension of any grade occurred only in the experimental arms, and peripheral neuropathies and alopecia only in the control arm. Five serious adverse drug reactions occurred and two were fatal: one in the control and one in the continuous arm. CONCLUSIONS: The combination of cediranib-olaparib was not superior to chemotherapy in terms of PFS in heavily pretreated platinum-resistant ovarian cancer patients. However, this oral doublet, is active and may offer a non-chemotherapy option in this difficult to treat population. CLINICAL TRIAL IDENTIFICATION: IRFMN-OVA-7289, EudraCT: 2016-003964-38, NCT03314740.

Clinical Activity and Safety of Cediranib and Olaparib Combination in Patients with Metastatic Pancreatic Ductal Adenocarcinoma without BRCA Mutation.

LESSONS LEARNED: Cediranib and olaparib combination did not result in clinically meaningful activity in patients with metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma without known BRCA mutation. BACKGROUND: Cediranib, a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, suppresses expression of BRCA1/2 and RAD51 inducing homologous recombination DNA repair deficiency (HRD) in several cancer cell lines and xenograft models [1]. Olaparib provides a clinical benefit in patients with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPDAC) with germline BRCA mutation (gBRCAmt) [2]. We hypothesized that cediranib induces HRD in the absence of gBRCAmt and synergizes with olaparib, resulting in an objective response in patients with mPDAC. METHODS: Patients with mPDAC with at least one prior systemic chemotherapy were enrolled. Patients with known gBRCAmt were excluded. Patients took cediranib 30 mg daily and olaparib 200 mg twice daily, orally. The primary endpoint was objective response (OR) rate. RESULTS: Nineteen patients received the study drugs. Seven patients came off treatment before the first restaging scan: six because of clinical progression and one because of an adverse event. No OR was observed. Six patients had stable disease (SD) as a best overall response. The median duration of SD was 3.1 months. The median overall survival was 3.4 months. Common treatment-related adverse events were fatigue, hypertension, and diarrhea. CONCLUSION: Cediranib and olaparib combination did not result in clinically meaningful activity in patients with mPDAC without gBRCAmt.

The WIRE study a phase II, multi-arm, multi-centre, non-randomised window-of-opportunity clinical trial platform using a Bayesian adaptive design for proof-of-mechanism of novel treatment strategies in operable renal cell cancer - a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Window-of-opportunity trials, evaluating the engagement of drugs with their biological target in the time period between diagnosis and standard-of-care treatment, can help prioritise promising new systemic treatments for later-phase clinical trials. Renal cell carcinoma (RCC), the 7th commonest solid cancer in the UK, exhibits targets for multiple new systemic anti-cancer agents including DNA damage response inhibitors, agents targeting vascular pathways and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Here we present the trial protocol for the WIndow-of-opportunity clinical trial platform for evaluation of novel treatment strategies in REnal cell cancer (WIRE). METHODS: WIRE is a Phase II, multi-arm, multi-centre, non-randomised, proof-of-mechanism (single and combination investigational medicinal product [IMP]), platform trial using a Bayesian adaptive design. The Bayesian adaptive design leverages outcome information from initial participants during pre-specified interim analyses to determine and minimise the number of participants required to demonstrate efficacy or futility. Patients with biopsy-proven, surgically resectable, cT1b+, cN0-1, cM0-1 clear cell RCC and no contraindications to the IMPs are eligible to participate. Participants undergo diagnostic staging CT and renal mass biopsy followed by treatment in one of the treatment arms for at least 14 days. Initially, the trial includes five treatment arms with cediranib, cediranib + olaparib, olaparib, durvalumab and durvalumab + olaparib. Participants undergo a multiparametric MRI before and after treatment. Vascularised and de-vascularised tissue is collected at surgery. A ≥ 30% increase in CD8+ T-cells on immunohistochemistry between the screening and nephrectomy is the primary endpoint for durvalumab-containing arms. Meanwhile, a reduction in tumour vascular permeability measured by Ktrans on dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI by ≥30% is the primary endpoint for other arms. Secondary outcomes include adverse events and tumour size change. Exploratory outcomes include biomarkers of drug mechanism and treatment effects in blood, urine, tissue and imaging. DISCUSSION: WIRE is the first trial using a window-of-opportunity design to demonstrate pharmacological activity of novel single and combination treatments in RCC in the pre-surgical space. It will provide rationale for prioritising promising treatments for later phase trials and support the development of new biomarkers of treatment effect with its extensive translational agenda. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03741426 / EudraCT: 2018-003056-21 .

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM): An overview of current therapies and mechanisms of resistance.

Glioblastoma multiforme (GBM) is a WHO grade IV glioma and the most common malignant, primary brain tumor with a 5-year survival of 7.2%. Its highly infiltrative nature, genetic heterogeneity, and protection by the blood brain barrier (BBB) have posed great treatment challenges. The standard treatment for GBMs is surgical resection followed by chemoradiotherapy. The robust DNA repair and self-renewing capabilities of glioblastoma cells and glioma initiating cells (GICs), respectively, promote resistance against all current treatment modalities. Thus, durable GBM management will require the invention of innovative treatment strategies. In this review, we will describe biological and molecular targets for GBM therapy, the current status of pharmacologic therapy, prominent mechanisms of resistance, and new treatment approaches. To date, medical imaging is primarily used to determine the location, size and macroscopic morphology of GBM before, during, and after therapy. In the future, molecular and cellular imaging approaches will more dynamically monitor the expression of molecular targets and/or immune responses in the tumor, thereby enabling more immediate adaptation of tumor-tailored, targeted therapies.

Anti-angiogenic therapy for ovarian cancer.

Angiogenesis is a known hallmark in cancer and plays a crucial role in ovarian cancer carcinogenesis and invasion. Anti- angiogenic agents are active in ovarian cancer treatment either as monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy, immunotherapy or poly ADP ribose polymerase (PARP) inhibitors. We review the mechanism of action, clinical activity and safety profile of the most important drugs either in the actual treatment or in current evaluation in the ovarian cancer treatment scenario (neoadjuvant, first line and relapse).

Dynamics of circulating vascular endothelial growth factor-A predict benefit from antiangiogenic cediranib in metastatic or recurrent cervical cancer patients.

AIMS: There is a need for predictive and surrogate response biomarkers to support treatment with antiangiogenic vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) inhibitors. We aimed to identify a minimally-invasive biomarker predicting benefit from cediranib pretreatment or early during treatment in patients with recurrent or metastatic cervical cancer. METHODS: Blood samples were collected before treatment, during treatment and upon disease progression where appropriate from patients enrolled in CIRCCa, a randomised phase II trial of carboplatin and paclitaxel with or without cediranib. Plasma concentrations of VEGF-A, VEGF-receptor 2, Ang1 and Tie2 were measured using multiplex enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Pretreatment and temporal changes of the biomarkers were investigated using proportional hazard regression and unsupervised clustering analysis. RESULTS: Samples (n = 556) from 52 patients were analysed. VEGF-receptor 2 (P = .0006) and Tie2 (P = .04) were downregulated following cediranib, while VEGF-A (P = .0025) was upregulated. High Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (P = .02, hazard ratio [HR] = 2.15, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.13-4.09) and low pretreatment Tie2 concentrations (P = .003, HR = 0.57, 95%CI 0.39-0.83) were independent prognostic factors associated with reduced progression-free survival. Two patterns of changes in VEGF-A following cediranib were identified. Patients with elevated VEGF-A in the first 3 treatment cycles, regardless of magnitude, had reduced progression-free survival in the placebo arm but improved survival with the addition of cediranib (P = .019, HR = 0.13, 95% CI 0.02-0.71). CONCLUSION: Patterns of early elevation in plasma VEGF-A should be studied further as a potential biomarker to predict treatment benefit from cediranib.

Cediranib phase-II study in children with metastatic alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS).

BACKGROUND: Alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS), a rare vascular sarcoma with a clinically indolent course, frequently presents with metastases. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a promising therapeutic target. In a phase-II trial of the VEGF receptor inhibitor cediranib for adults with ASPS, the partial response (PR) rate (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors [RECIST] v1.0) was 35% (15/43; 95% confidence interval: 21-51%). We evaluated cediranib in the pediatric population. PROCEDURE: Patients <16 years old with metastatic, unresectable ASPS received cediranib at the pediatric maximum tolerated dose of 12 mg/m2 (≈70% of the fixed adult phase-II dose orally daily). Tumor response was assessed every two cycles (RECIST v1.0). A Simon two-stage optimal design (target response rate 35%, rule out 5%) was used. RESULTS: Seven patients (four females), with a median age of 13 years, (range 9-15), were enrolled on stage 1. The most frequent grade 2 or 3 adverse events were neutropenia, diarrhea, hypertension, fatigue, and proteinuria. The best response was stable disease (SD) (median cycle number = 34). Three patients were removed from the study treatment for disease progression (cycles 4, 5, and 36). Five of seven patients had SD for ≥14 months. Two patients with SD remain on study (34-57+ cycles). CONCLUSIONS: Cediranib did not reach the target response rate in this small pediatric cohort, in contrast to the adult 35% PR rate. The pediatric dosing was 30% lower compared to the adult dosing, which may have contributed to response differences. Prolonged SD was observed in five patients, but given the indolent nature of ASPS, SD cannot be clearly attributed to cediranib. Cediranib has an acceptable safety profile.

Alveolar soft part sarcoma in children and young adults: A report of 69 cases.

BACKGROUND: Alveolar soft part sarcoma (ASPS) is a rare mesenchymal tumor characterized by ASPL-TFE3 translocation. Apart from complete surgical resection, there is no standard management strategy. PROCEDURE: The clinical data of 69 children and young adults less than 30 years old with ASPS diagnosed from 1980-2014 were retrospectively collected from four major institutions. RESULTS: Median age at diagnosis was 17 years (range: 1.5-30). Forty-four (64%) were female. Median follow-up was 46 months (range: 1-409). Most common primary sites were limbs (58%) and trunk (24%). ASPL-TFE3 translocation was present in all 26 patients tested. IRS postsurgical staging was I in 19 (28%), II in 7 (10%), III in 5 (7%), and IV in 38 (55%) patients. The 5-year event-free survival (EFS) and overall survival (OS) were 38% and 72%, respectively. The 5-year EFS and OS were 80% and 87%, respectively, for the 31 patients with localized tumors (IRS-I-II-III), and 7% and 61%, respectively, for the 38 patients with metastatic tumors (IRS-IV). Of 11 IRS-IV patients who received targeted therapy upfront, two had partial response, six had stable disease, and three had progressive disease. Median time to progression for IRS-IV patients was 12 months for those treated with targeted therapy, 7 months for cytotoxic chemotherapy (N = 15), and 4 months for observation only (N = 6). CONCLUSION: Localized ASPS has a good prognosis after gross total resection. ASPS is resistant to cytotoxic chemotherapy. Although there are no curative therapies for patients with metastatic disease, prolonged disease stabilization may be achieved with targeted therapies.

Pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy and pulmonary veno-occlusive disease in a woman with cervical cancer treated with cediranib and durvalumab.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary tumor thrombotic microangiopathy (PTTM) is a rare cause of pulmonary hypertension that is associated with malignancies and is marked by the presence of non-occlusive tumor emboli and fibrocellular intimal proliferation of small pulmonary arteries leading to increased pulmonary vascular resistance and right heart failure. The diagnosis of PTTM is challenging to make pre-mortem and guidelines on treatment are lacking. CASE PRESENTATION: A 45-year-old woman with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix developed symptoms of dyspnea and evidence of right heart failure during a phase I clinical trial with cediranib and durvalumab. After an extensive evaluation, pre-capillary pulmonary hypertension was confirmed by right heart catheterization. Vasodilator therapy was initiated but resulted in the development of symptomatic hypoxemia and was discontinued. Despite continued supportive care, she continued to decline and was transitioned to hospice care. At autopsy, the cause of her right heart failure was found to be due to PTTM with features of pulmonary veno-occlusive disease (PVOD). CONCLUSION: PTTM and PVOD are important diagnoses to consider in patients with a malignancy and the development of right heart failure and may be manifestations of a spectrum of similar disease processes.

Normalizing Tumor Vessels To Increase the Enzyme-Induced Retention and Targeting of Gold Nanoparticle for Breast Cancer Imaging and Treatment.

Abnormal tumor vessels impede the transport and distribution of chemotherapeutics, resulting in low drug concentration at tumor sites and compromised drug efficacy. Normalizing tumor vessels can modulate tumor vascular permeability, alleviate tumor hypoxia, increase blood perfusion, attenuate interstitial fluid pressure, and improve drug delivery. Herein, a novel strategy combining cediranib, a tumor vessel normalizing agent, with an enzyme responsive size-changeable gold nanoparticle (AuNPs-A&C) was developed. In vivo photoacoustic and fluorescence imaging showed that oral pretreatment with 6 mg/kg/day of cediranib for two consecutive days significantly enhanced the retention of AuNPs-A&C in 4T1 tumor. In vivo photoacoustic imaging for hemoglobin (Hb) and oxyhemoglobin (HbO2), Evans blue assay, and immunofluorescence assay showed that cediranib pretreatment markedly increased tumor vascular permeability and tumor oxygenation, while distinctly decreased the tumor microvessel density, demonstrating normalized tumor vessels and favorably altered microenvironment. Additionally, the combination strategy considerably elevated the tumor targeting capacity of different nanoparticle formulations (AuNPs-PEG, AuNPs-A&C), while coadministration of cediranib and AuNPs-A&C achieved prevailing tumor targeting and antitumor efficacy in 4T1 tumor bearing mouse model. In conclusion, we report a novel combined administration strategy to further improve tumor diagnosis and treatment.

Population pharmacokinetic and exposure simulation analysis for cediranib (AZD2171) in pooled Phase I/II studies in patients with cancer.

AIMS: A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model was developed for cediranib to simulate cediranib exposure for different doses, including comedication with strong uridine glucuronosyl transferase/P-glycoprotein inducers such as rifampicin, in cancer patients. METHODS: Plasma concentrations and covariates from 625 cancer patients after single or multiple oral cediranib administrations ranging from 0.5 to 90 mg in 19 Phase I and II studies were included in the analysis. Stepwise covariate modelling was used to develop the population PK model. The final model was used to simulate cediranib exposure in cancer patients to evaluate cediranib target coverage and the need for dose adjustment for covariates or coadministration with rifampicin. RESULTS: A two-compartment model with sequential zero- and first-order absorption and first-order elimination adequately described the cediranib concentration-time courses. Body weight and age were identified as having statistically significant impact on cediranib PK, but only <21% impact on AUC and maximum concentrations. Simulated lower bounds of 90% prediction interval or median of unbound cediranib concentrations after cediranib 15 or 20 mg exceeded the IC50 for vascular endothelial growth factor receptors-1, -2 and -3. Exposures of cediranib 20 or 30 mg with coadministration of rifampicin were comparable to those of 15 or 20 mg, respectively, without coadministration. CONCLUSIONS: No covariate was identified to require dose adjustment for cediranib. Cediranib exposure following 15 or 20 mg daily dose administration is adequate overall for inhibition of in vitro estimated vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-1, -2 and -3 activities. An increase in cediranib dose may be needed for cediranib coadministered with strong uridine glucuronosyl transferase/P-glycoprotein inducers such as rifampicin.

The VEGFR Inhibitor Cediranib Improves the Efficacy of Fractionated Radiotherapy in a Colorectal Cancer Xenograft Model.

BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: Radiotherapy (RT) increases local tumor control in locally advanced rectal cancer, but complete histological response is seen in only a minority of cases. Antiangiogenic therapy has been proposed to improve RT efficacy by "normalizing" the tumor microvasculature. Here, we examined whether cediranib, a pan-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, improves microvascular function and tumor control in combination with RT in a mouse colorectal cancer (CRC) model. METHODS: CRC xenografts (HT29) were grown subcutaneously in mice. Animals were treated for 5 consecutive days with vehicle, RT (1.8 Gy daily), cediranib (6 mg/kg po), or combined therapy (cediranib 2 h prior to radiation). Tumor volume was measured with calipers. Vascular changes were analyzed by dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, oxygenation and interstitial fluid pressure probes and histology. To investigate vascular changes more in detail, a second set of mice were fitted with titanium dorsal skinfold window chambers, wherein a HT29 tumor cell suspension was injected. In vivo fluorescence microscopy was performed before and after treatment (same treatment protocol). RESULTS: In vivo microscopy analyses showed that VEGFR inhibition with cediranib led to a "normalization" of the vessel wall, with decreased microvessel permeability (p < 0.0001) and tortuosity (p < 0.01), and a trend to decreased vessel diameters. This seemed to lead to lower tumor hypoxia rates in the cediranib and combination groups compared to the control and RT groups. This led to an increased tumor control in the combination group compared to controls or monotherapy (p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The combination of RT with cediranib enhances tumor control in a CRC xenograft mouse model. Microvascular analyses suggest that cediranib leads to vascular normalization and improved oxygenation.

Anti-angiogenic agents in ovarian cancer: past, present, and future.

Angiogenesis plays a pivotal role in normal ovarian physiology as well as in the progression of ovarian cancer through ascites formation and metastatic spread. Bevacizumab (Avastin(®), Genentech; South San Francisco, CA, USA), a humanized anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) monoclonal antibody, is the most widely studied anti-angiogenesis agent both across tumor types and specifically in epithelial ovarian cancer. In 2005, single-agent bevacizumab at 15 mg/kg (IV) every 3 weeks was first reported to be active in a case of recurrent high-grade serous ovarian cancer after failing 11th line cytotoxic treatment. Since then, many case series, phase II and phase III trials have confirmed these results leading to regulatory approval in most countries including the US Food and Drug Administration in 2014. Guidelines now give clear recommendations as to when and how bevacizumab should be integrated into the ovarian cancer treatment paradigm. Other anti-VEGF agents such as the VEGF receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitors have not shown increased activity or reduced toxicity relative to bevacizumab. However, anti-angiogenics other than anti-VEGF/VEGFR agents such as those targeting Angiopoietin-1 and -2 are in development as well as novel combinations with vascular disrupting agents (VDAs), PARP inhibitors and immune checkpoint inhibitors. Clearly, the benefits of anti-angiogenic agents such as bevacizumab must be carefully weighed against the cost and associated toxicities. Although almost all patients with ovarian cancer will receive an anti-angiogenic compound, cures are not increased. Predictive biomarkers are an urgent unmet need.

A phase II study of cediranib, an oral VEGF inhibitor, in previously untreated patients with metastatic or recurrent malignant melanoma.

PURPOSE: A two stage multi-institution Phase II study was undertaken by the Princess Margaret Hospital Consortium to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of oral cediranib, an inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors 1 and 2, in patients with previously untreated advanced malignant melanoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Between May 2006 and April 2008, 24 patients (median age 65 years) with advanced malignant melanoma were treated with oral cediranib. Cediranib was given on a continuous, oral once daily schedule of 45 mg, on a 28 day cycle. RESULTS: Of the 17 patients evaluable for response, there was stable disease in 8 patients, and progressive disease in 9 patients, with no objective responses seen. Only 2 patients had stable disease >/= 6 months, thus the study was terminated at the end of stage 1 accrual. The overall median survival was 9.9 months, and the median time to progression was 3.5 months. The most frequent non-hematologic adverse events were hypertension (78%), fatigue (69%), diarrhea (69%) and anorexia and nausea (each 57%). CONCLUSIONS: Although 2 patients had stable disease at 6 months, the short median time to progression and lack of any objective responses indicate that single agent cediranib at this dose and schedule is not sufficiently active to warrant study continuation.