Targeting the fibroblast growth factor pathway in molecular subtypes of castration-resistant prostate cancer.

BACKGROUND: Androgen receptor (AR) pathway inhibition remains the cornerstone for prostate cancer therapies. However, castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) tumors can resist AR signaling inhibitors through AR amplification and AR splice variants in AR-positive CRPC (ARPC), and conversion to AR-null phenotypes, such as double-negative prostate cancer (DNPC) and small cell or neuroendocrine prostate cancer (SCNPC). We have shown previously that DNPC can bypass AR-dependence through fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) signaling. However, the role of the FGFR pathway in other CRPC phenotypes has not been elucidated. METHODS: RNA-Seq analysis was conducted on patient metastases, LuCaP patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models, and CRPC cell lines. Cell lines (C4-2B, VCaP, and 22Rv1) and ex vivo LuCaP PDX tumor cells were treated with enzalutamide (ENZA) and FGFR inhibitors (FGFRi) alone or in combination and sensitivity was determined using cell viability assays. In vivo efficacy of FGFRi in ARPC, DNPC, and SCNPC were evaluated using PDX models. RESULTS: RNA-Seq analysis of FGFR signaling in metastatic specimens, LuCaP PDX models, and CRPC cell lines revealed significant FGF pathway activation in AR-low PC (ARLPC), DNPC, and SCNPC tumors. In vitro/ex vivo analysis of erdafitinib and CH5183284 demonstrated robust and moderate growth suppression of ARPC, respectively. In vivo studies using four ARPC PDX models showed that combination ENZA and CH5183284 significantly suppressed tumor growth. Additional in vivo studies using four ARPC PDX models revealed that erdafitinib monotherapy was as effective as ENZA in suppressing tumor growth, and there was limited combination benefit. Furthermore, two of three DNPC models and two of four SCNPC models responded to CH5183284 monotherapy, suggesting FGFRi responses were model dependent. RNA-Seq and gene set enrichment analysis of end-of-study ARPC tumors treated with FGFRi displayed decreased expression of E2F and MYC target genes and suppressed G2M checkpoint genes, whereas end-of-study SCNPC tumors had heterogeneous transcriptional responses. CONCLUSIONS: Although FGFRi treatments suppressed tumor growth across CRPC phenotypes, our analyses did not identify a single pathway or biomarker that would identify tumor response to FGFRi. This is very likely due to the array of FGFR1-4 expression and tumor phenotypes present in CRPC. Nevertheless, our data nominate the FGFR pathway as a clinically actionable target that promotes tumor growth in diverse phenotypes of treatment-refractory metastatic CRPC.

Erdafitinib versus pembrolizumab in pretreated patients with advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer with select FGFR alterations: cohort 2 of the randomized phase III THOR trial.

BACKGROUND: Erdafitinib is an oral pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor approved to treat locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) in patients with susceptible FGFR3/2 alterations (FGFRalt) who progressed after platinum-containing chemotherapy. FGFR-altered tumours are enriched in luminal 1 subtype and may have limited clinical benefit from anti-programmed death-(ligand) 1 [PD-(L)1] treatment. This cohort in the randomized, open-label phase III THOR study assessed erdafitinib versus pembrolizumab in anti-PD-(L)1-naive patients with mUC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients ≥18 years with unresectable advanced/mUC, with select FGFRalt, disease progression on one prior treatment, and who were anti-PD-(L)1-naive were randomized 1 : 1 to receive erdafitinib 8 mg once daily with pharmacodynamically guided uptitration to 9 mg or pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. RESULTS: The intent-to-treat population (median follow-up 33 months) comprised 175 and 176 patients in the erdafitinib and pembrolizumab arms, respectively. There was no statistically significant difference in OS between erdafitinib and pembrolizumab [median 10.9 versus 11.1 months, respectively; hazard ratio (HR) 1.18; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.51; P = 0.18]. Median PFS for erdafitinib and pembrolizumab was 4.4 and 2.7 months, respectively (HR 0.88; 95% CI 0.70-1.10). ORR was 40.0% and 21.6% (relative risk 1.85; 95% CI 1.32-2.59) and median duration of response was 4.3 and 14.4 months for erdafitinib and pembrolizumab, respectively. 64.7% and 50.9% of patients in the erdafitinib and pembrolizumab arms had ≥1 grade 3-4 adverse events (AEs); 5 (2.9%) and 12 (6.9%) patients, respectively, had AEs that led to death. CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib and pembrolizumab had similar median OS in this anti-PD-(L)1-naive, FGFR-altered mUC population. Outcomes with pembrolizumab were better than assumed and aligned with previous reports in non- FGFR-altered populations. Safety results were consistent with the known profiles for erdafitinib and pembrolizumab in this patient population.

Erdafitinib in BCG-treated high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer.

BACKGROUND: Treatment options are limited for patients with high-risk non-muscle-invasive bladder cancer (NMIBC) with disease recurrence after bacillus Calmette-Guérin (BCG) treatment and who are ineligible for/refuse radical cystectomy. FGFR alterations are commonly detected in NMIBC. We evaluated the activity of oral erdafitinib, a selective pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, versus intravesical chemotherapy in patients with high-risk NMIBC and select FGFR3/2 alterations following recurrence after BCG treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients aged ≥18 years with recurrent, BCG-treated, papillary-only high-risk NMIBC (high-grade Ta/T1) and select FGFR alterations refusing or ineligible for radical cystectomy were randomized to 6 mg daily oral erdafitinib or investigator's choice of intravesical chemotherapy (mitomycin C or gemcitabine). The primary endpoint was recurrence-free survival (RFS). The key secondary endpoint was safety. RESULTS: Study enrollment was discontinued due to slow accrual. Seventy-three patients were randomized 2 : 1 to erdafitinib (n = 49) and chemotherapy (n = 24). Median follow-up for RFS was 13.4 months for both groups. Median RFS was not reached for erdafitinib [95% confidence interval (CI) 16.9 months-not estimable] and was 11.6 months (95% CI 6.4-20.1 months) for chemotherapy, with an estimated hazard ratio of 0.28 (95% CI 0.1-0.6; nominal P value = 0.0008). In this population, safety results were generally consistent with known profiles for erdafitinib and chemotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib prolonged RFS compared with intravesical chemotherapy in patients with papillary-only, high-risk NMIBC harboring FGFR alterations who had disease recurrence after BCG therapy and refused or were ineligible for radical cystectomy.

Knockout of Shcbp1 sensitizes immunotherapy by regulating α-SMA positive cancer-associated fibroblasts.

The crucial role of cancer-associated fibroblasts (CAFs) in promoting T-cell exclusion has a significant impact on tumor immune evasion and resistance to immunotherapy. Therefore, enhancing T-cell infiltration into solid tumors has emerged as a pivotal area of research. We achieved a conventional knockout of Shcbp1 (Shcbp1-/- ) through CRISPR/Cas9 gene editing and crossed these mice with spontaneous breast cancer MMTV-PyMT mice, resulting in PyMT Shcbp1-/- mice. The different CAF subtypes were detected by flow cytometry analysis (FCA). We evaluated collagen and CAFs levels using Sirius red staining, immunohistochemistry (IHC), and immunofluorescence (IF). Primary tumor cells and CAFs were isolated from both PyMT Shcbp1+/+ and PyMT Shcbp1-/- mice. We analyzed CAFs' proliferation, invasion, migration, apoptosis, and cell cycle. Transwell coculture experiments were performed with primary tumor cells and CAFs to evaluate the role of CAFs in increasing the sensitivity of tumor cells to Erdafitinib. Tumors from PyMT Shcbp1+/+ and PyMT Shcbp1-/- mice were orthotopically transplanted to assess the therapeutic effect of the Erdafitinib and PD-1 combination. CAFs and T-cell infiltration in these tumors were assessed using FCA and IF. Knockout of Shcbp1 leads to a significant reduction in tumor burden, promotes longer survival, and decreases CAFs in MMTV-PyMT. Moreover, knockout of Shcbp1 enhances the sensitivity of Erdafitinib, leading to effective inhibition of CAFs' proliferation and invasion, as well as the induction of apoptosis. Additionally, it results in cell cycle arrest at the G2/M phase in vitro. Meanwhile, Shcbp1-/- CAFs change the sensitivity of Shcbp1-/- tumor cells to Erdafitinib compared to Shcbp1+/+ CAFs. Importantly, knockout of Shcbp1 boosts the effectiveness of Erdafitinib in combination with immune checkpoint blockade therapy by augmenting T-cell infiltration through CAFs regulation in vivo. Our findings demonstrate that knockout of Shcbp1 holds significant potential in enhancing the therapeutic response of Erdafitinib combined with PD-1 antibody treatment, offering promising prospects for future breast cancer therapies.

Erdafitinib in Asian patients with advanced solid tumors: an open-label, single-arm, phase IIa trial.

BACKGROUND: FGFR genomic aberrations occur in approximately 5-10% of human cancers. Erdafitinib has previously demonstrated efficacy and safety in FGFR-altered advanced solid tumors, such as gliomas, thoracic, gastrointestinal, gynecological, and other rare cancers. However, its efficacy and safety in Asian patients remain largely unknown. We conducted a multicenter, open-label, single-arm phase IIa study of erdafitinib to evaluate its efficacy in Asian patients with FGFR-altered advanced cholangiocarcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), and esophageal cancer. METHODS: Patients with pathologically/cytologically confirmed, advanced, or refractory tumors who met molecular and study eligibility criteria received oral erdafitinib 8 mg once daily with an option for pharmacodynamically guided up-titration to 9 mg on a 28-day cycle, except for four NSCLC patients who received erdafitinib 10 mg (7 days on/7 days off) as they were recruited before the protocol amendment. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate per RECIST v1.1. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, duration of response, disease control rate, overall survival, safety, and pharmacokinetics. RESULTS: Thirty-five patients (cholangiocarcinoma: 22; NSCLC: 12; esophageal cancer: 1) were enrolled. At data cutoff (November 19, 2021), the objective response rate for patients with cholangiocarcinoma was 40.9% (95% CI, 20.7-63.6); the median progression-free survival was 5.6 months (95% CI, 3.6-12.7) and median overall survival was 40.2 months (95% CI, 12.4-not estimable). No patient with RET/FGFR-altered NSCLC achieved objective response and the disease control rate was 25.0% (95% CI, 5.5-57.2%), with three patients with stable disease. The single patient with esophageal cancer achieved partial response. All patients experienced treatment-emergent adverse events, and grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events were reported in 22 (62.9%) patients. Hyperphosphatemia was the most frequently reported treatment-emergent adverse event (all-grade, 85.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Erdafitinib demonstrated efficacy in a population of Asian patients in selected advanced solid tumors, particularly in those with advanced FGFR-altered cholangiocarcinoma. Treatment was tolerable with no new safety signals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02699606); study registration (first posted): 04/03/2016.

P4HA2-mediated HIF-1α stabilization promotes erdafitinib-resistance in FGFR3-alteration bladder cancer.

Erdafitinib is a novel fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitor that has shown great therapeutic promise for solid tumor patients with FGFR3 alterations, especially in urothelial carcinoma. However, the mechanisms of resistance to FGFR inhibitors remain poorly understood. In this study, we found Erdafitinib could kill cells by inducing incomplete autophagy and increasing intracellular reactive oxygen species levels. We have established an Erdafitinib-resistant cell line, RT-112-RS. whole transcriptome RNA sequencing (RNA-Seq) and Cytospace analysis performed on Erdafitinib-resistant RT-112-RS cells and parental RT-112 cells introduced P4HA2 as a linchpin to Erdafitinib resistance. The gain and loss of function study provided evidence for P4HA2 conferring such resistance in RT-112 cells. Furthermore, P4HA2 could stabilize the HIF-1α protein which then activated downstream target genes to reduce reactive oxygen species levels in bladder cancer. In turn, HIF-1α could directly bind to P4HA2 promoter, indicating a positive loop between P4HA2 and HIF-1α in bladder cancer. These results suggest a substantial role of P4HA2 in mediating acquired resistance to Erdafitinib and provide a potential target for bladder cancer treatment.

Feasibility and antitumour activity of the FGFR inhibitor erdafitnib in three paediatric CNS tumour patients.

Alterations of the fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signalling pathway are increasingly recognized as frequent oncogenic drivers of paediatric brain tumours. We report on three patients treated with the selective FGFR1-4 inhibitor erdafitinib. Two patients were diagnosed with a posterior fossa ependymoma group A (PFA EPN) and one with a low-grade glioma (LGG), harbouring FGFR3/FGFR1 overexpression and an FGFR1 internal tandem duplication (ITD), respectively. While both EPN patients did not respond to erdafitinib treatment, the FGFR1-ITD-harbouring tumour showed a significant decrease in tumour volume and contrast enhancement throughout treatment. The tumour remained stable 6 months after treatment discontinuation.

Plain language summary of erdafitinib in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma: a phase 2 study with long-term follow-up.

WHAT IS THIS SUMMARY ABOUT?: This is a plain language summary of two articles describing the results from a study called BLC2001. The study examined the effect of a medication called erdafitinib on participants with a type of cancer known as urothelial carcinoma that had either spread beyond the bladder or urinary tract into surrounding organs and/or nearby muscles (locally advanced) and was not removable by surgery (unresectable) or had spread to other parts of the body (metastatic). In this study, researchers wanted to learn if erdafitinib was safe and effective at stopping or reducing tumor growth in participants with locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with certain genetic alterations (changes in DNA sequence) in two related genes called fibroblast growth factor receptor 2 (FGFR2) and 3 (FGFR3). Treatment options for people with this disease are very limited; some may not have responded to other therapies, or their tumors continued to grow after they received other treatments. 212 participants took part in the study. 111 participants were treated with oral (by mouth) erdafitinib at different doses to find a recommended dose regimen. 101 additional participants then received the recommended starting dose of erdafitinib at 8 mg daily with possible increase to 9 mg daily, these participants make up the 8 mg regimen group. WHAT WERE THE RESULTS OF THE BLC2001 STUDY IN THE 8 MG REGIMEN GROUP?: Researchers found that tumors decreased in size or completely disappeared in 40% of participants. With approximately 1 year of follow-up, an estimated 55% of participants were still alive, and after 2 years, an estimated 31% of participants were still alive. Common side effects of erdafitinib included high phosphate levels in the blood (hyperphosphatemia), an inflamed and sore mouth, diarrhea, and dry mouth. WHAT DO THE RESULTS MEAN?: Participants had locally advanced and unresectable or metastatic urothelial carcinoma with certain FGFR gene alterations that had been treated with erdafitinib after previous chemotherapy and/or a type of medicine that uses the immune system to help the body fight cancer (immunotherapy). The BLC2001 study found that some participants treated with 8 mg erdafitinib had the benefit of a longer period without their cancer growing or spreading to other parts of the body. About 80% of participants achieved some level of disease control where their tumor shrank or remained stable.

Phase 3 THOR Japanese subgroup analysis: erdafitinib in advanced or metastatic urothelial cancer and fibroblast growth factor receptor alterations.

BACKGROUND: In the THOR trial (NCT03390504) Cohort 1, erdafitinib demonstrated significantly prolonged overall survival (OS) (median 12.1 versus 7.8 months) and reduced risk of death by 36% (hazard ratio 0.64, P = 0.005) compared with chemotherapy in metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) patients with FGFR alterations who progressed after ≥ 1 prior treatments, including anti-PD-(L)1. There have been no reports of the Japanese subgroup results yet. METHODS: THOR Cohort 1 randomized patients to erdafitinib once daily or docetaxel/vinflunine once every 3 weeks. Primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). No specific statistical power was set for this Japanese subgroup analysis. RESULTS: Of 266 patients randomized, 27 (14 erdafitinib; 13 chemotherapy) were Japanese. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between treatments and to the overall population, except for more males, lower body weight, and more upper tract primary tumors among Japanese patients. Compared with chemotherapy, erdafitinib showed improved OS (median 25.4 versus 12.4 months), PFS (median 8.4 versus 2.9 months) and ORR (57.1% versus 15.4%). Any grade treatment-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in all patients from both arms but Grade 3/4 AEs and AEs leading to discontinuation were lower in the erdafitinib arm. No new safety signals were observed in the Japanese subgroup. CONCLUSION: In the Japanese subgroup, erdafitinib showed improved survival and response compared to chemotherapy, with no new safety concerns. These results support erdafitinib as a treatment option for Japanese mUC patients with FGFR alterations, and early FGFR testing after diagnosis of mUC should be considered.

Pioneering electrochemical detection unveils erdafitinib: a breakthrough in anticancer agent determination.

The successful fabrication is reported of highly crystalline Co nanoparticles interconnected with zeolitic imidazolate framework (ZIF-12) -based amorphous porous carbon using the molten-salt-assisted approach utilizing NaCl. Single crystal diffractometers (XRD), and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) analyses confirm the codoped amorphous carbon structure. Crystallite size was calculated by Scherrer (34 nm) and Williamson-Hall models (42 nm). The magnetic properties of NPCS (N-doped porous carbon sheet) were studied using a vibrating sample magnetometer (VSM). The NPCS has a magnetic saturation (Ms) value of 1.85 emu/g. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) analyses show that Co/Co3O4 nanoparticles are homogeneously distributed in the carbon matrix. While a low melting point eutectic salt acts as an ionic liquid solvent, ZIF-12, at high temperature, leading cobalt nanoparticles with a trace amount of Co3O4 interconnected by conductive amorphous carbon. In addition, the surface area (89.04 m2/g) and pore architectures of amorphous carbon embedded with Co nanoparticles are created using the molten salt approach. Thanks to this inexpensive and effective method, the optimal composite porous carbon structures were obtained with the strategy using NaCl salt and showed distinct electrochemical performance on electrochemical methodology revealing the analytical profile of Erdatifinib (ERD) as a sensor modifier. The linear response spanned from 0.01 to 7.38 µM, featuring a limit of detection (LOD) of 3.36 nM and a limit of quantification (LOQ) of 11.2 nM. The developed sensor was examined in terms of selectivity, repeatability, and reproducibility. The fabricated electrode was utilized for the quantification of Erdafitinib in urine samples and pharmaceutical dosage forms. This research provides a fresh outlook on the advancements in electrochemical sensor technology concerning the development and detection of anticancer drugs within the realms of medicine and pharmacology.

The Importance of the Pyrazole Scaffold in the Design of Protein Kinases Inhibitors as Targeted Anticancer Therapies.

The altered activation or overexpression of protein kinases (PKs) is a major subject of research in oncology and their inhibition using small molecules, protein kinases inhibitors (PKI) is the best available option for the cure of cancer. The pyrazole ring is extensively employed in the field of medicinal chemistry and drug development strategies, playing a vital role as a fundamental framework in the structure of various PKIs. This scaffold holds major importance and is considered a privileged structure based on its synthetic accessibility, drug-like properties, and its versatile bioisosteric replacement function. It has proven to play a key role in many PKI, such as the inhibitors of Akt, Aurora kinases, MAPK, B-raf, JAK, Bcr-Abl, c-Met, PDGFR, FGFRT, and RET. Of the 74 small molecule PKI approved by the US FDA, 8 contain a pyrazole ring: Avapritinib, Asciminib, Crizotinib, Encorafenib, Erdafitinib, Pralsetinib, Pirtobrutinib, and Ruxolitinib. The focus of this review is on the importance of the unfused pyrazole ring within the clinically tested PKI and on the additional required elements of their chemical structures. Related important pyrazole fused scaffolds like indazole, pyrrolo[1,2-b]pyrazole, pyrazolo[4,3-b]pyridine, pyrazolo[1,5-a]pyrimidine, or pyrazolo[3,4-d]pyrimidine are beyond the subject of this work.

Ipatasertib (GDC-0068) and erdafitinib co-treatment for inducing mitochondrial apoptosis through Bim upregulation in bladder cancer cells.

Bladder cancer (BC) is a common malignancy of the urological system that still lacks effective treatment. It is frequently characterised by dysregulation of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) signalling. FGFR inhibitors have been proven as a promising treatment for BC in clinical settings. Besides the FGFR signalling, the therapeutic effects of FGFR inhibitors are often limited owing to various mechanisms, such as the activation of the Akt signalling pathway. Therefore, this study aimed to examine the synergistic effects of ipatasertib, a FGFR inhibitor, and erdafitinib, an Akt inhibitor, in BC cells. Ipatasertib and erdafitinib co-treatment synergistically inhibited cell proliferation and induced BC cell death. Mechanically, ipatasertib and erdafitinib induced the activation of Bax, an essential protein for cell death. Moreover, erdafitinib, which inhibited the Akt signalling pathway, is responsible for Bim upregulation, a condition critical to achieving the synergistic effects. Therefore, our data suggest that ipatasertib and erdafitinib co-treatment is a promising strategy for BC.

Targeting the FGFR Pathway in Urothelial Carcinoma: the Future Is Now.

OPINION STATEMENT: As we come to better understand cancer genomics, we are increasingly shifting towards precision medicine. FGFR has been elucidated as one of the oncogenic driver pathways in urothelial carcinoma, leading to exciting targeted drug development. Although many agents are being investigated, erdafitinib is the only FGFR inhibitor currently approved by the FDA for treating platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma harboring susceptible FGFR2/3 alterations, with seemingly higher response rates than second-line chemotherapy or immunotherapy. In this review, we summarize the clinical data supporting FGFR inhibition, ways to optimize its use in routine clinical practice including FGFR testing, dosing, and toxicity management. We also highlight ongoing efforts evaluating combination strategies and testing in earlier treatment settings to further expand this targeted therapeutic approach in urothelial carcinoma.

Erdafitinib Inhibits Tumorigenesis of Human Lung Adenocarcinoma A549 by Inducing S-Phase Cell-Cycle Arrest as a CDK2 Inhibitor.

Lung adenocarcinoma (LADC) is the most prevalent lung cancer sub-type, and targeted therapy developed in recent years has made progress in its treatment. Erdafitinib, a potent and selective pan-FGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been confirmed to be effective for the treatment of LADC; however, the molecular mechanism responsible for this effect is unclear. The in vitro study showed that erdafitinib exhibited an outstanding anti-cancer activity in human LADC cell line A549 by inducing S-phase cell-cycle arrest and cell apoptosis. The mechanistic study based on the transcriptomic data revealed that erdafitinib exerted its anti-cancer effect by affecting the cell cycle-related pathway, and CDK2 was the regulatory target of this drug. In addition, CDK2 overexpression significantly attenuated the anti-cancer effect of erdafitinib by affecting the transcriptional activity and expression of E2F1, as well as the expression of CDK1. The in vivo study showed that erdafitinib presented an obvious anti-cancer effect in the A549 xenograft mice model, which was accompanied by the reduced expression of CDK2. Thus, this study demonstrates the anti-cancer effect of erdafitinib against LADC for the first time based on in vitro and in vivo models, whose activity is achieved by targeting CDK2 and regulating downstream E2F1-CDK1 signaling. This study may be helpful for expanding the clinical application of erdafitinib in treating LADC.

Metabolism and disposition in rats, dogs, and humans of erdafitinib, an orally administered potent pan-fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

This article describes in vivo biotransformation and disposition of erdafitinib following single oral dose of 3H-erdafitinib and 14C-erdafitinib to intact and bile duct-cannulated (BC) rats (4 mg/kg), 3H-erdafitinib to intact dogs (0.25 mg/kg), and 14C-erdafitinib to humans (12 mg; NCT02692677). Peak plasma concentrations of total radioactivity were achieved rapidly (Tmax: animals, 1 h; humans, 2-3 h). Recovery of drug-derived radioactivity was significantly slower in humans (87%, 384 h) versus animals (rats: 91-98%, 48 h; dogs: 81%, 72 h). Faeces was the primary route of elimination in intact rats (95%), dogs (76%), and humans (69%); and bile in BC rats (48%). Renal elimination of radioactivity was relatively low in animals (2-12%) versus humans (19%). Unchanged erdafitinib was major component in human excreta (faeces, 17%; urine, 11%) relative to animals. M6 (O-desmethyl) was the major faecal metabolite in humans (24%) and rats (intact, 46%; BC, 11%), and M2 (O-glucuronide of M6) was the prevalent biliary metabolite in rats (14%). In dogs, besides M6, majority of radioactive dose in faeces was composed of multiple minor metabolites. In humans, unchanged erdafitinib was the major circulating entity. O-demethylation of erdafitinib was the major metabolic pathway in humans and animals.

Fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) inhibitors: A review of a novel therapeutic class.

Comprehensive genomic profiling has an emerging role in cancer therapeutics. As treatment options remain needed for advanced cancers, patients are relying increasingly more on tumor genomic alterations as possible targets for cancer treatment. Frequent tumor fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) alterations are seen in many cancers, and include genetic amplifications, mutations, rearrangements and fusions. FGFR inhibitors target these receptor alterations and show promise as a drug class. Currently 2 medications are currently FDA approved: erdafitinib and pemigatinib. Through the FDA accelerated approval process, erdafitinib is indicated to treat metastatic urothelial carcinoma with FGFR2 and FGFR3 alterations, whereas pemigatinib is indicated to treat unresectable cholangiocarcinoma with FGFR2 alterations. Despite growing knowledge about such advanced cancers, treatment is usually palliative. With multiple FGFR inhibitors in the pipeline, further FDA approvals are possible, and it is likely their role in therapy will extend to other cancer types. This review outlines erdafitinib, pemigatinib, their role in cancer, as well as outlining the possible future use of other FGFR inhibitors in urothelial carcinoma, cholangiocarcinoma, and other malignancies.

Fibroblast Growth Factor Receptor (FGFR) Inhibitors in Urothelial Cancer.

Dysregulated fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) signaling is associated with several cancers, including urothelial carcinoma. Preclinical studies with FGFR inhibitors have shown significant antitumor activity, which has led to clinical evaluation of multiple FGFR inhibitors. Recently, erdafitinib was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for advanced urothelial carcinoma with FGFR gene alterations as the first molecularly targeted therapy. Additional ongoing clinical trials with other types of FGFR inhibitors have shown encouraging results. This review summarizes the oncogenic signaling of FGFR alterations, completed and ongoing clinical trials of FGFR inhibitors, and resistance patterns. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Dysregulated fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) signaling is associated with several cancers, including urothelial carcinoma. Preclinical studies with FGFR inhibitors have shown significant antitumor activity, which has led to clinical evaluation of multiple FGFR inhibitors. Most recently, erdafitinib was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for advanced urothelial carcinoma with FGFR gene alterations as the first molecularly targeted therapy. Additional ongoing clinical trials with other types of FGFR inhibitors have shown encouraging results. This review summarizes the oncogenic signaling of FGFR alterations, completed and ongoing clinical trials of FGFR inhibitors, and resistance patterns.

Properties of FDA-approved small molecule protein kinase inhibitors: A 2020 update.

Because genetic alterations including mutations, overexpression, translocations, and dysregulation of protein kinases are involved in the pathogenesis of many illnesses, this enzyme family is currently the subject of many drug discovery programs in the pharmaceutical industry. The US FDA approved four small molecule protein kinase antagonists in 2019; these include entrectinib, erdafitinib, pexidartinib, and fedratinib. Entrectinib binds to TRKA/B/C and ROS1 and is prescribed for the treatment of solid tumors with NTRK fusion proteins and for ROS1-postive non-small cell lung cancers. Erdafitinib inhibits fibroblast growth factor receptors 1-4 and is used in the treatment of urothelial bladder cancers. Pexidartinib is a CSF1R antagonist that is prescribed for the treatment of tenosynovial giant cell tumors. Fedratinib blocks JAK2 and is used in the treatment of myelofibrosis. Overall, the US FDA has approved 52 small molecule protein kinase inhibitors, nearly all of which are orally effective with the exceptions of temsirolimus (which is given intravenously) and netarsudil (an eye drop). Of the 52 approved drugs, eleven inhibit protein-serine/threonine protein kinases, two are directed against dual specificity protein kinases, eleven target non-receptor protein-tyrosine kinases, and 28 block receptor protein-tyrosine kinases. The data indicate that 46 of these drugs are used in the treatment of neoplastic diseases (eight against non-solid tumors such as leukemias and 41 against solid tumors including breast and lung cancers; some drugs are used against both tumor types). Eight drugs are employed in the treatment of non-malignancies: fedratinib, myelofibrosis; ruxolitinib, myelofibrosis and polycythemia vera; fostamatinib, chronic immune thrombocytopenia; baricitinib, rheumatoid arthritis; sirolimus, renal graft vs. host disease; nintedanib, idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis; netarsudil, glaucoma; and tofacitinib, rheumatoid arthritis, Crohn disease, and ulcerative colitis. Moreover, sirolimus and ibrutinib are used for the treatment of both neoplastic and non-neoplastic diseases. Entrectinib and larotrectinib are tissue-agnostic anti-cancer small molecule protein kinase inhibitors. These drugs are prescribed for the treatment of any solid cancer harboring NTRK1/2/3 fusion proteins regardless of the organ, tissue, anatomical location, or histology type. Of the 52 approved drugs, seventeen are used in the treatment of more than one disease. Imatinib, for example, is approved for the treatment of eight disparate disorders. The most common drug targets of the approved pharmaceuticals include BCR-Abl, B-Raf, vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR), epidermal growth factor receptors (EGFR), and ALK. Most of the approved small molecule protein kinase antagonists (49) bind to the protein kinase domain and six of them bind covalently. In contrast, everolimus, temsirolimus, and sirolimus are larger molecules (MW ≈ 1000) that bind to FK506 binding protein-12 (FKBP-12) to generate a complex that inhibits the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) protein kinase complex. This review presents the physicochemical properties of all of the FDA-approved small molecule protein kinase inhibitors. Twenty-two of the 52 drugs have molecular weights greater than 500, exceeding a Lipinski rule of five criterion. Excluding the macrolides (everolimus, sirolimus, temsirolimus), the average molecular weight of the approved drugs is 480 with a range of 306 (ruxolitinib) to 615 (trametinib). More than half of the antagonists (29) have lipophilic efficiency values of less than five while the recommended optima range from 5 to 10. One of the troublesome problems with both targeted and cytotoxic drugs in the treatment of malignant diseases is the near universal development of resistance to every therapeutic modality.

The role of fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) protein-tyrosine kinase inhibitors in the treatment of cancers including those of the urinary bladder.

The human fibroblast growth factor family consists of 22 factors and five transmembrane receptors. Of the 22 factors, eighteen are secreted while four of them function exclusively within the cell. Four of the fibroblast growth factor receptors (FGFRs) possess intracellular protein-tyrosine kinase activity while the fifth (FGFRL1) has a short 105-residue intracellular non-enzymatic component. The FGFR protein kinase domain consists of a bi-lobed structure that is similar to that of all other protein kinases. FGFR gene alterations occur in a wide variety of cancers including those of the urinary bladder, breast, ovary, prostate, endometrium, lung, and stomach. The majority (66 %) of FGFR gene alterations involve gene amplifications, followed by mutations (26 %), and rearrangements that produce fusion proteins (8 %). Erdafitinib was the first orally effective FGFR antagonist approved by the FDA (2019) for the treatment of advanced cancer, that of the urinary bladder. FGF23 suppresses phosphate reabsorption in the proximal tubules of the kidney; FGF23 blockade allows phosphate reabsorption to occur and leads to elevated serum phosphate levels. Erdafitinib and several other, but not all, FGFR antagonists produce hyperphosphatemia. Erdafitinib binds to an inactive DGF-Din conformation of FGFR1 and is classified as a type I½ inhibitor. Similarly, dovitinib, AZD4547, CH5183284, infigratinib, lenvatinib, LY2874455, and lucitanib are type I½ inhibitors. The inactive conformations contain an autoinhibitory brake that is made up of three main residues: an asparagine (N) within the αC-ß4 back loop, a glutamate (E) corresponding to the second hinge residue, and a lysine (K) in the ß8-strand (the NEK triad). PDGFRα/ß, Kit, CSF1R, VEGFR1/2/3, Flt3, Tek, and Tie protein kinases are also regulated by a similar autoinhibitory brake mechanism. Ponatinib binds to FGFR4 in a DFG-Dout conformation and is classified as a type II inhibitor. Futibatinib, roblitinib, H3B-6527, fisogatinib, and PRN1371 bind covalently to their FGFR target and are classified as type VI inhibitors. Nintedanib, pazopanib, pemigatinib, rogaratinib, fisogatinib, and PRN1371 are FGFR inhibitors lacking drug-enzyme crystal structures. All of the aforementioned FGFR antagonists are orally effective. The development of FGFR inhibitors has lagged behind those of other receptor protein-tyrosine kinases. However, the FDA approval of erdafitinib for the treatment of urinary bladder cancers may stimulate additional work targeting the many other FGFR-driven neoplasms.

Targeted Molecular Therapeutics for Bladder Cancer-A New Option beyond the Mixed Fortunes of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors?

The fact that there are now five immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) monoclonal antibodies approved since 2016 that target programmed cell death protein 1 or programmed death ligand-1 for the treatment of metastatic and refractory bladder cancer is an outstanding achievement. Although patients can display pronounced responses that extend survival when treated with ICIs, the main benefit of these drugs compared to traditional chemotherapy is that they are better tolerated and result in reduced adverse events (AEs). Unfortunately, response rates to ICI treatment are relatively low and, these drugs are expensive and have a high economic burden. As a result, their clinical efficacy/cost-value relationship is debated. Long sought after targeted molecular therapeutics have now emerged and are boasting impressive response rates in heavily pre-treated, including ICI treated, patients with metastatic bladder cancer. The antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) enfortumab vedotin (EV) and sacituzumab govitecan (SG) have demonstrated the ability to provide objective response rates (ORRs) of 44% and 31% in patients with bladder tumor cells that express Nectin-4 and Trop-2, respectively. As a result, EV was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for the treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic bladder cancer who have previously received ICI and platinum-containing chemotherapy. SG has been granted fast track designation. The small molecule Erdafitinib was recently approved for the treatment of patients with advanced or metastatic bladder cancer with genetic alterations in fibroblast growth factor receptors that have previously been treated with a platinum-containing chemotherapy. Erdafitinib achieved an ORR of 40% in patients including a proportion who had previously received ICI therapy. In addition, these targeted drugs are sufficiently tolerated or AEs can be appropriately managed. Hence, the early performance in clinical effectiveness of these targeted drugs are substantially increased relative to ICIs. In this article, the most up to date follow-ups on treatment efficacy and AEs of the ICIs and targeted therapeutics are described. In addition, drug price and cost-effectiveness are described. For best overall value taking into account clinical effectiveness, price and cost-effectiveness, results favor avelumab and atezolizumab for ICIs. Although therapeutically promising, it is too early to determine if the described targeted therapeutics provide the best overall value as cost-effectiveness analyses have yet to be performed and long-term follow-ups are needed. Nonetheless, with the arrival of targeted molecular therapeutics and their increased effectiveness relative to ICIs, creates a potential novel paradigm based on 'targeting' for affecting clinical practice for metastatic bladder cancer treatment.