A phase I and pharmacologic study of weekly gemcitabine in combination with infusional 5-fluorodeoxyuridine and oral calcium leucovorin

Chemistry of Fluorinated Pyrimidines in the Era of Personalized Medicine

We review developments in fluorine chemistry contributing to the more precise use of fluorinated pyrimidines (FPs) to treat cancer. 5-Fluorouracil (5-FU) is the most widely used FP and is used to treat > 2 million cancer patients each year. We review methods for 5-FU synthesis, including the incorporation of radioactive and stable isotopes to study 5-FU metabolism and biodistribution. We also review methods for preparing RNA and DNA substituted with FPs for biophysical and mechanistic studies. New insights into how FPs perturb nucleic acid structure and dynamics has resulted from both computational and experimental studies, and we summarize recent results. Beyond the well-established role for inhibiting thymidylate synthase (TS) by the 5-FU metabolite 5-fluoro-2′-deoxyuridine-5′-O-monophosphate (FdUMP), recent studies have implicated new roles for RNA modifying enzymes that are inhibited by 5-FU substitution including tRNA methyltransferase 2 homolog A (TRMT2A) and pseudouridylate synthase in 5-FU cytotoxicity. Furthermore, enzymes not previously implicated in FP activity, including DNA topoisomerase 1 (Top1), were established as mediating FP anti-tumor activity. We review recent literature summarizing the mechanisms by which 5-FU inhibits RNA- and DNA-modifying enzymes and describe the use of polymeric FPs that may enable the more precise use of FPs for cancer treatment in the era of personalized medicine.

Phase I/II Trial of Neoadjuvant Oregovomab-based Chemoimmunotherapy Followed by Stereotactic Body Radiotherapy and Nelfinavir For Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma

OBJECTIVE

Cancer antigen (CA)-125 influences progression, metastasis, and outcomes in pancreatic cancer. This phase I/II trial (NCT01959672) evaluated the safety, efficacy, and immunologic correlates of chemoimmunotherapy (CIT) with oregovomab (anti-CA-125), followed by stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) with the radiosensitizer nelfinavir.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Following imaging, pathologic confirmation, and staging laparoscopy, subjects received three 3-week cycles of CIT (gemcitabine/leucovorin/fluorouracil/oregovomab). Thereafter, nelfinavir was delivered (1250 mg bid) for 5 weeks, with SBRT (40 Gy/5 fractions) occurring during the third week of nelfinavir. Following another cycle of CIT, pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed if resectable. Three more cycles of CIT were then delivered (total 7 cycles). In subjects with high (≥10 U/mL) CA-125, oregovomab (2 mg) was administered for 7 total doses (3 pre-SBRT, 1 between SBRT and resection, and 3 postoperatively). The enzyme-linked immunospot assay evaluated the development of CA-125-specific CD8 T-lymphocytes.

RESULTS

The trial was prematurely closed because gemcitabine/leucovorin/fluorouracil was replaced by FOLFIRINOX and gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel as the standard of care. Median follow-up was 13 months. Of 11 enrolled patients, 10 had high CA-125; 1 patient suffered an unexpected cardiac-related death, so 9 subjects received oregovomab. Ten received SBRT and 4 underwent resection. Overall, 6/11 patients experienced any grade ≥3 event. The median survival and time to progression were 13 and 8.6 months, respectively. Five patients had samples available for immunospot testing, of whom 2 (40%) developed CA-125-specific CD8 T-lymphocytes.

CONCLUSION

A combined pancreatic cancer multimodality approach using CIT and radiosensitized radiotherapy is feasible and safe; delivery of immunotherapy can lead to T-cell immunity. Re-evaluation with modern systemic paradigms is recommended.

Phase I trial of concurrent stereotactic body radiotherapy and nelfinavir for locally advanced borderline or unresectable pancreatic adenocarcinoma

INTRODUCTION

The HIV protease inhibitor nelfinavir (NFV) displays notable radiosensitizing effects. There have been no studies evaluating combined stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT) and NFV for borderline/unresectable pancreatic cancer. The primary objective of this phase I trial (NCT01068327) was to determine the maximum tolerated SBRT/NFV dose, and secondarily evaluate outcomes.

METHODS

Following initial imaging, pathologic confirmation, and staging laparoscopy, subjects initially received three 3-week cycles of gemcitabine/leucovorin/fluorouracil; patients without radiologic progression received 5-fraction SBRT/NFV. Dose escalation was as follows: (1) 25 Gy/625 mg BID ×3wks; (2) 25 Gy/1250 mg BID ×3wks; (3) 30 Gy/1250 mg BID ×3wks; (4) 35 Gy/1250 mg BID ×3wks; (5) 35 Gy/1250 mg BID ×5wks; and (6) 40 Gy/1250 mg BID ×5wks. Pancreaticoduodenectomy was performed thereafter if resectable; if not, gemcitabine/leucovorin/fluorouracil was administered.

RESULTS

Forty-six patients enrolled (10/2008-5/2013); 39 received protocol-directed therapy. Sixteen (41%) experienced any grade ≥2 event during and 1 month after SBRT. Four grade 3 and both grade 4 events occurred in a single patient at the initial dose level. 40 Gy/1250 mg BID ×5wks was the maximum tolerated dose. Five patients had late gastrointestinal bleeding (n = 2 superior mesenteric artery pseudo-aneurysm, n = 1 disease progression, n = 1 lower GI tract, n = 1 unknown location). The median overall survival was 14.4 months. Six (15%) patients recurred locally; median local failure-free survival was not reached. The median distant failure-free survival was 11 months, and median all failure-free survival was 10 months.

CONCLUSIONS

Concurrent SBRT (40 Gy)/NFV (1250 mg BID) for locally advanced pancreatic cancer is feasible and safe, although careful attention to treatment planning parameters is recommended to reduce the incidence of late gastrointestinal bleeding.

Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of imatinib mesylate (Gleevec) and gemcitabine in patients with refractory solid tumors

PURPOSE

Preclinical data shows improvements in response for the combination of imatinib mesylate (IM, Gleevec) and gemcitabine (GEM) therapy compared with GEM alone. Our goals were to determine the maximum tolerated dose of GEM and IM in combination, the pharmacokinetics of GEM in the absence and in the presence of IM, and IM pharmacokinetics in this combination.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with refractory malignancy, intact intestinal absorption, measurable/evaluable disease, adequate organ function, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS 0-2, and signed informed consent were eligible. Initially, treatment consisted of 600 mg/m2 of GEM (10 mg/m2/min) on days 1, 8, and 15, and 300 mg of IM daily every 28 days. Due to excessive toxicity, the schedule was altered to IM on days 1 to 5 and 8 to 12, and GEM on days 3 and 10 every 21 days. Two final cohorts received IM on days 1 to 5, 8 to 12, and 15 to 19.

RESULTS

Fifty-four patients were treated. IM and GEM given daily at 500 to 600 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 produced frequent dose-limiting toxicities. With the modified scheduling, GEM given at 1,500 mg/m2/150 min was deliverable, along with 400 mg of IM, without dose-limiting toxicities. Three partial (laryngeal, renal, and mesothelioma) and two minor (renal and pancreatic) responses were noted at GEM doses of 450 to 1,500 mg/m2. Stable disease >24 weeks was seen in 17 patients. CA19-9 in 7 of 10 patients with pancreatic cancer was reduced by approximately 90%. IM did not significantly alter GEM pharmacokinetics.

CONCLUSION

The addition of intermittently dosed IM to GEM at low to full dose was associated with broad antitumor activity and little increase in toxicity.