Weekly Topotecan for Recurrent Ovarian, Fallopian Tube and Primary Peritoneal Carcinoma: Tolerability and Efficacy Study—The Israeli Experience

Pharmacology of ME-344, a novel cytotoxic isoflavone

Isoflavones isolated from members of the Fabaceae (primarily Leguminosae) family have been characterized for their phytoestrogenic properties, but certain derivatives have also shown potential as possible cancer therapeutic agents. ME-344, related to phenoxodiol (Fig. 1), is a second generation isoflavone with a recent history of both preclinical and early clinical testing. The drug has unusual cytotoxicity profiles, where cancer cell lines can be categorized as either intrinsically sensitive or resistant to the drug. Evolving studies show that the cytotoxic properties of the drug are enacted through targeting mitochondrial bioenergetics. While the drug has undergone early Phase I/II trials in solid tumors with confined dose limiting effects and some evidence of disease response, there is a continuing need to define specific cellular targets that determine sensitivity, with the long-term goal of applying such information to individualized therapy. This review article details some of the existing and ongoing studies that are assisting in the continued drug development processes that may lead to new drug application (NDA) status.

Phase Ib study of the mitochondrial inhibitor ME-344 plus topotecan in patients with previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic small cell lung, ovarian and cervical cancers

Background This multicenter, open-label, phase Ib study was designed to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics and preliminary efficacy of ME-344, a mitochondrial inhibitor, administered in combination with the topoisomerase I inhibitor, topotecan, in patients with previously treated, locally advanced or metastatic small cell lung (SCLC), ovarian and cervical cancers. Patients and methods In Part 1, patients received ME-344 10 mg/kg intravenously weekly on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 in combination with topotecan 4 mg/m² on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28 day cycle. Cycles were repeated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Patients were evaluated for dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in cycle 1 and ME-344 pharmacokinetic samples were obtained. In Part 2, patients with locally advanced or metastatic SCLC and ovarian cancer were enrolled in expansion cohorts treated at the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) determined in Part 1. Results Fourteen patients were enrolled in Part 1 and no DLTs were observed. The RP2D of ME-344 in combination with topotecan was established as 10 mg/kg. In Part 2, 32 patients were enrolled. The most common treatment-emergent all-grade and grade 3/4 toxicities included fatigue (65.2%, 6.5%), neutropenia (56.5%, 43.5%) and thrombocytopenia (50%, 23.9%). One patient with recurrent ovarian cancer experienced a partial response by RECIST 1.1 and 21 patients achieved stable disease as best response. Conclusions The combination of ME-344 10 mg/kg weekly and topotecan 4 mg/m² was tolerable, however, the degree of anti-cancer activity does not support further investigation of the combination in unselected patients with SCLC, ovarian and cervical cancers.

Examination of the Fractalkine and Fractalkine Receptor Expression in Fallopian Adenocarcinoma Reveals Differences When Compared to Ovarian Carcinoma

Fallopian adenocarcinoma is a rare malignancy arising in the epithelium of the fallopian tube. Fallopian tube epithelium has been proposed as a tissue origin for high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma, the deadliest gynecologic malignancy. Given the commonalities in dissemination and treatment of these malignancies, we contemplated the possibility of similar patterns of gene expression underlying their progression. To reveal potential similarities or differences in the gene expression of fallopian adenocarcinoma and high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma, we tested expression of the fractalkine receptor (CX₃CR1) and its ligand, fractalkine (CX₃CL1), in the specimens of normal and pathologic fallopian tube using immunohistochemistry. Our data show that CX₃CR1 is expressed in the normal, cancer adjacent normal, inflammatory, and malignant fallopian epithelium. CX₃CL1 was expressed only by the normal and cancer adjacent normal fallopian tube epithelium; its expression was largely lost in the inflammatory and malignant fallopian epithelium. In opposite, both CX₃CR1 and CX₃CL1 are expressed in high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma. These findings are consistent with an idea that fallopian adenocarcinoma and high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma, although currently thought to arise from the same organ, may not share similar molecular characteristics.

Topotecan for ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapeutic agents such as topotecan can be used to treat ovarian cancer. The effects of using topotecan as a therapeutic agent have not been previously been systematically reviewed.

OBJECTIVES

To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of topotecan for the treatment of ovarian cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), (Issue 4, 2006); Cochrane Gynaecological Cancer Review Group (CGCRG) Specialised Register (Cochrane Library Issue 4, 2006); MEDLINE (January 1990 to 27 July 2006); EMBASE (January 1990 to 27 July 2006); The European Organization for the Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) database (to 1 August 2006); CBM (Chinese Biomedical Database) (January 1990 to 27 July 2006).

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which randomized patients with ovarian cancer to single or combined use of topotecan versus interventions without topotecan, or different remedies of topotecan.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted and analysed data.

MAIN RESULTS

Six studies including 1323 participants were eligible for this review (Gordon 2004a; Gore 2001a; Gore 2002; Hoskins 1998; Huinink 2004; Placido 2004) All studies, as reported, were identified as being of poor methodological quality. Topotecan had comparable effectiveness to prolong progression-free survival (PFS) compared with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD), (16.1 weeks versus 17.0 weeks; p = 0.095). Overall survival (OS) time was similar in participants using PLD compared with topotecan (56.7 weeks versus 60 weeks; p = 0.341). Topotecan was more hematologically toxic compared with paclitaxel or PLD, relative risks (RRs) of hematological events: ranged from 1.03 to 14.46 and 1.73 to 27.12 respectively. A 21-day cycle of topotecan was more toxic than a 42-day cycle (RRs of hematological and non-hematological events ranged from 1.03 to 8). Intravenous and oral topotecan had comparable toxicity. Topotecan delayed progression more effectively compared with paclitaxel (23.1 weeks versus 14 weeks, p = 0.0021). Participants were more likely to respond to topotecan on a 21-day cycle as opposed to a 42-day cycle (RR 7.23, 95% CI 0.94 to 55.36). Small tumor diameter, sensitivity to platinum-based chemotherapy was associated with better prognosis. Small sample size, methodological flaws and poor reporting of the included trials made measurement bias of the trials difficult to assess.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Topotecan appears to have a similar level of effectiveness as paclitaxel and PLD, though with different patterns of side effects. Larger, well-designed RCTs are required in order to define an optimal regime.