Phase ii comparator study of oral versus intravenous topotecan in patients with chemosensitive small-cell lung cancer

Topotecan in a Real-World Small-Cell Lung Cancer Cohort: Prognostic Biomarkers Improve Selection of Patients for Second-Line Treatment

BACKGROUND

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a highly aggressive tumor, and overall survival (OS) remains poor despite intensive efforts to develop new treatment strategies. In second line, topotecan is the only approved drug, with a median OS of 5.9 months. However, real-world SCLC patients are often in worse condition and harbor more comorbidities than study populations. Therefore, the real-world performance of topotecan may differ from that seen in studies. Here, we analyzed outcomes of SCLC patients receiving topotecan and identified predictive and prognostic markers.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We retrospectively analyzed 44 consecutive SCLC patients receiving topotecan between 2015 and 2022. We analyzed baseline characteristics (age, ECOG-PS, topotecan cycles, and dosage) and pre-treatment blood values (LDH, CRP, sodium) as well as prognostic scores (neutrophil/lymphocyte ratio (NLR), thrombocyte/lymphocyte ratio (TLR), Glasgow Prognostic Score, prognostic nutritional score, systemic inflammation index (SII), and the prognostic index) extracted from electronic patients' charts to identify predictive and prognostic markers.

RESULTS

In our cohort, mPFS and mOS were only 1.9 and 5.6 months, respectively. Gender, ECOG-PS, active brain metastases, NLR, GPS, PNI, and SII significantly influenced PFS and OS in univariate analysis. ECOG-PS (p > 0.001), active brain metastases (p = 0.001), and SII (p = 0.008) were significant independent prognostic variables in a multivariate COX regression model. Selecting patients by these three markers achieved an mPFS of 5.7 months and thus increased the mPFS three-fold. Patients not meeting all criteria had an mPFS of 1.8 months (p = 0.006). Patients identified by prognostic markers had an mOS of 9.1 months (p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

The efficacy of topotecan in SCLC real-world patients is poor, indicating that many patients were treated without any benefit. Easy-to-obtain markers can predict response and treatment efficacy and should therefore be validated in larger cohorts to identify patients who are more likely to benefit from topotecan.

The Evolving Scenario of ES-SCLC Management: From Biology to New Cancer Therapeutics

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive neuroendocrine carcinoma accounting for 15% of lung cancers with dismal survival outcomes. Minimal changes in therapy and prognosis have occurred in SCLC for the past four decades. Recent progress in the treatment of extensive-stage disease (ES-SCLC) has been marked by incorporating immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) into platinum-based chemotherapy, leading to modest improvements. Moreover, few second-line-and-beyond treatment options are currently available. The main limitation for the molecular study of SCLC has been the scarcity of samples, because only very early diseases are treated with surgery and biopsies are not performed when the disease progresses. Despite all these difficulties, in recent years we have come to understand that SCLC is not a homogeneous disease. At the molecular level, in addition to the universal loss of retinoblastoma (RB) and TP53 genes, a recent large molecular study has identified other mutations that could serve as targets for therapy development or patient selection. In recent years, there has also been the identification of new genetic subtypes which have shown us how intertumor heterogeneity exists. Moreover, SCLC can also develop intratumoral heterogeneity linked mainly to the concept of cellular plasticity, mostly due to the development of resistance to therapies. The aim of this review is to quickly present the current standard of care of ES-SCLC, to focus on the molecular landscapes and subtypes of SCLC, subsequently present the most promising therapeutic strategies under investigation, and finally recap the future directions of ongoing clinical trials for this aggressive disease which still remains a challenge.

Reconsidering the Cutoff Value for Sensitive and Refractory Relapses in Extensive-Stage SCLC in the Era of Immunotherapy

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, relapsed SCLC has been classified as "sensitive" or "refractory" on the basis of cutoff values (60 or 90 d) for the duration between the last chemotherapy and disease progression. Nevertheless, these cutoff values are not derived from rigorous analytical methods, and their applicability to contemporary treatments remains uncertain.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective multicenter study on patients with extensive-stage SCLC who underwent second-line therapy after platinum-doublet chemotherapy with or without immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) resistance before (pre-ICI cohort) and after (post-ICI cohort) approval of combination immunotherapy. We selected the optimal platinum-free interval cutoff value with the lowest two-sided p value in the multivariable Cox regression model for second-line overall survival. The internal validity of the chosen cutoff value was assessed using twofold cross-validation.

RESULTS

There were 235 and 98 patients in the pre-ICI and post-ICI cohorts, respectively. In the pre-ICI cohort, the optimal cutoff was 59 days (p = 0.0001); the hazard ratio calculated using twofold cross-validation was 1.31 (95% confidence interval: 0.95-1.82]). In the post-ICI cohort, although the 60- and 90-day cutoff values could predict prognosis (60 d; p = 0.002, 90 d; p = 0.005), the optimal cutoff value was 75 days (p = 0.0002), which resulted in a median second-line overall survival of 15.9 and 5.0 months for patients with sensitive and refractory relapse, respectively (hazard ratio = 2.77, 95% confidence interval: 1.56-4.93).

CONCLUSIONS

We clarified the previously ambiguous cutoff values for classifying relapsed SCLC and revealed that the 75-day cutoff most accurately predicts subsequent prognosis than the traditional cutoffs in the post-ICI era.

Lurbinectedin in patients with small cell lung cancer with chemotherapy-free interval ≥30 days and without central nervous metastases

OBJECTIVES

This report focuses on lurbinectedin activity and safety in a subgroup of small cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients from a Basket phase 2 study (Trigo et al. Lancet Oncology 2020;21:645-654) with chemotherapy-free interval (CTFI) ≥ 30 days. This pre-planned analysis was requested for obtaining regulatory approval of lurbinectedin in Switzerland.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients with extensive-stage SCLC, no central nervous system (CNS) metastases, and disease progression after platinum-containing therapy were included. Topotecan data from a contemporary, randomized, controlled phase 3 study (ATLANTIS) were used as indirect external control in a matched patient population (n = 98 patients).

RESULTS

Lurbinectedin showed a statistically significant higher overall response rate (ORR) by investigator assessment (IA) compared to topotecan subgroup (41.0 % vs. 25.5 %; p = 0.0382); higher ORR by Independent Review Committee (IRC) (33.7 % vs. 25.5 %); longer median duration of response (IA: 5.3 vs. 3.9 months; IRC: 5.1 vs. 4.3 months), and longer median overall survival (10.2 vs. 7.6 months). Grade ≥ 3 hematological abnormalities were remarkably lower with lurbinectedin: anemia 12.0 % vs. 54.1 %; leukopenia 30.1 % vs. 68.4 %; neutropenia 47.0 % vs. 75.5 %, and thrombocytopenia 6.0 % vs. 52.0 %. Febrile neutropenia was observed at a higher incidence with topotecan (6.1 % vs. 2.4 % with lurbinectedin) despite that the use of growth-colony stimulating factors was mandatory with topotecan.

CONCLUSION

With the limitations of an indirect comparison, however using recent and comparable SCLC datasets, this post hoc analysis shows that SCLC patients with CTFI ≥ 30 days and no CNS metastases have a positive benefit/risk ratio with lurbinectedin, superior to that observed with topotecan.

[Prevention, Diagnosis, Therapy, and Follow-up of Lung Cancer - Interdisciplinary Guideline of the German Respiratory Society and the German Cancer Society - Abridged Version]

The current S3 Lung Cancer Guidelines are edited with fundamental changes to the previous edition based on the dynamic influx of information to this field:The recommendations include de novo a mandatory case presentation for all patients with lung cancer in a multidisciplinary tumor board before initiation of treatment, furthermore CT-Screening for asymptomatic patients at risk (after federal approval), recommendations for incidental lung nodule management , molecular testing of all NSCLC independent of subtypes, EGFR-mutations in resectable early stage lung cancer in relapsed or recurrent disease, adjuvant TKI-therapy in the presence of common EGFR-mutations, adjuvant consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibitors in resected lung cancer with PD-L1 ≥ 50%, obligatory evaluation of PD-L1-status, consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibition after radiochemotherapy in patients with PD-L1-pos. tumor, adjuvant consolidation treatment with checkpoint inhibition in patients withPD-L1 ≥ 50% stage IIIA and treatment options in PD-L1 ≥ 50% tumors independent of PD-L1status and targeted therapy and treatment option immune chemotherapy in first line SCLC patients.Based on the current dynamic status of information in this field and the turnaround time required to implement new options, a transformation to a "living guideline" was proposed.

Indirect treatment comparison of lurbinectedin versus other second-line treatments for small-cell lung cancer

Aim: Compare lurbinectedin versus other second-line (2L) small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) treatments. Methods: An unanchored matching-adjusted indirect comparison connected the platinum-sensitive SCLC cohort of a single-arm lurbinectedin trial to a network of three randomized controlled trials (oral and intravenous [IV] topotecan, and platinum re-challenge) identified by systematic literature review. Network meta-analysis methods estimated relative treatment effects. Results: In platinum-sensitive patients, lurbinectedin demonstrated a survival benefit and favorable safety profile versus oral and IV topotecan and platinum re-challenge (overall survival, hazard ratio [HR]: 0.43; 95% credible interval [CrI]: 0.27, 0.67; HR: 0.43; 95% CrI: 0.26, 0.70; HR: 0.42; 95% CrI: 0.30, 0.58 respectively). Conclusion: Lurbinectedin showed a robust survival benefit and favorable safety versus other SCLC treatments in 2L platinum-sensitive SCLC.

Comparison of the second-line treatments for patients with small cell lung cancer sensitive to previous platinum-based chemotherapy: A systematic review and Bayesian network analysis

Objective

It remains unclear what the best second-line treatment is for patients with small-cell lung cancer sensitive to previous platinum-based chemotherapy.

Methods

We systematically screened randomized controlled trials from several online databases. The primary outcome was objective response rate (ORR), and the secondary outcomes were disease control rate (DCR), overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and hematological complications graded 3 to 5. The efficacy of included treatments was ranked by surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) value.

Results

We included eleven trials involving 1560 patients in quantitative analysis. Triple chemotherapy containing platinum (TP, combination of cisplatin, etoposide, and irinotecan) was associated with favorable ORR (intravenous topotecan vs TP; odds ratio: 0.13, 95% CI:0.03-0.63; SUCRA, 0.94) and PFS (vs intravenous topotecan; hazard ratio, 0.5; 95% CI: 0.25-0.99; SUCRA, 0.90). Belotecan ranked highest for OS (SUCRA, 0.90), while intravenous topotecan plus Ziv-aflibercept ranked highest for DCR (SUCRA, 0.75). TP was more likely to cause anemia and thrombocytopenia while intravenous topotecan plus Ziv-aflibercept resulted in most neutrocytopenia.

Conclusion

TP is the first recommendation for the second-line treatment of sensitive relapsed SCLC. TP achieved priority in ORR and PFS with the most frequent adverse effects in anemia and thrombocytopenia. For patients who cannot tolerate the hematological adverse effects of triple chemotherapy, amrubicin is an optional option. Amrubicin had relatively good ORR and PFS, accompanied by fewer hematological complications. The rechallenge of the platinum doublet is inferior to amrubicin in ORR, DCR, and PFS. Oral topotecan has a similar effect compared with IV topotecan, but oral topotecan was associated with slightly higher safety and less stress in nursing. Belotecan contributed to the best PFS with slightly better safety but was not ideal in other outcomes.

Systematic review registration

https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/, identifier CRD42022358256.

Integrated exposure-response analysis of efficacy and safety of lurbinectedin to support the dose regimen in small-cell lung cancer

Purpose

These exposure–response (E–R) analyses integrated lurbinectedin effects on key efficacy and safety variables in relapsed SCLC to determine the adequacy of the dose regimen of 3.2 mg/m² 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks (q3wk).

Methods

Logistic models and Cox regression analyses were applied to correlate lurbinectedin exposure metrics (AUC_tot and AUC_u) with efficacy and safety endpoints: objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS) in SCLC patients (n = 99) treated in study B-005 with 3.2 mg/m² q3wk, and incidence of grade 4 (G4) neutropenia and grade 3–4 (G ≥ 3) thrombocytopenia in a pool of cancer patients from single-agent phase I to III studies (n = 692) treated at a wide range of doses. A clinical utility index was used to assess the appropriateness of the selected dose.

Results

Effect of lurbinectedin AUC_u on ORR best fitted to a sigmoid-maximal response (E_max) logistic model, where E_max was dependent on chemotherapy-free interval (CTFI). Cox regression analysis with OS found relationships with both CTFI and AUC_u. An E_max logistic model for G4 neutropenia and a linear logistic model for G ≥ 3 thrombocytopenia, which retained platelets and albumin at baseline and body surface area, best fitted to AUC_tot and AUC_u. AUC_u between approximately 1000 and 1700 ng·h/L provided the best benefit/risk ratio, and the dose of 3.2 mg/m² provided median AUC_u of 1400 ng·h/L, thus maximizing the proportion of patients within that lurbinectedin target exposure range.

Conclusions

The relationships evidenced in this integrated E–R analysis support a favorable benefit-risk profile for lurbinectedin 3.2 mg/m² q3wk.

Trial registration

Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT02454972; registered May 27, 2015.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s00280-021-04366-3.

Advances in Treatment of Recurrent Small Cell Lung Cancer (SCLC): Insights for Optimizing Patient Outcomes from an Expert Roundtable Discussion

Second-line treatment options for patients with relapsed, extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) are limited, and even with currently available treatments, prognosis remains poor. Until recently, topotecan (a topoisomerase I inhibitor) was the only drug approved by the United States (US) Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the management of ES-SCLC following progression after first-line treatment with etoposide plus a platinum derivative (EP; carboplatin preferred). With the most recent approval of EP plus a programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor, there are now more therapeutic options for managing ES-SCLC. A number of novel agents have emerging data for activity in relapsed ES-SCLC, and single-agent lurbinectedin (an alkylating drug and selective inhibitor of oncogenic transcription and DNA repair machinery in tumor cells) has conditional FDA approval for use in this patient population. Trilaciclib, a short-acting cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK 4/6) inhibitor, has also been recently approved as a supportive intervention for use prior to an EP or a topotecan-containing regimen to diminish the incidence of chemotherapy-induced myelosuppression. The current review is based on a recent expert roundtable discussion and summarizes current therapeutic agents and emerging data on newer agents and biomarkers. It also provides evidence-based clinical considerations and a treatment decision tool for oncologists treating patients with relapsed ES-SCLC. This paper discusses the importance of various factors to consider when selecting a second-line treatment option, including prior first-line treatment, available second-line treatment options, tumor platinum sensitivity, and patient characteristics (such as performance status, comorbidities, and patient-expressed and perceived values).

Oral lipid nanomedicines: Current status and future perspectives in cancer treatment

Oral anticancer drugs have earned a seat at the table, as the need for homecare treatment in oncology has increased. Interest in this field is growing as a result of their proven efficacy, lower costs and positive patient uptake. However, the gastrointestinal barrier is still the main obstacle to surmount in chemotherapeutic oral delivery. Anticancer nanomedicines have been proposed to solve this quandary. Among these, lipid nanoparticles are described to be efficiently absorbed while protecting drugs from early degradation in hostile environments. Their intestinal lymphatic tropism or mucoadhesive/penetrative properties give them unique characteristics for oral administration. Considering that chronic cancer cases are increasing over time, it is important to be able to provide treatments with low toxicity and low prices. The challenges, opportunities and therapeutic perspectives of lipid nanoparticles in this area will be discussed in this review, taking into consideration the pre-clinical and clinical progress made in the last decade.

Efficacy and safety of lurbinectedin and doxorubicin in relapsed small cell lung cancer. Results from an expansion cohort of a phase I study

Background A phase I study found remarkable activity and manageable toxicity for doxorubicin (bolus) plus lurbinectedin (1-h intravenous [i.v.] infusion) on Day 1 every three weeks (q3wk) as second-line therapy in relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). An expansion cohort further evaluated this combination. Patients and methods Twenty-eight patients with relapsed SCLC after no more than one line of cytotoxic-containing chemotherapy were treated: 18 (64%) with sensitive disease (chemotherapy-free interval [CTFI] ≥90 days) and ten (36%) with resistant disease (CTFI <90 days; including six with refractory disease [CTFI ≤30 days]). Results Ten patients showed confirmed response (overall response rate [ORR] = 36%); median progression-free survival (PFS) = 3.3 months; median overall survival (OS) = 7.9 months. ORR was 50% in sensitive disease (median PFS = 5.7 months; median OS = 11.5 months) and 10% in resistant disease (median PFS = 1.3 months; median OS = 4.6 months). The main toxicity was transient and reversible myelosuppression. Treatment-related non-hematological events (fatigue, nausea, decreased appetite, vomiting, alopecia) were mostly mild or moderate. Conclusion Doxorubicin 40 mg/m² and lurbinectedin 2.0 mg/m² on Day 1 q3wk has shown noteworthy activity in relapsed SCLC and a manageable safety profile. The combination is being evaluated as second-line therapy for SCLC in an ongoing, randomized phase III trial. Clinical trial registration www.ClinicalTrials.gov code: NCT01970540. Date of registration: 22 October, 2013.

Phase 2 study of NAB-paclitaxel in SensiTivE and refractory relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC) (NABSTER TRIAL)

BACKGROUND

Despite sensitivity to first-line chemotherapy, most small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) patients relapse. In this setting, topotecan demonstrated modest activity with significant toxicity. Paclitaxel was also active. This study was designed to evaluate activity and safety of nab-paclitaxel in relapsed SCLC.

METHODS

In this multicentre prospective Phase 2 trial, patients with refractory or sensitive SCLC progressed to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy received nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/smq on days 1, 8, 15 every 4 weeks up to six cycles, progressive disease or intolerable toxicity. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective tumour response. Secondary endpoints were toxicity, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS).

RESULTS

Of the 68 patients treated, partial response was 8% in the refractory cohort and 14% in the sensitive cohort. Most common toxicities of any grade were fatigue (54%), anaemia (38%), neutropenia (29%), leukopenia (26%) and diarrhoea (21%). Median PFS was similar in both refractory (1.8 months) and sensitive cohorts (1.9 months), while median OS was longer in sensitive one (6.6 versus 3.6 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Although nab-paclitaxel has shown some modest anti-tumour activity in relapsed SCLC, associated with a favourable toxicity profile, the primary end-point of the study was not met.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trial registration number is ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03219762.

Oral Chemotherapy for Treatment of Lung Cancer

The global COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted healthcare delivery, particularly for patients with advanced lung cancer. While certain aspects of care can be safely omitted or delayed, systemic therapy plays an important role in survival and quality of life for patients with advanced lung cancer; limiting access to systemic therapy will compromise cancer-related outcomes. This can be at odds with strategies to mitigate risk of COVID-19 exposure, which include reducing hospital and clinic visits. One important strategy is implementation of oral cancer therapies. Many standard regimens require intravenous infusions but there are specific circumstances where an oral agent could be an acceptable alternative. Integrating oral therapeutics can permit patients to receive effective systemic treatment without the exposure risks associated with frequent infusions. Here, we review currently available oral cytotoxic agents with a potential role in the treatment of lung cancer.

Oral Delivery of Anticancer Agents Using Nanoparticulate Drug Delivery System

Background:

Conventionally, anti-cancer agents were administered through the intravenous route. The major drawbacks associated with the intravenous route of administration are: severe side effects, need of hospitalization, nursing care, and palliative treatment. In order to overcome the drawbacks associated with the intravenous route of administration, oral delivery of anti-cancer agents has gained tremendous interest among the scientific fraternity. Oral delivery of anti-cancer agents principally leads to a reduction in the overall cost of treatment, and aids in improving the quality of life of patients. Bioavailability of drugs and inter-subject variability are the major concerns with oral administration of anti-cancer agents. Factors viz. physicochemical and biological barriers (pre-systemic metabolism and transmembrane efflux of the drug) are accountable for hampering oral bioavailability of anti-cancer agents can be efficiently overcome by employing nanocarrier based drug delivery systems. Oral delivery of anticancer agents by employing these drug delivery systems will not only improve the quality of life of patients but will also provide pharmacoeconomic advantage and lead to a reduction in the overall cost of treatment of life-threatening disease like cancer.

Objective:

This article aims to familiarize the readers with some of the recent advancements in the field of nanobased drug delivery systems for oral delivery of anticancer agents.

Conclusion:

Advancement in the field of nanotechnology-based drug delivery systems has opened up gateways for the delivery of drugs that are difficult to administer orally. Oral delivery of anti-cancer agents by these drug delivery systems will not only improve the quality of life of patients but will also provide pharmacoeconomic advantage and lead to a reduction in the overall cost of treatment of life-threatening disease like cancer.

Synergistic combination of DT-13 and Topotecan inhibits aerobic glycolysis in human gastric carcinoma BGC-823 cells via NM IIA/EGFR/HK II axis

DT-13 combined with topotecan (TPT) showed stronger antitumour effects in mice subcutaneous xenograft model compared with their individual effects in our previous research. Here, we further observed the synergistically effect in mice orthotopic xenograft model. Metabolomics analysis showed DT-13 combined with TPT alleviated metabolic disorders induced by tumour and synergistically inhibited the activity of the aerobic glycolysis-related enzymes in vivo and in vitro. Mechanistic studies revealed that the combination treatment promoted epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) degradation through non-muscle myosin IIA (NM IIA)-induced endocytosis of EGFR, further inhibited the activity of hexokinase II (HK II), and eventually promoted the aerobic glycolysis inhibition activity more efficiently compared with TPT or DT-13 monotherapy. The combination therapy also inhibited the specific binding of HK II to mitochondria. When using the NM II inhibitor (-)002Dblebbistatin or MYH-9 shRNA, the synergistic inhibition effect of DT-13 and TPT on aerobic glycolysis was eliminated in BGC-823 cells. Immunohistochemical analysis revealed selective up-regulation of NM IIA while specific down-regulation of p-CREB, EGFR, and HK II by the combination therapy. Collectively, these findings suggested that this regimen has significant clinical implications, warranted further investigation.

Indirect comparison of nivolumab ± ipilimumab (CheckMate 032) versus other treatments for recurrent small-cell lung cancer

Aim: To estimate the comparative efficacy of nivolumab ± ipilimumab versus alternative treatments for small-cell lung cancer after at least one prior line of chemotherapy. Materials & m ethods: A systematic literature review identified six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that could be connected in a network. The Kaplan-Meier survival curves from these RCTs were synthesized using network meta-analysis models. Aggregate-level matching was used to connect CheckMate 032 to the RCTs. Results: CheckMate 032 was connected to the network by Amrubicin Clinical Trial-1. Nivolumab ± ipilimumab had a more durable tumor response and more favorable long-term survival versus topotecan via intravenous and versus amrubicin. Conclusion: Compared with chemotherapies for recurrent small-cell lung cancer, nivolumab ± ipilimumab improves response duration, which may translate to long-term survival benefits.

Budget impact model of avelumab in patients with metastatic merkel cell carcinoma in the US

Objective: To estimate the budget impact of avelumab as a treatment option for patients with treatment-naïve first-line (1L) and previously treated second-line or later (2L+) metastatic Merkel cell carcinoma (mMCC) in the US.

Methods: A budget impact model was developed to evaluate the addition of avelumab for the treatment of mMCC patients using a hypothetical 30 million-member US health plan over a 3-year time horizon (2019–2021). The comparator treatments included in the analysis were pembrolizumab and nivolumab (other immuno-oncology agents); and the chemotherapies routinely used in the eligible mMCC population. Model inputs included market share uptake of avelumab and other comparators, duration of treatments, and costs (drugs, health care resource utilization, adverse events). The model was evaluated from a commercial payer perspective. Sensitivity analyses were conducted to test uncertainties arising from the input values used in the model.

Results: In a hypothetical commercial health plan of 30 million members, 285 patients with mMCC were identified over 3 years; 43 patients received avelumab as a 1L treatment over 3 years. In a world without avelumab, the total health care costs of treating patients with mMCC over 3 years were estimated to be US$11,710,115 from a commercial health plan perspective. With avelumab, there were estimated savings of $2,643,173 considering the total costs related to the treatment of mMCC over 3 years (23% reduction in the budget). The incremental cost per member per month over 3 years was −$0.0025.

Conclusion: The model results indicate that the adoption of avelumab as a treatment option for mMCC would likely result in minimal budget impact from a US health plan perspective. Patients with mMCC, a rare condition with a poor prognosis and high unmet need, may benefit greatly from recently approved immunotherapies.

Synchronized Ratiometric Codelivery of Metformin and Topotecan through Engineered Nanocarrier Facilitates In Vivo Synergistic Precision Levels at Tumor Site

The combination of metabolic modulators with chemotherapy holds vast promise for effective inhibition of tumor progression and invasion. Herein, a ratiometric codelivery platform is developed for metformin (MET), a known metabolic modulator and topotecan (TPT), a chemotherapeutic drug, by engineering lipid bilayer-camouflaged mesoporous silica nanoparticles (LB-MSNs). In an attempt to deliver and maintain high tumor site concentrations of MET and TPT, a novel ion pairing-assisted loading procedure is developed using pamoic acid (PA) as an in situ trapping agent. PA, a hydrophobic counterion, increases the hydrophobicity of MET and TPT and facilitates MSNs with exceptionally high payload capacity (>40 and 32 wt%, respectively) and controlled release profile. Further, the synergy between MET and TPT determined by a modeling approach helps to afford synchronized delivery of both the drugs. Coloaded MET and TPT LB-MSNs present synergistic cytotoxicity against MDA-MB-231/4T1 cells and effectively promote apoptosis via mitochondrial membrane depolarization and cell cycle arrest. Extended pharmacokinetic profiles in preclinical models with fourfold to sevenfold longer circulation half-life and 7.5-100 times higher tumor site concentrations correspond to a significant increase in pharmacodynamic efficacy. Taken together, the developed codelivery approach effectively addresses the challenges in the chemotherapeutic efficacy of MET and TPT collectively.

Determination of Degradation Kinetics and Effect of Anion Exchange Resin on Dissolution of Novel Anticancer Drug Rigosertib in Acidic Conditions

Rigosertib is a novel anticancer drug in clinical development by Onconova therapeutics, Inc. Currently, it is in pivotal phase III clinical trials for myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) patients. Chemically, it is a sodium salt of weak acid with low solubility in lower pH solutions. In the preliminary studies, it was found that rigosertib is unstable in acidic conditions and forms multiple degradation products. In this research, drug degradation kinetics of rigosertib were studied in acidic conditions. Rigosertib follows pseudo-first-order general acid catalysis reaction. Cholestyramine, which is a strong anion exchange resin, was used to form complex with drug to improve stability and dissolution in acidic conditions. Drug complex with cholestyramine showed better dissolution profile compared to drug alone. Effect of polyethylene glycol was investigated on the release of drug from the drug resin complex. Polyethylene glycol further improved dissolution profile by improving drug solubility in acidic medium.

Quality-of-Life (QOL) during Screening for Phase 1 Trial Studies in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors and Its Impact on Risk for Serious Adverse Events

Background: Serious adverse events (SAEs) and subject replacements occur frequently in phase 1 oncology clinical trials. Whether baseline quality-of-life (QOL) or social support can predict risk for SAEs or subject replacement among these patients is not known. Methods: Between 2011-2013, 92 patients undergoing screening for enrollment into one of 22 phase 1 solid tumor clinical trials at Roswell Park Cancer Institute were included in this study. QOL Questionnaires (EORTC QLQ-C30 and FACT-G), Medical Outcomes Study Social Support Survey (MOSSSS), Charlson comorbidity scores (CCS) and Royal Marsden scores (RMS) were obtained at baseline. Frequency of dose limiting toxicities (DLTs), subject replacement and SAEs that occurred within the first 4 cycles of treatment were recorded. Fisher's exact test and Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test were used to study the association between categorical and continuous variables, respectively. A linear transformation was used to standardize QOL scores. p-value ≤ 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Baseline QOL, MOSSSS, CCS and RMS were not associated with subject replacement nor DLTs. Baseline EORTC QLQ-C30 scores were significantly lower among patients who encountered SAEs within the first 4 cycles (p = 0.04). Conclusions: Lower (worse) EORTC QLQ-C30 score at baseline is associated with SAE occurrence during phase 1 oncology trials.

Second-line pazopanib in patients with relapsed and refractory small-cell lung cancer: a multicentre phase II study of the Hellenic Oncology Research Group

Background:

Pazopanib is a tyrosine kinase inhibitor with antiangiogenic activity. Vascular endothelial growth factor expression is increased in SCLC and is correlated with poor prognosis. The efficacy and tolerance of second-line pazopanib in SCLC was evaluated.

Patients and methods:

Patients with platinum-sensitive (cohort A; n=39) and -resistant/refractory (cohort B; n=19) SCLC were enrolled in a multicentre phase II study. The primary end point was the progression-free survival rate (PFS-R) at week 8 in each cohort. Pazopanib (800 mg per day per os) was administered until progressive disease (PD). Circulating tumour cells (CTCs) were enumerated using the Cellsearch assay.

Results:

All patients were evaluable for response and toxicity. In the intention-to-treat analysis, eight (13.8%) patients achieved partial response (PR) (95% confidence interval (CI): 5.0–22.7), 20 (34.5%) stable disease (SD) and 30 (51.7%) PD. Accrual in cohort B was halted because the hard-stop rule was met; in cohort A, the PFS-R was 59% (95% CI: 43.5–74.4; PR=7, SD=16). Nine (23.1%) patients received pazopanib for >6 months and 3 of them for >12 months. One pazopanib cycle resulted to a significant decrease to the number of patients with ⩾5 CTCs/7.5 ml of blood (20%) compared with baseline (50%). The median PFS and OS for all patients was 2.5 months (95% CI: 1.9–3.1 months) and 6.0 months (95% CI: 3.8–8.2 months), respectively (cohort A: PFS=3.7 months and OS=8.0 months). No unexpected toxicity was observed.

Conclusions:

Second-line treatment with pazopanib in platinum-sensitive SCLC is well tolerated and resulted in promising objective responses and disease control; CTC enumeration might serve as a reliable surrogate biomarker of response.

Efficacy of topotecan in pretreated metastatic poorly differentiated extrapulmonary neuroendocrine carcinoma

Therapeutic options for metastatic poorly differentiated neuroendocrine carcinoma (NEC) after prior platinum-based chemotherapy are limited. Topotecan is an approved second-line chemotherapy for small cell lung cancer (SCLC). NEC is often considered to show a biological behavior similar to SCLC. The aim of this study was to analyze the efficacy of topotecan in pretreated metastatic NEC patients. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients treated with topotecan for metastatic NEC who presented at our center between January 2005 and December 2014 (n = 30). All 30 patients had received at least a platinum and etoposide containing regimen as prior chemotherapy. Median proliferation rate (Ki67) was 80%. As best response to topotecan five patients showed a stable disease, two patients a partial remission, resulting in a disease control rate of 23%. Of the remaining 23 patients, 14 (47%) showed a progressive disease, nine (30%) died before radiologic response could be evaluated. Median progression-free (PFS) and overall survival (OS) after start of topotecan was 2.1 and 4.1 months, respectively. In the subgroup analysis, patients with unknown primary (vs. those with a known primary) showed a significantly prolonged PFS of 3.5 months (vs. 1.9, P = 0.0107) and OS of 6.7 months (vs. 2.6 months, P = 0.0168). Grade 3/4 hematotoxicity was observed in 60% of patients. Topotecan shows only moderate antitumor activity in metastatic NEC. Disease control rate is lower than reported for SCLC. However, antitumor activity of topotecan seems higher in patients with unknown primary.

Synergistic combination of DT-13 and topotecan inhibits human gastric cancer via myosin IIA-induced endocytosis of EGF receptor in vitro and in vivo

Combination therapy has a higher success rate for many cancers compared to mono-therapy. The treatment of Topotecan (TPT) on gastric cancer (GC) is limited by its toxicity and the potential drug resistance. We found that the combination of the saponin monomer 13 from the dwarf lilyturf tuber (DT-13), performing anti-metastasis and anti-angiogenesis effects, with TPT synergistically induced apoptotic cytotoxicity in GCs with high EGF receptor (EGFR) expression, which was dependent on DT-13-induced endocytosis of EGFR. With TPT, DT-13 promoted EGFR ubiquitin--mediated degradation through myosin IIA-induced and Src/ caveolin-1 (Cav-1)-induced endocytosis of EGFR; inhibited EGFR downstream signalling and then increased the pro-apoptotic effects. Moreover, the synergistic pro-apoptotic efficacy of DT-13 and TPT in GCs with high EGFR expression was eliminated by both the NM II inhibitor (-)-blebbistatin and MYH-9 shRNA. The combination therapy of DT-13 with TPT showed stronger anti-tumour effects in vivo compared with their individual effects. Moreover, the results of combination therapy revealed selective upregulation of pro-apoptotic activity in TUNEL assays and cleaved caspase-3 and NM IIA in immunohischemical analysis; while specific downregulation of p-extracellular regulated kinase 1/2 (p-ERK1/2), EGFR and Cav-1 in immunohischemical analysis. Collectively, these findings have significant clinical implications for patients with tumours harbouring high EGFR expression due to the possible high sensitivity of this regimen.

Topotecan for Relapsed Small-cell Lung Cancer: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of 1347 Patients

Topotecan is the most reliable chemotherapy regimen for relapsed small-cell lung carcinoma (SCLC). The efficacy and adverse effects of topotecan as reported by previous studies varied greatly. The inclusion criterion was a prospective study that was able to provide data for 6-month over-all survival (OS) rate, 1-year OS rate, objective responses, and/or adverse effects of single agent topotecan as a second line chemotherapy for SCLC, written in English language as a full article. Any topotecan regimen were allowed. Binary data were meta-analyzed with the random-model generic inverse variance method. We included 14 articles consisted of 1347 patients. Pooled values were estimated as follows. <Refractory relapse> Six-month OS rate: 37% (95% CI: 28-46%). One-year OS rate: 9% (95% CI: 5-13%). Response rate: 5% (95% CI: 1-8%). <Sensitive relapse> Six-month OS rate: 57% (95% CI: 50-64%). One-year OS rate: 27% (95% CI: 22-32%). Response rate: 17% (95% CI: 11-23%). <Adverse effect> Grade III/IV neutropenia 69% (95% CI: 58-80%). Grade III/IV thrombopenia 41% (95% CI: 34-48%). Grade III/IV anemia 24% (95% CI: 17-30%). Non-hematorogical events were rare. Chemotherapy-related death 2% (95% CI: 1-3%). In conclusion, Topotecan provided a possibly promising outcome for sensitive-relapse SCLC and poor outcome for refractory relapse SCLC. Adverse events were mainly hematological.

VAC chemotherapy with valproic acid for refractory/relapsing small cell lung cancer: a phase II study

Salvage chemotherapy (CT) for relapsing or refractory small cell lung cancer (SCLC) remains disappointing. In vitro experiments showed that valproic acid increases apoptosis of SCLC cell lines exposed to doxorubicin, vindesine and bis(2-chloroethyl)amine. The primary objective of this phase II study was to determine whether epigenetic modulation with valproic acid in addition to a doxorubicin, vindesine and cyclophosphamide (VAC) regimen improves 6-month progression-free survival (PFS).

Patients with pathologically proven SCLC refractory to prior platinum derivatives and etoposide were eligible. After central registration, patients received VAC plus daily oral valproic acid.

64 patients were registered, of whom six were ineligible. Seven patients did not receive any CT, leaving 51 patients assessable for the primary end-point. The objective response rate was 19.6%. Median PFS was 2.8 months (95% CI 2.5–3.6 months) and 6-month PFS was 6%. Median survival time was 5.9 months (95% CI 4.7–7.5 months). Toxicity was mainly haematological, with 88% and 26% grade 3–4 neutropenia and thrombopenia, respectively.

Despite an interesting response rate, the addition of valproic acid to VAC did not translate into adequate PFS in relapsing SCLC or SCLC refractory to platinum–etoposide.

Epigenetic modulation with valproic acid does not improve CT efficacy in refractory SCLC after platinum–etoposidehttp://ow.ly/R0rBt

Phase I and pharmacological study of pazopanib in combination with oral topotecan in patients with advanced solid tumours

Background:

This phase I study evaluated the safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and pharmacokinetics of two dosing schedules of oral topotecan in combination with pazopanib in patients with advanced solid tumours.

Methods:

Stage I of this study was to determine whether there was an impact of pazopanib on topotecan exposure. In stage II, the MTD and safety profile of oral topotecan given weekly on days 1, 8 and 15 in a 28-day cycle; or daily-times-five on days 1–5 in a 21-day cycle, both in combination with daily pazopanib, were explored.

Results:

In total, 67 patients were enroled. Pazopanib co-administration caused a substantial increase in exposure to total topotecan (1.7-fold) compared with topotecan alone, which is considered clinically relevant. Topotecan had no effect on pazopanib concentrations. Safety findings were consistent with the known profile of both agents. There were three drug-related deaths, liver failure, tumour haemorrhage and myelosuppression. Two patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs; hand–foot syndrome, myelosuppression and diarrhoea) on the weekly topotecan schedule and four patients experienced DLTs (myelosuppression) on the daily-times-five topotecan schedule. When combined with pazopanib, 800 mg daily, the recommended doses for oral topotecan are: 8 mg weekly and 2.5 mg daily-times-five. Seven of eight patients with partial response had platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. In addition, 54% of patients had stable disease with 22% stable for 6 months.

Conclusions:

Total topotecan exposure is 1.7-fold higher when co-administered with pazopanib. Both schedules of administration were tolerated and would permit further evaluation, especially the weekly schedule.

Pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics of oral topotecan in patients with advanced solid tumours and impaired renal function

AIMS

The aim of the study was to determine the effect of renal impairment and prior platinum-based chemotherapy on the toxicity and pharmacokinetics of oral topotecan and to identify recommended doses for patients with renal impairment or prior platinum-based (PB) chemotherapy.

METHODS

A multicentre phase I toxicity and pharmacokinetic study of oral topotecan was conducted in patients with advanced solid tumours. Patients were grouped by normal renal function with limited or prior PB chemotherapy or impaired renal function (mild [creatinine clearance (CLcr)  = 50-79 ml min(-1) ], moderate [CLcr  = 30-49 ml min(-1) ], severe [CLcr <30 ml min(-1) ]).

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients were evaluable. Topotecan lactone and total topotecan area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) was significantly increased in patients with moderate and severe renal impairment (109% and 174%, respectively, topotecan lactone and 148% and 298%, respectively, total topotecan). Asian patients (23 in total) had higher AUCs than non-Asian patients with the same degree of renal impairment. Thirteen dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed, which were mostly haematological. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 2.3 mg m(-2) day(-1) , given on days 1 to 5 in a 21 day cycle, for patients with prior PB chemotherapy or mild renal impairment, and 1.2 mg m(-2) day(-1) for patients with moderate renal impairment (suggested dose 1.9 mg m(-2) day(-1) for non-Asians). Due to incomplete enrolment of patients with severe renal impairment, the MTD was determined as ≥ 0.6 mg m(-2) day(-1) in this cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral topotecan dose adjustments are not required in patients with prior PB chemotherapy or mildly impaired renal function, but reduced doses are required for patients with moderate or severe renal impairment.

Polymeric nanoparticle drug delivery technologies for oral delivery applications

INTRODUCTION

Many therapeutics are limited to parenteral administration. Oral administration is a desirable alternative because of the convenience and increased compliance by patients, especially for chronic diseases that require frequent administration. Polymeric nanoparticles (NPs) are one technology being developed to enable clinically feasible oral delivery.

AREAS COVERED

This review discusses the challenges associated with oral delivery. Strategies used to overcome gastrointestinal (GI) barriers using polymeric NPs will be considered, including mucoadhesive biomaterials and targeting of NPs to transcytosis pathways associated with M cells and enterocytes. Applications of oral delivery technologies will also be discussed, such as oral chemotherapies, oral insulin, treatment of inflammatory bowel disease, and mucosal vaccinations.

EXPERT OPINION

There have been many approaches used to overcome the transport barriers presented by the GI tract, but most have been limited by low bioavailability. Recent strategies targeting NPs to transcytosis pathways present in the intestines have demonstrated that it is feasible to efficiently transport both therapeutics and NPs across the intestines and into systemic circulation after oral administration. Further understanding of the physiology and pathophysiology of the intestines could lead to additional improvements in oral polymeric NP technologies and enable the translation of these technologies to clinical practice.

Phase II study of bendamustine in relapsed chemotherapy sensitive or resistant small-cell lung cancer

INTRODUCTION

To determine the time to progression (TTP), response rate (RR), and toxicity for North American patients with relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) treated with bendamustine in the second- or third-line setting.

METHODS

Patients with relapsed, histologically confirmed SCLC were eligible for enrollment on study. The study population included patients with both chemotherapy-sensitive and chemotherapy-resistant disease treated with up to two prior lines of chemotherapy. Patients were treated with 120 mg/m of bendamustine on days 1 and 2 of a 21-day cycle for up to six cycles. Primary end point was TTP; secondary end points included toxicity, RR, and overall survival.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine patients were accrued, 50 patients met eligibility for enrollment. The median age of patients was 62, and 56% were men. Twenty-nine patients (58%) had chemotherapy-sensitive disease. Median TTP was 4.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.3-5.4), median overall survival was 4.8 months (95% CI, 3.8-6.3), and the RR was 26% (95% CI, 13.3%-39.5%). Patients with chemosensitive disease had a median TTP of 4.2 months (95% CI, 3.3-6.0) compared with 3.4 months (95% CI, 2.7-∞) for chemotherapy-resistant disease. The RR was 33% (95% CI, 14.2%-51.8%) in patients with chemosensitive disease and 17% (95% CI, 0%-34.4%) in those with chemoresistant disease. The most common grade 3/4 adverse events were fatigue (20%), dyspnea (12%), and anemia (12%).

CONCLUSION

Bendamustine has modest activity in relapsed SCLC similar to other agents evaluated in this patient population.

Randomized Phase III Trial of Amrubicin Versus Topotecan As Second-Line Treatment for Patients With Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose

Amrubicin, a third-generation anthracycline and potent topoisomerase II inhibitor, showed promising activity in small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) in phase II trials. This phase III trial compared the safety and efficacy of amrubicin versus topotecan as second-line treatment for SCLC.

Patients and Methods

A total of 637 patients with refractory or sensitive SCLC were randomly assigned at a ratio of 2:1 to 21-day cycles of amrubicin 40 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) on days 1 to 3 or topotecan 1.5 mg/m2 IV on days 1 to 5. Primary end point was overall survival (OS); secondary end points included overall response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety.

Results

Median OS was 7.5 months with amrubicin versus 7.8 months with topotecan (hazard ratio [HR], 0.880; P = .170); in refractory patients, median OS was 6.2 and 5.7 months, respectively (HR, 0.77; P = .047). Median PFS was 4.1 months with amrubicin and 3.5 months with topotecan (HR, 0.802; P = .018). ORR was 31.1% with amrubicin and 16.9% with topotecan (odds ratio, 2.223; P < .001). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events in the amrubicin and topotecan arms were: neutropenia (41% v 54%; P = .004), thrombocytopenia (21% v 54%; P < .001), anemia (16% v 31%; P < .001), infections (16% v 10%; P = .043), febrile neutropenia (10% v 3%; P = .003), and cardiac disorders (5% v 5%; P = .759); transfusion rates were 32% and 53% (P < .001), respectively. NQO1 polymorphisms did not influence safety outcomes.

Conclusion

Amrubicin did not improve survival when compared with topotecan in the second-line treatment of patients with SCLC. OS did not differ significantly between treatment groups, although an improvement in OS was noted in patients with refractory disease treated with amrubicin.

Polymeric nanoparticle technologies for oral drug delivery

Biologics increasingly are being used for the treatment of many diseases. These treatments typically require repeated doses administered by injection. Alternate routes of administration, particularly oral, are considered favorable because of improved convenience and compliance by patients, but physiological barriers such as extreme pH level, enzyme degradation, and poor intestinal epithelium permeability limit absorption. Encapsulating biologics in drug delivery systems such as polymeric nanoparticles prevents inactivation and degradation caused by low pH and enzymes of the gastrointestinal tract. However, transport across the intestinal epithelium remains the most critical barrier to overcome for efficient oral delivery. This review focuses on recent advances in polymeric nanoparticles being developed to overcome transport barriers and their potential for translation into clinical use.

Prognostic role of hyponatremia in 564 small cell lung cancer patients treated with topotecan

OBJECTIVES

Hyponatremia is reported in about 15% of small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Variable results of the prognostic significance of low plasmatic sodium (Napl) have been reported. Our study was performed to investigate the prognostic role of hyponatremia in SCLC patients treated in second-line with topotecan chemotherapy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data were retrospectively collected from a database including clinical data from 631 patients enrolled in 6 prospective topotecan iv studies. Final data were obtained from 564 patients in which data on baseline Napl were available. Univariate and multivariate analysis were carried out to study the possible correlation between Napl and second-line clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

Hyponatremia (Napl<135mequiv./l) was present in 101 cases (17.9%). Napl was <125mequiv./l in 16 patients (2.8%), 126-130mequiv./l in 11 (2%), 130-134mequiv./l in 74 (13.1%), while 463 patients (82.1%) showed normal values. The median survival was 28.7 weeks in patients with normal Napl, and 21.1 weeks in patients with hyponatremia (p<0.0001, HR=1.67, 95%CI=1.32-2.10). By Cox multivariate analysis, hyponatremia was associated with poorer prognosis (p=0.0024, HR=1.44, 95%CI=1.13-1.82). A not statistically significant trend of correlation between hyponatremia and progression-free survival (p=0.085, HR=1.23, 95%CI 0.97-1.55) and response rate (p=0.5037, OR=0.81, 95%CI 0.44-1.49) was observed.

CONCLUSION

Hyponatremia is an independent prognostic factor for patients with SCLC treated with topotecan in second-line setting. Further studies are needed to prospectically confirm these results and to develop an optimal therapy for hyponatremic patients.

Relapsed small cell lung cancer: treatment options and latest developments

According to recent analyses, there was a modest yet significant improvement in median survival time and 5-year survival rate of limited stage small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in North America, Europe, Japan and other countries over the last 30 years. The median survival time of limited stage SCLC is 15-20 months and 5-year survival rate is 15% or less. In terms of extensive stage SCLC, a median survival time of 9.4-12.8 months and 2-year survival of 5.2-19.5% are still disappointing. Despite being highly sensitive to first-line chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatments, most patients with SCLC experience relapse within 2 years and die from systemic metastasis. While several clinical trials of cytotoxic chemotherapies and molecular targeting agents have been investigated in the treatment of relapsed SCLC, none showed a significant clinical activity to be able to exceed topotecan as second-line chemotherapy. There are problematic issues to address for relapsed SCLC, such as standardizing the treatment for third-line chemotherapy. Topotecan alone was the first approved therapy for second-line treatment for relapsed SCLC. Amrubicin is a promising drug and a variety of trials evaluating its efficacy have been carried out. Amrubicin has shown superiority to topotecan in a Japanese population, but was not superior in a study of western patients. There are some controversial issues for relapsed SCLC, such as treatment for older patients, third-line chemotherapy and efficacy of molecular targeting therapy. This article reviews current standard treatment, recent clinical trials and other topics on relapsed SCLC.

Oral anticancer drugs: mechanisms of low bioavailability and strategies for improvement

The use of oral anticancer drugs has increased during the last decade, because of patient preference, lower costs, proven efficacy, lack of infusion-related inconveniences, and the opportunity to develop chronic treatment regimens. Oral administration of anticancer drugs is, however, often hampered by limited bioavailability of the drug, which is associated with a wide variability. Since most anticancer drugs have a narrow therapeutic window and are dosed at or close to the maximum tolerated dose, a wide variability in the bioavailability can have a negative impact on treatment outcome. This review discusses mechanisms of low bioavailability of oral anticancer drugs and strategies for improvement. The extent of oral bioavailability depends on many factors, including release of the drug from the pharmaceutical dosage form, a drug's stability in the gastrointestinal tract, factors affecting dissolution, the rate of passage through the gut wall, and the pre-systemic metabolism in the gut wall and liver. These factors are divided into pharmaceutical limitations, physiological endogenous limitations, and patient-specific limitations. There are several strategies to reduce or overcome these limitations. First, pharmaceutical adjustment of the formulation or the physicochemical characteristics of the drug can improve the dissolution rate and absorption. Second, pharmacological interventions by combining the drug with inhibitors of transporter proteins and/or pre-systemic metabolizing enzymes can overcome the physiological endogenous limitations. Third, chemical modification of a drug by synthesis of a derivative, salt form, or prodrug could enhance the bioavailability by improving the absorption and bypassing physiological endogenous limitations. Although the bioavailability can be enhanced by various strategies, the development of novel oral products with low solubility or cell membrane permeability remains cumbersome and is often unsuccessful. The main reasons are unacceptable variation in the bioavailability and high investment costs. Furthermore, novel oral anticancer drugs are frequently associated with toxic effects including unacceptable gastrointestinal adverse effects. Therefore, compliance is often suboptimal, which may negatively influence treatment outcome.

Oral topotecan: Bioavailability, pharmacokinetics and impact of ABCG2 genotyping in Chinese patients with advanced cancers

Oral topotecan (Hycamtin(®)) has been recently approved for the treatment of relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC) in 2007, however, the bioavailability and pharmacokinetic data of topotecan for Chinese patients is still limited. Xinze(®) is a new and the only capsule formulation of topotecan used in China that is similar to Hycamtin(®). The current study aimed to investigate the absolute bioavailability and pharmacokinetics of Xinze(®) in Chinese patients with advanced cancers. On day 1, an IV dose of 1.5 mg/m(2)/d as a 30 min continuous infusion was administered. Patients took the oral topotecan at one of two dose levels: 1.5 mg/m(2)/d (six patients) or 1.9 mg/m(2)/d (seven patients) on day 2. Plasma pharmacokinetics of total topotecan and topotecan in the lactone form were performed on both days using ultra-high-performance liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry (UHPLC-MS/MS). Single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) identified in exon 5 (421C>A) and in exon 2 (34G>A) in ATP-binding cassette sub-family G member 2 (ABCG2) were analyzed by direct sequencing. Safety assessments were performed throughout the study. The maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) reached at 1-2 h and the elimination half-life time (T1/2) was approximately 4.2 h after oral administration. The absolute bioavailability of total topotecan in the 1.5 mg/m(2)/d and 1.9 mg/m(2)/d groups averaged 41.23 ± 11.8% and 36.00 ± 14.8%, respectively. The patients with heterozygous SNPs had essentially the same bioavailability and pharmacokinetics. The bioavailability of topotecan after oral administration illustrates good systemic exposure at dosages of 1.5 mg/m(2)/d and 1.9 mg/m(2)/d over a five-day schedule in Chinese patients. On a dose-normalized basis, the values of Cmax and AUC0-t for total topotecan in Chinese patients were higher than in Caucasians following oral and intravenous administration, while the T1/2 was consistent.

Treatment of small cell lung cancer: Diagnosis and management of lung cancer, 3rd ed: American College of Chest Physicians evidence-based clinical practice guidelines

BACKGROUND

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a lethal disease for which there have been only small advances in diagnosis and treatment in the past decade. Our goal was to revise the evidence-based guidelines on staging and best available treatment options.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search covering 2004 to 2011 was conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and five Cochrane databases using SCLC terms. This was cross-checked with the authors' own literature searches and knowledge of the literature. Results were limited to research in humans and articles written in English.

RESULTS

The staging classification should include both the old Veterans Administration staging classification of limited stage (LS) and extensive stage (ES), as well as the new seventh edition American Joint Committee on Cancer/International Union Against Cancer staging by TNM. The use of PET scanning is likely to improve the accuracy of staging. Surgery is indicated for carefully selected stage I SCLC. LS disease should be treated with concurrent chemoradiotherapy in patients with good performance status. Thoracic radiotherapy should be administered early in the course of treatment, preferably beginning with cycle 1 or 2 of chemotherapy. Chemotherapy should consist of four cycles of a platinum agent and etoposide. ES disease should be treated primarily with chemotherapy consisting of a platinum agent plus etoposide or irinotecan. Prophylactic cranial irradiation prolongs survival in those individuals with both LS and ES disease who achieve a complete or partial response to initial therapy. To date, no molecularly targeted therapy agent has demonstrated proven efficacy against SCLC.

CONCLUSION

Evidence-based guidelines are provided for the staging and treatment of SCLC. LS-SCLC is treated with curative intent with 20% to 25% 5-year survival. ES-SCLC is initially responsive to standard treatment, but almost always relapses, with virtually no patients surviving for 5 years. Targeted therapies have no proven efficacy against SCLC.

Medical treatment of small cell lung cancer: state of the art and new development

INTRODUCTION

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a rapidly progressive disease that accounts for approximately 15% of all lung cancers. Chemotherapy remains the cornerstone of treatment of SCLC, but in the last two decades, its progress has reached a plateau. Although a significant sensitivity to chemotherapy and radiotherapy is a feature of SCLC, an early development of drug resistance unavoidable occurs during the course of the disease. Second-line treatment for relapsed patients remains a very challenging setting, with a limited clinical benefit.

AREAS COVERED

A thorough analysis of various therapeutic strategies reported in literature for SCLC treatment was performed. This review includes novel therapeutic approaches such as maintenance or consolidation treatments, new chemotherapy agents and targeted therapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Against this background, there is a desperate need for the development of novel active drugs. Among these, amrubicin has also shown more favourable antitumor activity, and is the most promising at present. Concerning targeted agents, these have failed to demonstrate effectiveness for SCLC and a better understanding of the molecular mechanisms is clearly needed. In the future, further investigations are required to clarify the role of novel anti-angiogenic or pro-apoptotic agents and hedgehog pathway inhibitors.

Treatment update in small-cell lung cancer: from limited to extensive disease

OPINION STATEMENT

Small-cell lung cancers are aggressive tumors, often discovered with widespread metastases that include brain involvement. For patients with limited-stage disease, the standard of care is platinum-doublet chemotherapy (often etoposide) with concurrent radiation. Concurrent chemoradiotherapy can be difficult when given upfront, sometimes preventing on-time completion of later chemotherapy cycles. Recent data support giving concurrent chemoradiotherapy following 1 or 2 cycles of chemotherapy alone. For patients with extensive disease, chemotherapy alone remains the standard of care. For patients with limited or extensive disease who achieve clinical benefit from primary therapy, consideration of prophylactic cranial radiation should be made. Despite aggressive use of these treatments, most patients will have life-threatening disease return, sometimes very soon after finishing treatment. For those patients who are candidates for additional systemic treatment, several single-agent options exist, such as topotecan, paclitaxel, or even consideration of retreating with the same initial regimen depending on how effective it was. All patients with SCLC should be considered for clinical trials, because this remains our greatest hope for finding more effective therapies.

Efficacy and safety of oral topotecan and bevacizumab combination as second-line treatment for relapsed small-cell lung cancer: an open-label multicenter single-arm phase II study

BACKGROUND

Topotecan is currently the only US Federal Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug for second-line treatment of relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). We investigated the efficacy and safety of a novel topotecan-bevacizumab combination in treating relapsed SCLC.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Each 21-day treatment cycle consisted of bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) administration on day 1 and oral topotecan (2.3 mg/m(2)/d) administration on days 1 to 5. Treatment was continued for 8 cycles or until disease progression/toxicity. The primary objective was evaluation of 3-month progression-free survival (PFS). Overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, time to response (TTR), and overall survival (OS) were secondary objectives.

RESULTS

The study enrolled 50 patients between July 2008 and May 2010. The 3-month PFS was 65% (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.3%-76.9%), which was promising compared with the historical control of 50% (P = .017) but did not meet the predefined criteria for clinically meaningful improvement. Median PFS was 6.24 months for the sensitive subgroup (progression time from end of previous chemotherapy > 90 days; n = 27) and 2.91 months for the resistant subgroup (progression time ≤ 90 days; n = 23). No patient achieved complete response (CR), and the ORR was 16%. Twenty (40%) patients had stable disease (SD) and 13 (26%) had progressive disease (PD). Median OS, TTR, and duration of response were 7.4, 1.3, and 4.7 months, respectively. The worst reported adverse events (AEs) were grade 1/2 in 11 (22%) patients and grade 3/4/5 in 39 (78%) patients.

CONCLUSION

Improvement in the 3-month PFS after treatment with topotecan-bevacizumab was promising compared with the historical control and justifies additional studies with this regimen.

A clinical review of small-cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder

Small-cell carcinoma of the urinary bladder is a rare and aggressive type of bladder cancer that has a poor prognosis. The incidence has been gradually increasing because of the aging population. Owing to its rarity there are no available treatment guidelines. Several retrospective studies and 1 prospective study have provided some insight into therapy for this disease. A multimodal approach that includes chemotherapy, local radiation therapy, and definitive surgery in resectable cases appears to be an optimal management approach.