The ixabepilone and vandetanib combination shows synergistic activity in docetaxel-resistant MDA-MB-231 breast cancer cells

Background

The lack of drug targets is an obstacle to the treatment of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). At present, non-specific cytotoxic drugs are first-line agents, but the development of resistance is a major problem with these agents. The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a potential target in some TNBCs, because its tyrosine kinase activity drives tumorigenesis. Thus, small molecule inhibitors of the EGFR in combination with cytotoxic agents could be important for the treatment of TNBCs.

Methods

The present study evaluated the efficacies of clinically approved EGFR inhibitors in combination with the cytotoxic agent ixabepilone in parental and docetaxel-resistant MDA-MB-231 cells (231C and TXT cells, respectively). Cell viability was assessed using MTT reduction assays, cell death pathways were evaluated using annexin V/7-aminoactinomycin D staining and flow cytometry and Western immunoblotting was used to assess the expression of pro- and anti-apoptotic proteins in cells.

Results

Ixabepilone and the EGFR inhibitors gefitinib and vandetanib inhibited 231C and TXT cell proliferation, but the alternate EGFR inhibitors erlotinib and lapatinib were poorly active. Using combination analysis, ixabepilone/vandetanib was synergistic in both cell types, whereas the ixabepilone/gefitinib combination exhibited antagonism. By flow cytometry, ixabepilone/vandetanib enhanced 231C and TXT cell death over that produced by the single agents and also enhanced caspase-3 cleavage and the pro/anti-apoptotic Bcl-2 protein ratios over ixabepilone alone.

Conclusions

These findings suggest that the ixabepilone/vandetanib combination may have promise for the treatment of patients with drug-resistant TNBC.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s43440-022-00396-7.

A Phase II Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Chloroquine in Combination With Taxanes in the Treatment of Patients With Advanced or Metastatic Anthracycline-refractory Breast Cancer

INTRODUCTION

Chemotherapy eliminates most of the cancer cells except those with potential for self-renewal and tumor initiation, called cancer stem cells (CSCs). Chloroquine, through bioinformatics, was found to be a potential agent to target CSCs. We designed a phase II trial to test the efficacy and safety of chloroquine in combination with taxane or taxane-like chemotherapy agents in patients with advanced or metastatic breast cancer who are refractory to anthracycline-based chemotherapy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Female patients ≥ 18 years of age who had received prior anthracycline chemotherapy were enrolled in this study. Chloroquine 250 mg was given daily orally with either docetaxel or paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel or ixabepilone every 3 weeks. The maximum number of 3-week cycles allowed was 6. The primary efficacy endpoint was the objective response rate (ORR). The secondary efficacy endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety analysis.

RESULTS

Thirty-eight patients were enrolled in the study, and 31 patients were evaluated for response. The median age was 54.1 years (range, 31.7-78.1 years). The ORR was 45.16% (95% confidence interval [CI], 29.2%-62.2%), which was higher than the expected ORR of 30% (P = .03). Patients were followed for a median of 25.4 months and experienced a median PFS of 12.4 months (95% CI, 4.9-24.6 months) and a median OS of 25.4 months (95% CI, 13.7-83.5 months). The combination was well-tolerated, with only 13.15% of patients experiencing grade ≥ 3 adverse events.

CONCLUSION

A combination of chloroquine with taxane or taxane-like chemotherapy was efficacious in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with prior anthracycline-based chemotherapy.

A multi-scale systems pharmacology approach uncovers the anti-cancer molecular mechanism of Ixabepilone

It has been realized that FDA approved drugs may have more molecular targets than is commonly thought. Thus, to find the exact drug-target interactions (DTIs) is of great significance for exploring the new molecular mechanism of drugs. Here, we developed a multi-scale system pharmacology (MSSP) method for the large-scale prediction of DTIs. We used MSSP to integrate drug-related and target-related data from multiple levels, the network structural data formed by known drug-target relationships for predicting likely unknown DTIs. Prediction results revealed that Ixabepilone, an epothilone B analog for treating breast cancer patients, may target Bcl-2, an oncogene that contributes to tumor progression and therapy resistance by inhibiting apoptosis. Furthermore, we demonstrated that Ixabepilone could bind with Bcl-2 and decrease its protein expression in breast cancer cells. The down-regulation of Bcl-2 by Ixabepilone is resulted from promoting its degradation by affecting p-Bcl-2. We further found that Ixabepilone could induce autophagy by releasing Beclin1 from Beclin1/Bcl-2 complex. Inhibition of autophagy by knockdown of Beclin1 or pharmacological inhibitor augmented apoptosis, thus enhancing the antitumor efficacy of Ixabepilone against breast cancer cells in vitro and in vivo. In addition, Ixabepilone also decreases Bcl-2 protein expression and induces cytoprotective autophagy in human hepatic carcinoma and glioma cells. In conclusion, this study not only provides a feasible and alternative way exploring new molecular mechanisms of drugs by combing computation DTI prediction, but also reveals an effective strategy to reinforce the antitumor efficacy of Ixabepilone.

Mitochondrial dysfunction in the pathogenesis of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy

Several first-line chemotherapeutic agents, including taxanes, platinum agents and proteasome inhibitors, are associated with the dose-limiting side effect of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN). CIPN predominantly manifests as sensory symptoms, which are likely due to drug accumulation within peripheral nervous tissues rather than the central nervous system. No treatment is currently available to prevent or reverse CIPN. The causal mechanisms underlying CIPN are not yet fully understood. Mitochondrial dysfunction has emerged as a major factor contributing to the development and maintenance of CIPN. This chapter will provide an overview of both clinical and preclinical data supporting this hypothesis. We will review the studies reporting the nature of mitochondrial dysfunction evoked by chemotherapy in terms of changes in mitochondrial morphology, bioenergetics and reactive oxygen species (ROS) generation. Furthermore, we will discuss the in vivo effects of pharmacological interventions that counteract chemotherapy-evoked mitochondrial dysfunction and ameliorate pain-like behavior.

Identification of high-risk drugs related to chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy in Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program-sponsored phase I trials

BACKGROUND

Chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN) is a significant and debilitating side effect. However, there have been no studies of the relative risk of CIPN with known causative agents. We examined the risk of CIPN in patients taking such agents as a part of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Cancer Therapy Evaluation Program-sponsored phase I trials.

METHODS

CIPN events in each patient were graded according to the Clinical Terminology of Common Adverse Effects and compared among several high-risk chemotherapeutic agent groups, adjusting for possible confounding factors. Patients receiving tubulin-targeted agents were analysed separately for specific background factors associated with CIPN.

RESULTS

In 135 phase I clinical trials, 259 of 3614 patients were identified as developing CIPN during chemotherapy. Tubulin-targeting agents and proteasome inhibitors were identified as high-risk agents (hazard ratio 9.04 and 5.01, respectively) for CIPN, whereas platinum-complex agents and thalidomide analogues imparted lower risk (hazard ratio 1.52 and 1.11, respectively). Age, sex and medical history of diabetes were not significantly related to CIPN. CIPN developed over time as the number of chemotherapy cycles increased. Among patients with CIPN, treatment with tubulin-targeting agents resulted in a significantly higher rate of chemotherapy schedule modification compared with treatments with other chemotherapeutic agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Tubulin-targeting agents and proteasome inhibitors were associated with a greatly increased risk of CIPN compared with other agents. CIPN tended to develop in later chemotherapy cycles. These findings will help to minimise the risk of CIPN by encouraging increased surveillance and earlier dose adjustment of high-risk agents in phase I trials.

UCBG 2-08: 5-year efficacy results from the UNICANCER-PACS08 randomised phase III trial of adjuvant treatment with FEC100 and then either docetaxel or ixabepilone in patients with early-stage, poor prognosis breast cancer

PURPOSE

UNICANCER-PACS08 compared adjuvant FEC (5-FU; epirubicin; cyclophosphamide) then docetaxel to FEC then ixabepilone in poor prognosis early breast cancer (BC). We evaluated whether replacing docetaxel with ixabepilone would increase 5-year disease-free survival (DFS).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) or oestrogen receptor (ER)+/progesterone receptor (PR)-/HER2- BC patients were randomised to receive standard FEC (3 cycles) followed by 3 cycles of either docetaxel (100 mg/m²) or ixabepilone (40 mg/m²). Radiotherapy was mandatory after conservative surgery; ER+ patients received endocrine therapy.

RESULTS

Seven hundred sixty-two patients were enrolled between October 2007 and September 2010. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. Median follow-up was 66.7 months. Median DFS was not reached; 5-year DFS rate was 76% with docetaxel and 79% with ixabepilone (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.58-1.10; p = 0.175). Median overall survival (OS) was not reached; 5-year OS rate was 86% versus 84% (HR = 0.97; 95% CI = 0.66-1.42; p = 0.897). TNBC patients treated with ixabepilone had a 23% lower risk of relapse compared to docetaxel (HR for DFS = 0.77; 95% CI = 0.53-1.11; p = 0.168). DFS was longer with ixabepilone than docetaxel in patients with grade II-III lymphocytic infiltration (HR = 0.55; 95% CI = 0.29-1.05; p = 0.063). All patients experienced ≥1 adverse events (AEs): 75% reported grade III-IV AEs and two (<1%) had grade V AEs (both with neutropenia and infection receiving ixabepilone).

CONCLUSION

After adjuvant FEC, ixabepilone was comparable to docetaxel for treating poor prognosis early BC patients. The benefit of ixabepilone in subgroups (patients with TNBC and grade II-III lymphocytic infiltration) requires further evaluation.

A phase II study of frontline paclitaxel/carboplatin/bevacizumab, paclitaxel/carboplatin/temsirolimus, or ixabepilone/carboplatin/bevacizumab in advanced/recurrent endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

Paclitaxel and carboplatin (PC) is a standard initial therapy for advanced endometrial cancer. We evaluated the efficacy and tolerability of incorporating three novel agents into initial therapy.

METHODS

In this randomized phase II trial, patients with chemotherapy-naïve stage III/IVA (with measurable disease) and stage IVB or recurrent (with or without measurable disease) endometrial cancer were randomly assigned to treatment with PC plus bevacizumab (Arm 1), PC plus temsirolimus (Arm 2) or ixabepilone and carboplatin (IC) plus bevacizumab (Arm 3). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Comparable patients on the PC Arm of trial GOG209 were used as historical controls. Secondary endpoints were response rate, overall survival (OS), and safety.

RESULTS

Overall, 349 patients were randomized. PFS duration was not significantly increased in any experimental arm compared with historical controls (p > 0.039). Treatment HRs (92% CI) for Arms 1, 2, and 3 relative to controls were 0.81 (0.63-1.02), 1.22 (0.96-1.55) and 0.87 (0.68-1.11), respectively. Response rates were similar across arms (60%, 55% and 53%, respectively). Relative to controls, OS duration (with censoring at 36 months), was significantly increased in Arm 1 (p < 0.039) but not in Arms 2 and 3; the HRs (92% CIs) were 0.71 (0.55-0.91), 0.99 (0.78-1.26), and 0.97 (0.77-1.23), respectively. No new safety signals were identified. Common mutations and rates of mismatch repair protein loss are described by histotype. Potential predictive biomarkers for temsirolimus and bevacizumab were identified.

CONCLUSION

PFS was not significantly increased in any experimental arm compared to historical controls. NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study GOG-86P.

Differential Morphological and Biochemical Recovery from Chemotherapy-Induced Peripheral Neuropathy Following Paclitaxel, Ixabepilone, or Eribulin Treatment in Mouse Sciatic Nerves

The reversibility of chemotherapy-induced peripheral neuropathy (CIPN), a disabling and potentially permanent side effect of microtubule-targeting agents (MTAs), is becoming an increasingly important issue as treatment outcomes improve. The molecular mechanisms regulating the variability in time to onset, severity, and time to recovery from CIPN between the common MTAs paclitaxel and eribulin are unknown. Previously (Benbow et al. in Neurotox Res 29:299-313, 2016), we found that after 2 weeks of a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) in mice, paclitaxel treatment resulted in severe reductions in axon area density, higher frequency of myelin abnormalities, and increased numbers of Schwann cell nuclei in sciatic nerves. Biochemically, eribulin induced greater microtubule-stabilizing effects than paclitaxel. Here, we extended these comparative MTD studies to assess the recovery from these short-term effects of paclitaxel, eribulin, and a third MTA, ixabepilone, over the course of 6 months. Paclitaxel induced a persistent reduction in axon area density over the entire 6-month recovery period, unlike ixabepilone- or eribulin-treated animals. The abundance of myelin abnormalities rapidly declined after cessation of all drugs but recovered most slowly after paclitaxel treatment. Paclitaxel- and ixabepilone- but not eribulin-treated animals exhibited increased Schwann cell numbers during the recovery period. Tubulin composition and biochemistry rapidly returned from MTD-induced levels of α-tubulin, acetylated α-tubulin, and end-binding protein 1 to control levels following cessation of drug treatment. Taken together, sciatic nerve axons recovered more rapidly from morphological effects in eribulin- and ixabepilone-treated animals than in paclitaxel-treated animals and drug-induced increases in protein expression levels following paclitaxel and eribulin treatment were relatively transient.

TITAN: phase III study of doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by ixabepilone or paclitaxel in early-stage triple-negative breast cancer

PURPOSE

Ixabepilone is a microtubule stabilizer with activity in taxane-refractory metastatic breast cancer and low susceptibility to taxane-resistance mechanisms including multidrug-resistant phenotypes and high β-III tubulin expression. Since these resistance mechanisms are common in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC), ixabepilone may have particular advantages in this patient population. This study evaluated the substitution of ixabepilone for paclitaxel following doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide (AC) in the adjuvant treatment of early-stage TNBC.

METHODS

Patients with operable TNBC were eligible following definitive breast surgery. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive four cycles of AC followed by either four cycles (12 weeks) of ixabepilone or 12 weekly doses of paclitaxel.

RESULTS

614 patients were randomized: 306 to AC/ixabepilone and 308 to AC/paclitaxel. At a median follow-up of 48 months, 59 patients had relapsed (AC/ixabepilone, 29; AC/paclitaxel, 30). The median time from diagnosis to relapse was 20.8 months. The 5-year disease-free survival (DFS) rates of the two groups were similar [HR 0.92; ixabepilone 87.1% (95% CI 82.6-90.5) vs. paclitaxel 84.7% (95% CI 79.7-88.6)]. The estimated 5-year overall survival (OS) rates were also similar [HR 1.1; ixabepilone 89.7% (95% CI 85.5-92.7) vs. paclitaxel 89.6% (95% CI 85.0-92.9)]. Peripheral neuropathy was the most common grade 3/4 event. Dose reductions and treatment discontinuations occurred more frequently during paclitaxel treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

Treatment with AC/ixabepilone provided similar DFS and OS in patients with operable TNBC when compared to treatment with AC/paclitaxel. The two regimens had similar toxicity, although treatment discontinuation, dose modifications, and overall peripheral neuropathy were more frequent with AC/paclitaxel.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical Trials.gov Identifier, NCT00789581.

A phase II evaluation of ixabepilone in the treatment of recurrent/persistent carcinosarcoma of the uterus, an NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group study

BACKGROUND

The primary objectives were to determine the objective response rate (ORR) and safety profile of ixabepilone in women with recurrent or persistent uterine carcinosarcoma (UCS). Secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Exploratory translational objectives included characterization of class III beta tubulin expression and its association with response, PFS, and OS.

METHODS

Patients had measurable disease; up to two prior chemotherapeutic regimens were allowed, but must have included a taxane. Women received ixabepilone 40mg/m² as a 3hour IV infusion on day 1 of a 21daycycle. Treatment was continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurred.

RESULTS

Forty-two women were enrolled, with 34 eligible and evaluable. Median age was 68years. ECOG performance status was 0 in 56% of women, 38% had received radiation, and 15% had received 2 lines of chemotherapy. Overall ORR was 11.8% (4/34, 90% CI 4.2-25.1%); all were partial responses. Stable disease for at least 8weeks was achieved in 8 patients (23.5%). Median PFS and OS were 1.7mo and 7.7mo, respectively, with a median follow-up of 37mo. Six month PFS was 20.6%. Major grade≥3 toxicities were neutropenia (47%), fatigue (15%), dehydration (15%), hypertension (15%), and hyponatremia (15%); grade 2 peripheral neuropathy was reported in 18%. In this small sample size, class III beta tubulin expression in the primary tumor was not associated with the response to ixabepilone, PFS, or OS.

CONCLUSION

In this cohort of women, single agent ixabepilone showed modest but insufficient clinical activity.

Systematic review of ixabepilone for treating metastatic breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Ixabepilone is now a Food and Drug Administration-approved therapeutic option for patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) whose disease has progressed despite prior anthracycline and taxane therapy. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to systematically evaluate the efficacy and safety of ixabepilone for treating metastatic breast cancer.

METHODS

A systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted. Randomized controlled studies applying ixabepilone for treating MBC were included. The primary outcome was Overall Survival (OS). The authors of primary articles were contacted and methodological quality was evaluated. Subgroups were drawn based on intervention measures; heterogeneity and bias were discussed.

RESULTS

Eight studies with 5247 patients were included. Compared with a weekly schedule, a triweekly schedule of ixabepilone was better at improving overall response rate (ORR), while there were no differences in improving OS and progression-free survival (PFS). Ixabepilone plus capecitabine was superior to capecitabine monotherapy in improving OS, PFS and ORR. Paclitaxel was more effective than ixabepilone in terms of OS and PFS. There was no difference in the improvement of ORR, clinical benefit rate (CBR) and disease control rate (DCR) between ixabepilone and eribulin.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence suggests that a triweekly schedule of ixabepilone is more effective than weekly dosing in improving ORR. Use of ixabepilone in combination with capecitabine possesses superior clinical efficacy to the use of capecitabine alone. Paclitaxel was more effective than ixabepilone in terms of OS and PFS. The efficacy and safety between ixabepilone and eribulin were identical.

Silencing A7-nAChR levels increases the sensitivity of gastric cancer cells to ixabepilone treatment

Gastric cancer is an important health issue worldwide. Currently, improving the therapeutic efficacy of chemotherapy drugs is an important goal of cancer research. Alpha-7 nicotine acetylcholine receptor (A7-nAChR) is the key molecule that mediates gastric cancer progression, metastasis, and therapy responses; however, the role of A7-nAChR in the therapeutic efficacy of ixabepilone remains unclear. A7-nAChR expression was silenced by small interfering RNA (siRNA) technology. The cytotoxicity of ixabepilone was determined by 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assay and ixabepilone-induced apoptosis was analyzed by flow cytometry and annexin V/propidium iodide (PI) apoptotic assay. The expression patterns of anti-apoptotic proteins (AKT, phospho-AKT, Mcl-1, and Bcl-2) and pro-apoptotic proteins (Bad and Bax) were determined by western blot. Our study found that A7-nAChR knockdown (A7-nAChR-KD) AGS cells were more sensitive to ixabepilone administration than scrambled control AGS cells. We found that A7-nAChR knockdown enhanced ixabepilone-induced cell death as evidenced by the increased number of annexin V-positive (apoptotic) cells. After scrambled control and A7-nAChR-KD cells were treated with ixabepilone, we found that pAKT and AKT levels were significantly reduced in both groups of cells. The levels of Bcl-2 and the anti-apoptotic Mcl-1 isoform increased dramatically after ixabepilone treatment in scrambled control cells but not in A7-nAChR-KD cells. Bad and Bax levels did not change between the treatment group and vehicle group in both A7-nAChR-KD and scrambled control cells, whereas cleaved PARP levels dramatically increased in ixabepilone-treated A7-nAChR-KD cells. Our results demonstrated that knockdown of A7-nAChR enhanced the sensitivity of gastric cancer cells to ixabepilone administration. Thus, the A7-nAChR expression level in patients with gastric cancer may be a good indicator of ixabepilone sensitivity.

Phase II Randomized Study of Ixabepilone Versus Observation in Patients With Significant Residual Disease After Neoadjuvant Systemic Therapy for HER2-Negative Breast Cancer

BACKGROUND

Residual disease (RD) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy carries an increased risk for recurrence. Ixabepilone has activity in anthracycline/taxanes-resistant breast cancer. We explored adjuvant ixabepilone in patients with significant RD HER2-negative breast cancer.

METHODS

A phase II study in patients with residual cancer burden II or III randomized to ixabepilone versus observation was conducted. Circulating tumor cells (CTCs) were measured at baseline and at 9 and 18 weeks. Survival probabilities were estimated by Kaplan-Meier product limit. Toxicities were reported as proportions in the ixabepilone arm.

RESULTS

Accrual was stopped because of ixabepilone toxicity. Sixty-seven patients were registered; 43 were randomized, 19 received ixabepilone, and 24 went to observation. One patient (9.1%) in the observation arm versus 2 patients (18.2%) in the ixabepilone arm had CTCs at 18 weeks (P = 1.0). Three-year recurrence-free survival and overall survival were 94% and 82%, and 100% and 79% in the observation and ixabepilone arms (P = .35 and .18), respectively. Most common adverse events (AEs) included fatigue, pain, neuropathy, constipation, nausea, rash, anorexia, and diarrhea. Serious AEs included pain (63.2%), fatigue (31.6%), and neuropathy (31.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Adjuvant ixabepilone in patients with significant RD after neoadjuvant chemotherapy was difficult to administer because of AEs and did not change the presence of CTC or affect survival outcomes. NCT00877500.

Mechanism of action of ixabepilone and its interactions with the βIII-tubulin isotype

Ixabepilone (Ixempra, BMS-247550), a semisynthetic analog of epothilone B, is a microtubule-targeted drug in clinical use for treatment of metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer. Ixabepilone's binding and mechanism of action on microtubules and their dynamics, as well as its interactions with isotypically altered microtubules, both in vitro and in tumor cells, have not been described. Microtubules are dynamic polymers of the protein tubulin that function in mitosis, intracellular transport, cell proliferation, and migration. They continually undergo dynamic instability, periods of slow growth and rapid shortening that are crucial to these cell functions. We determined ixabepilone's microtubule binding and polymerization effects in vitro and also determined its effects on inhibition of dynamic instability in vitro and in cells, both with and without removal of the βIII isotype of tubulin. The βIII isotype of tubulin is associated with drug resistance and tumor aggressivity. We found that removal (in vitro) and knockdown (in cells) of βIII-tubulin led to increased inhibition of microtubule dynamic instability by ixabepilone. Depletion of βIII-tubulin from MCF7 human breast cancer cells also induced increased mitotic arrest by ixabepilone. Thus, βIII-tubulin expression suppresses the antitumor effects of ixabepilone, indicating that increased βIII-tubulin may be an important contributor to the development of resistance to ixabepilone.

Phase III randomized trial of second-line ixabepilone versus paclitaxel or doxorubicin in women with advanced endometrial cancer

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this multicenter, open label, randomized phase III study was to determine whether ixabepilone resulted in improved overall survival (OS) compared with commonly used single-agent chemotherapy (doxorubicin or paclitaxel) in women with locally advanced, recurrent, or metastatic endometrial cancer with at least one failed prior platinum-based chemotherapeutic regimen.

METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to ixabepilone (40mg/m(2)), or either paclitaxel (175mg/m(2)) or doxorubicin (60mg/m(2)), every 21days. Patients that had previously received an anthracycline were randomized to ixabepilone or paclitaxel; all other patients were randomized to ixabepilone or doxorubicin. An interim analysis of futility for OS was planned.

RESULTS

At the time of database lock, 496 patients were randomized to receive ixabepilone (n=248) or control (n=248); nine patients in the control arm were not treated. The interim analysis of futility for OS (219 events) favored the control chemotherapy arm (hazard ratio=1.3 [95% confidence interval: 1.0-1.7], stratified log rank test P=0.0397), indicating that the study would not meet its primary objective. The study was discontinued based on the interim OS results. The frequency of adverse events was comparable between the treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The study did not meet its primary objective of improving OS in the ixabepilone arm compared to the control chemotherapy arm. A favorable risk/benefit ratio was not observed for ixabepilone versus control at the time of the interim analysis. The safety results were consistent with the known safety profiles of ixabepilone and control.

Weekly ixabepilone with or without biweekly bevacizumab in the treatment of recurrent or persistent uterine and ovarian/primary peritoneal/fallopian tube cancers: A retrospective review

OBJECTIVE

To describe the clinical outcome and tolerability of weekly ixabepilone (16-20mg/m(2) days 1, 8, 15 of a 28-day cycle)±biweekly bevacizumab (10mg/kg days 1 and 15) in patients with recurrent/persistent uterine or ovarian/primary peritoneal/fallopian tube cancers.

METHODS

A single-institution retrospective review was performed inclusive of all patients who received ≥2cycles from 01/2010 to 06/2014. Progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival were determined using the Kaplan-Meier method. Toxicities were graded according to CTCAEv4.0. Best response was categorized using RECIST or by CA-125 criteria.

RESULTS

A total of 60 patients (24 uterine and 36 ovarian cancers) were identified. Patients had received a median of 3.5 (range:1-10) prior lines of chemotherapy. Patients completed a mean of 4.7±2.9cycles of ixabepilone; 66.7% (16/24) and 91.7% (33/36) of patients with uterine and ovarian cancers received concurrent bevacizumab. For uterine cancers, objective response rate (ORR) was 41.7% (12.5% complete, 29.2% partial); median duration of response or stabilization was 7months (range:2-30). Median PFS and OS were 5.2 and 9.6months, respectively. PFS and OS were improved in the setting of concurrent bevacizumab (6.5 versus 3.0months, p=0.01, HR 0.2, 95% CI 0.05-0.77; 9.6 versus 4.2months, p=0.02, HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.04-0.74). Similar ORR was observed among ovarian cancers; median PFS/OS were not yet reached. Most toxicities were grade 1/2.

CONCLUSIONS

Weekly ixabepilone with or without biweekly bevacizumab has promising activity and acceptable toxicity in patients with platinum-/taxane-resistant endometrial and ovarian cancers. This combination warrants further prospective study in these populations.

Ixabepilone alone or with cetuximab as first-line treatment for advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

BACKGROUND

Despite high initial sensitivity to chemotherapy, TNBC is associated with a poor prognosis, highlighting the need for novel therapeutic strategies. The aim of this multicenter, randomized, open-label phase II trial was to assess the efficacy of ixabepilone as monotherapy, and the combination of ixabepilone with cetuximab, as first-line treatment in patients with triple-negative locally advanced nonresectable and/or metastatic breast cancer.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women were randomly assigned to receive either ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2)) every 21 days (n = 40), or ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2)) every 21 days with cetuximab (400 mg/m(2) loading dose, followed by 250 mg/m(2)) once weekly (n = 39). The primary end point of the trial was to estimate the response rates of ixabepilone monotherapy and ixabepilone with cetuximab combination therapy.

RESULTS

Of 79 randomized patients, 77 were treated. Based on an intent-to-treat analysis, an objective response rate of 30% (95% confidence interval [CI], 16.6-46.5) was observed in the monotherapy arm, and 35.9% (95% CI, 21.2-52.8) in the combination arm. Median progression-free survival was 4.1 months in both treatment groups. Safety findings were consistent with the known individual toxicity profiles of ixabepilone and cetuximab. Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders were more common with combination therapy, as were discontinuations because of adverse events.

CONCLUSION

Ixabepilone monotherapy and the ixabepilone and cetuximab combination demonstrated similar levels of clinical activity in first-line treatment of advanced TNBC, with a predictable safety profile. Further investigation of novel therapies for TNBC is required to improve patient outcomes.

A Phase II evaluation of ixabepilone (IND #59699, NSC #710428) in the treatment of recurrent or persistent leiomyosarcoma of the uterus: an NRG Oncology/Gynecologic Oncology Group Study

OBJECTIVE

The combination of gemcitabine and docetaxel is the standard first-line therapy for recurrent or metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma. There is no standard second-line therapy. Ixabepilone is a semi-synthetic analog of epothilone B that binds to the same site on beta tubulin as paclitaxel and may be a more potent polymerizer of tubulin. We sought to determine the activity of ixabepilone as a single agent as second-line treatment for patients with metastatic uterine leiomyosarcoma who had received taxane based therapy.

METHODS

Eligible women with unresectable uterine leiomyosarcoma progressing after prior cytotoxic therapy containing a taxane were treated with ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2) on day one of a 21 day cycle. Patients with prior pelvic radiation were treated without dose reduction. Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) response was assessed by computed tomography (CT).

RESULTS

Twenty-three of 26 women were evaluable (two wrong histology, one never treated) with two of 23 receiving 1 cycle of therapy. There were no complete or partial responses. Stable disease (SD) was seen in four patients (17.4%, median 3.4 months). Seventeen patients (73.9%) had increasing disease (PD) and two patients were inevaluable per RECIST. One patient had SD over 6 cycles of treatment. Median PFS for all 23 patients was 1.4 months and overall survival was 7.0 months. The predominant grade 3 or 4 toxicity was uncomplicated myelosuppression: neutropenia grade 3 (13%), grade 4 (17%), and anemia grade 3 (22%).

CONCLUSION

Ixabepilone as a single agent is not an active second-line therapy for uterine leiomyosarcoma previously treated with a taxane.

Efficacy and safety of ixabepilone plus capecitabine in elderly patients with anthracycline- and taxane-pretreated metastatic breast cancer

OBJECTIVES

Data on chemotherapy regimens in elderly patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) are limited. The aim of this retrospective pooled analysis was to determine efficacy and safety of ixabepilone plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in patients with MBC aged ≥ 65 years.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A total of 1973 patients with MBC previously treated with or resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes were randomized in two open-label, multinational, phase 3 studies (study 046 and study 048). Patients received ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2) as a 3-hour intravenous infusion every 3 weeks) plus oral capecitabine (1000 mg/m(2) administered twice each day), or capecitabine alone (1250 mg/m(2) twice each day).

RESULTS

In total, 251 randomized patients were aged ≥ 65 years (ixabepilone plus capecitabine, n=116; capecitabine monotherapy, n=135). Efficacy results were consistent in patients aged <65 and ≥ 65 years with respect to the observed improvement in progression-free survival and objective response rate with ixabepilone plus capecitabine compared with capecitabine alone. No significant differences in overall survival between arms were observed for either subgroup. In the ixabepilone plus capecitabine arm, grade 3/4 hematologic adverse events (AEs) were similar in both subgroups except leukopenia and febrile neutropenia, which had a higher incidence in patients aged ≥ 65 years. The majority of grade 3/4 nonhematologic AEs were similar in the two subgroups, including fatigue, peripheral sensory neuropathy, and hand-foot syndrome.

CONCLUSION

The combination of ixabepilone plus capecitabine maintains its efficacy in elderly patients with anthracycline and taxane pretreated MBC, with a similar safety profile to patients aged < 65 years.

Neoadjuvant doxorubicin/cyclophosphamide followed by ixabepilone or paclitaxel in early stage breast cancer and evaluation of βIII-tubulin expression as a predictive marker

BACKGROUND

This randomized phase II trial was designed to compare the rate of pathologic complete response (pCR) induced by neoadjuvant cyclophosphamide plus doxorubicin (AC) followed by ixabepilone or paclitaxel in women with early stage breast cancer (BC). Expression of βIII-tubulin as a predictive marker was also evaluated.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Women with untreated, histologically confirmed primary invasive breast adenocarcinoma received four cycles of AC followed by 1:1 randomization to either ixabepilone 40 mg/m2 (3-hour infusion) every 3 weeks for four cycles (n = 148) or weekly paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 (1-hour infusion) for 12 weeks (n = 147). All patients underwent a core needle biopsy of the primary cancer for molecular marker analysis prior to chemotherapy. βIII-Tubulin expression was assessed using immunohistochemistry.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in the rate of pCR in the ixabepilone treatment arm (24.3%; 90% confidence interval [CI], 18.6-30.8) and the paclitaxel treatment arm (25.2%; 90% CI, 19.4-31.7). βIII-Tubulin-positive patients obtained higher pCR rates compared with βIII-tubulin-negative patients in both treatment arms; however, βIII-tubulin expression was not significantly associated with a differential response to ixabepilone or paclitaxel. The safety profiles of both regimens were generally similar, although neutropenia occurred more frequently in the ixabepilone arm (grade 3/4: 41.3% vs. 8.4%). The most common nonhematologic toxicity was peripheral neuropathy.

CONCLUSIONS

Neoadjuvant treatment of early stage BC with AC followed by ixabepilone every 3 weeks or weekly paclitaxel was well tolerated with no significant difference in efficacy. Higher response rates were observed among βIII-tubulin-positive patients.

A case report of breast cancer with extensive pulmonary lymphovascular tumor emboli

We describe a patient with breast cancer who relapsed with an extensive pulmonary lymphovascular tumor embolism. A 38-year-old female, who previously received neoadjuvant chemotherapy and curative resection of breast cancer, underwent adjuvant chemotherapy and was referred to the emergency room because of sudden-onset pleuritic chest pain lasting for 10 days. Despite a trial of empirical antibiotics, the chest pain and the extent of consolidative lung lesion on chest radiographs rapidly aggravated. We performed an open lung biopsy to confirm the etiology. The histopathological review revealed a hemorrhagic infarction caused by lymphovascular tumor emboli from a metastatic breast carcinoma. Palliative first-line chemotherapy was administered, consisting of ixabepilone and capecitabine, and the lung lesion improved markedly.

Ixabepilone as monotherapy or in combination with capecitabine for the treatment of advanced breast cancer

Breast Cancer is the most prevalent cancer in the world with 4.4 million survivors up to 5 years following the diagnosis.1 In the US alone approximately forty thousand women die annually of metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Despite many effective systemic treatment options approximately 50% of women with MBC succumb to the disease within 24 months of the diagnosis.2 Ixabepilone is a novel, first in class member of the epothilone class of antineoplastic agents. Ixabepilone is indicated as monotherapy for the treatment of metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer in patients whose tumors are resistant or refractory to anthracyclines, taxanes, and Capecitabine. Ixabepilone is also indicated in combination with Capecitabine for the treatment of patients with metastatic or locally advanced breast cancer resistant to treatment with an anthracycline and a taxane, or whose cancer is taxane resistant and for whom further anthracycline therapy is contraindicated. Ixabepilone was extensively studied as a single agent in patients with MBC and was found to be effective and well tolerated with a predictable and manageable safety profile. Not surprisingly prior exposure to anthracyclines and taxanes affects significantly the potential for response to therapy with single agent Ixabepilone in metastatic setting. MBC patients with taxane resistant MBC have objective response rate (RR) of 12%, patients with prior low exposure to taxanes and/or resistance RR = 22%, Ixabepilone treatment after adjuvant anthracycline therapy exposure renders RR = 42% and in Taxane naïve patients RR = 57%. In two large phase III studies of Ixabepilone + Capecitabine versus Capecitabine alone, progression free survival (PFS) and overall response rates (RR) were higher in the combination treatment arms, but no survival advantage was seen overall. Treatment with Ixabepilone + Capecitabine in a phase II study resulted in an overall response rate (ORR) of 23% in ER/PR/HER2 negative, triple-negative breast cancer patients (TNBC) while ORR of 31% was seen in a preplanned pooled analysis of TNBC in the phase III trials of Ixabepilone + Capecitabine. Significantly prolonged median PFS was seen for TNBC treated with the combination of Ixabepilone + Capecitabine compared to Capecitabine alone 4.2 vs. 1.7 months respectively. Ixabepilone as single agent appears to show excellent antitumor activity in patients with TNBC MBC. Addition of Ixabepilone to Capecitabine results in approximately doubling in median PFS for TNBC versus Capecitabine alone. Single agent Ixabepilone is generally well tolerated, and its toxicity profile does not overlap with that of Capecitabine and therefore depending on prior exposure to chemotherapy both single agent Ixabepilone or in combination with Capecitabine can be used safely and effectively for treatment of advanced breast cancer.