Role of KSP inhibitors as anti-cancer therapeutics: an update

Regardless of the growing discovery of anticancer treatments, targeting cancer-specific pathways, cytotoxic therapy still maintained its abundant clinical significance based on the fact that tumours harbour a greater population of actively dividing cells than normal tissues. Conventional anti-mitotic agents or microtubule poisons acting on the major mitotic spindle protein tubulin have been effectively used in clinical settings for cancer chemotherapy over the last three decades. However, use of these drugs is associated with limited clinical utility due to serious side effects such as debilitating and dose-limiting peripheral neuropathy, myelosuppression, drug resistance and allergic reactions. Therefore, research initiatives have been undertaken to develop novel microtubule motor proteins inhibitors that can potentially circumvent the limitations associated with conventional microtubule poisons. Kinesin spindle proteins (KSP) belonging to the kinesin-5 family play a crucial role during mitosis and unregulated cell proliferation. Several evidences from preclinical studies and different phases of clinical trials have presented kinesin spindle protein as a promising target for cancer therapeutics. kinesin spindle protein inhibitors causing mitosis disruption without interfering with microtubule dynamics in non-dividing cells offer a potential therapeutic alternative for the management of several major cancer types and are devoid of side effects associated with classical anti-mitotic drugs. This review summarizes recent data highlighting progress in the discovery of targeted KSP inhibitors and presents the development of scaffolds, structure-activity relationships, and outcomes of biological, and enzyme inhibition studies. We reviewed the recent literature reports published over last decade, using various electronic database searches such as PubMed, Embase, Medline, Web of Science, and Google Scholar. Clinical trial data till 2021 was retrieved from ClinicalTrial.gov. Major chemical classes developed as selective KSP inhibitors include dihydropyrimidines, β-carbolines, carbazoles, benzimidazoles, fused aryl derivatives, pyrimidines, fused pyrimidines, quinazolines, quinolones, thiadiazolines, spiropyran and azobenzenes. Drugs such as filanesib, litronesib, ispinesib have entered clinical trials, the most advanced phase explored being Phase II. KSP inhibitors have exhibited promising results; however, continued exploration is greatly required to establish the clinical potential of KSP inhibitors.

Phase Ib/II Pomdefil clinical trial conducted by the Spanish MM group

This phase I/II trial evaluated the combination of the kinesin spindle protein inhibitor filanesib with pomalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) patients. Forty-seven RRMM patients with a median of three prior lines (2-8) and 94% refractory to lenalidomide were included: 14 in phase I and 33 in phase II. The recommended dose was 1·25 mg/m² of filanesib on days 1, 2, 15, 16, with pomalidomide 4 mg on days 1-21 and dexamethasone 40 mg weekly. The defined threshold for success was achieved, with 18 out of 31 patients obtaining at least minor response (MR) in the phase II. In the global population, 51% of patients achieved at least partial response (PR) and 60% ≥MR, resulting in a median progression-free survival (mPFS) of seven months and overall survival (OS) of 19 months. The main toxicity was haematological. Importantly, patients with low serum levels of alpha 1-acid glycoprotein (AAG) at baseline (<800 mg/l) had a superior response (overall response rate of 62% vs. 17%; P = 0·04), which also translated into a longer mPFS (9 vs. 2 months; P = 0·014). In summary, filanesib with pomalidomide and dexamethasone is active in RRMM although with significant haematological toxicity. Most importantly, high levels of AAG can identify patients unlikely to respond to this strategy. Trial registration: clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02384083.

KIF15 nanomechanics and kinesin inhibitors, with implications for cancer chemotherapeutics

Eg5, a mitotic kinesin, has been a target for anticancer drug development. Clinical trials of small-molecule inhibitors of Eg5 have been stymied by the development of resistance, attributable to mitotic rescue by a different endogenous kinesin, KIF15. Compared with Eg5, relatively little is known about the properties of the KIF15 motor. Here, we employed single-molecule optical-trapping techniques to define the KIF15 mechanochemical cycle. We also studied the inhibitory effects of KIF15-IN-1, an uncharacterized, commercially available, small-molecule inhibitor, on KIF15 motility. To explore the complementary behaviors of KIF15 and Eg5, we also scored the effects of small-molecule inhibitors on admixtures of both motors, using both a microtubule (MT)-gliding assay and an assay for cancer cell viability. We found that (i) KIF15 motility differs significantly from Eg5; (ii) KIF15-IN-1 is a potent inhibitor of KIF15 motility; (iii) MT gliding powered by KIF15 and Eg5 only ceases when both motors are inhibited; and (iv) pairing KIF15-IN-1 with Eg5 inhibitors synergistically reduces cancer cell growth. Taken together, our results lend support to the notion that a combination drug therapy employing both inhibitors may be a viable strategy for overcoming chemotherapeutic resistance.

A phase 1 dose-escalation study of filanesib plus bortezomib and dexamethasone in patients with recurrent/refractory multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND

Filanesib is a kinesin spindle protein inhibitor that has demonstrated encouraging activity in patients with recurrent/refractory multiple myeloma. Preclinical synergy with bortezomib was the rationale for the current phase 1 study.

METHODS

The current study was a multicenter study with an initial dose-escalation phase to determine the maximum tolerated dose of 2 schedules of filanesib plus bortezomib with and without dexamethasone, followed by a dose-expansion phase.

RESULTS

With the addition of prophylactic filgastrim, the maximum planned dose was attained: 1.3 mg/m² /day of bortezomib plus 40 mg of dexamethasone on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle, with filanesib given intravenously either at a dose of 1.5 mg/m² /day (schedule 1: days 1, 2, 15, and 16) or 3 mg/m² /day (schedule 2: days 1 and 15). The most common adverse events (assessed for severity using version 4.0 of the National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events) were transient, noncumulative neutropenia and thrombocytopenia with grade 3/4 events reported in 44% (16% in cycle 1 with filgastrim) and 29% of patients, respectively. A low (≤11%) overall rate of nonhematological grade 3/4 toxicity was observed. With a median of 3 prior lines of therapy and 56% of patients with disease that was refractory to proteasome inhibitors, the overall response rate was 20% (55 patients), and was 29% in 14 patients with proteasome inhibitors-refractory disease receiving filanesib at a dose of ≥1.25 mg/m² (duration of response, 5.2 to ≥21.2 months).

CONCLUSIONS

The current phase 1 study established a dosing schedule for the combination of these agents that demonstrated a favorable safety profile with a low incidence of nonhematologic toxicity and manageable hematologic toxicity. The combination of filanesib, bortezomib, and dexamethasone appears to have durable activity in patients with recurrent/refractory multiple myeloma. Cancer 2016;122:3327-3335. © 2016 American Cancer Society.