A Phase Ib Expansion Cohort Evaluating Aurora A Kinase Inhibitor Alisertib and Dual TORC1/2 Inhibitor Sapanisertib in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

BACKGROUND

This study further evaluated the safety and efficacy of the combination of alisertib and sapanisertib in an expansion cohort of patients, including a subset of patients with refractory pancreatic adenocarcinoma, with further evaluation of the pharmacodynamic characteristics of combination therapy.

METHODS

Twenty patients with refractory solid tumors and 11 patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma were treated at the recommended phase 2 dose of alisertib and sapanisertib. Adverse events and disease response were assessed. Patients in the expansion cohort were treated with a 7-day lead-in of either alisertib or sapanisertib prior to combination therapy, with tumor tissue biopsy and serial functional imaging performed for correlative analysis.

RESULTS

Toxicity across treatment groups was overall similar to prior studies. One partial response to treatment was observed in a patient with ER positive breast cancer, and a patient with pancreatic cancer experienced prolonged stable disease. In an additional cohort of pancreatic cancer patients, treatment response was modest. Correlative analysis revealed variability in markers of apoptosis and immune cell infiltrate according to lead-in therapy and response.

CONCLUSIONS

Dual targeting of Aurora A kinase and mTOR resulted in marginal clinical benefit in a population of patients with refractory solid tumors, including pancreatic adenocarcinoma, though individual patients experienced significant response to therapy. Correlatives indicate apoptotic response and tumor immune cell infiltrate may affect clinical outcomes.

Claims analysis of hypertension occurrence, severity changes and patterns of antihypertensive use in cancer patients receiving vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors

Background

Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors such as bevacizumab, sorafenib, and sunitinib are utilized in the treatment of multiple cancers. Although these agents are associated with hypertension, there is a lack of evidence describing patterns of antihypertensive use in patients with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-associated hypertension in a non-trial, “real-world” setting.

Objective

To describe the occurrence and severity of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-associated hypertension, patterns of antihypertensive use and occurrence of cardiovascular complications in a non-trial population, and to describe patterns of initial antihypertensive therapy in patients developing hypertension during treatment with a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study utilized claims data from the Medstat MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounter database to identify patients with claims for a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor and a diagnosis of cancer using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes, Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System J-codes and National Drug Codes. The study period encompassed claims from one year before the patient’s first claim for a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, and continued through one year after the initial vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor claim. Patients meeting study criteria were classified into cohorts A1, patients with no hypertension throughout the study period; A2, patients without hypertension at baseline who developed hypertension after starting a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor; and cohort B, patients with hypertension prior to receiving a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor. We utilized medical and pharmacy claims data to describe the presence of hypertension, its severity, and the occurrence of cardiovascular complications throughout the study period. Initial antihypertensive use in cohort A2 was described.

Results

In all, 2177 patients met study criteria and were categorized into cohorts A1 (n = 708), A2 (n = 333) and B (n = 1136). Approximately 32% of patients without hypertension at baseline had claims suggestive for hypertension during the study period. Life-threatening (Grade 4) hypertension increased throughout the study period for cohorts A1, A2, and B, to 3.4%, 10.2%, and 16.4%, respectively ( p < 0.001 for all). Claims suggestive of Grade 3 hypertension occurred in more patients in cohort B (45.8%) than in cohort A2 (32.7%, p < 0.001). Cardiovascular complications occurred in 4.7%, 15.6%, and 22.7% of patients in cohorts A1, A2, and B, respectively. Initial antihypertensive agent selection did not impact the occurrence of cardiovascular complications in cohort A2.

Conclusion

Our study provides valuable insight into non-trial patterns of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-associated hypertension occurrence and severity, and is consistent with prior claims analysis. Identification of optimal strategies to manage vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-associated hypertension remain to be clarified with the advent of more comprehensive data sets.

A phase I safety, pharmacological, and biological study of the farnesyl protein transferase inhibitor, lonafarnib (SCH 663366), in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine in patients with advanced solid tumors

PURPOSE

This phase I study was conducted to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacological properties and biological activity of the combination of the lonafarnib, a farnesylproteintransferase (FTPase) inhibitor, with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced solid malignancies.

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

This was a single institution study to determine the maximal tolerated dose (MTD) of escalating lonafarnib (75-125 mg po BID) with gemcitabine (750-1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15) and fixed cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) day 1) every 28 days. Due to dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in initial patients, these patients were considered "heavily pre-treated" and the protocol was amended to limit prior therapy and re-escalate lonafarnib in "less heavily pre-treated patients" on 28-day and 21-day schedules. Cycle 1 and 2 pharmacokinetics (PK), and farnesylation of the HDJ2 chaperone protein and FPTase activity were analyzed.

RESULTS

Twenty-two patients received 53 courses of therapy. Nausea, vomiting, and fatigue were frequent in all patients. Severe toxicities were observed in 91% of patients: neutropenia (41%), nausea (36%), thrombocytopenia (32%), anemia (23%) and vomiting (23%). Nine patients withdrew from the study due to toxicity. DLTs of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and fatigue limited dose-escalation on the 28-day schedule. The MTD was established as lonafarnib 75 mg BID, gemcitabine 750 mg/m(2) days 1, 8, 15, and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) in heavily pre-treated patients. The MTD in the less heavily pre-treated patients could not be established on the 28-day schedule as DLTs were observed at the lowest dose level, and dose escalation was not completed on the 21-day schedule due to early study termination by the Sponsor. No PK interactions were observed. FTPase inhibition was not observed at the MTD, however HDJ-2 gel shift was observed in one patient at the 100 mg BID lonafarnib dose. Anti-cancer activity was observed: four patients had stable disease lasting >2 cycles, one subject had a complete response, and another had a partial response, both with metastatic breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

Lonafarnib 75 mg BID, gemcitabine 750 mg/m(2) days 1, 8, 15, and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) day 1 on a 28-day schedule was established as the MTD. Lonafarnib did not demonstrate FTPase inhibition at these doses. Despite the observed efficacy, substantial toxicity and questionable contribution of anti-tumor activity of lonafarnib to gemcitabine and cisplatin limits further exploration of this combination.