Phase II Study Investigating the Safety and Efficacy of Savolitinib and Durvalumab in Metastatic Papillary Renal Cancer (CALYPSO)

PURPOSE

Metastatic papillary renal cancer (PRC) has poor outcomes, and new treatments are required. There is a strong rationale for investigating mesenchymal epithelial transition receptor (MET) and programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) inhibition in this disease. In this study, the combination of savolitinib (MET inhibitor) and durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) is investigated.

METHODS

This single-arm phase II trial explored durvalumab (1,500 mg once every four weeks) and savolitinib (600 mg once daily; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02819596). Treatment-naïve or previously treated patients with metastatic PRC were included. A confirmed response rate (cRR) of > 50% was the primary end point. Progression-free survival, tolerability, and overall survival were secondary end points. Biomarkers were explored from archived tissue (MET-driven status).

RESULTS

Forty-one patients treated with advanced PRC were enrolled into this study and received at least one dose of study treatment. The majority of patients had Heng intermediate risk score (n = 26 [63%]). The cRR was 29% (n = 12; 95% CI, 16 to 46), and the trial therefore missed the primary end point. The cRR increased to 53% (95% CI, 28 to 77) in MET-driven patients (n/N = 9/27) and was 33% (95% CI, 17 to 54) in PD-L1-positive tumors (n/N = 9/27). The median progression-free survival was 4.9 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 10.0) in the treated population and 12.0 months (95% CI, 2.9 to 19.4) in MET-driven patients. The median overall survival was 14.1 months (95% CI, 7.3 to 30.7) in the treated population and 27.4 months (95% CI, 9.3 to not reached [NR]) in MET-driven patients. Grade 3 and above treatment related adverse events occurred in 17 (41%) patients. There was 1 grade 5 treatment-related adverse event (cerebral infarction).

CONCLUSION

The combination of savolitinib and durvalumab was tolerable and associated with high cRRs in the exploratory MET-driven subset.

DNA alterations in papillary renal cancer

725

Background: The characterisation of DNA alternations in papillary renal cancer (PRC) is unclear. The CALYPSO trial (NCT02819596) prospectively evaluated combination therapy of savolitinib (MET inhibitor) and durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) in PRC. The trial showed high response rates (RR) in the MET-driven population. Here we explore the relationship between MET, PD-L1 and TMB in these tumours and the relevance of other biomarkers including PIK3CA, PTEN and KRAS. Methods: FoundationOne analysis from 41 samples of PRC patients enrolled on the CALYPSO trial was performed. The relevance of co-positivity between MET/PD-L1 and MET/TMB as well as analysis of other DNA alterations such as PIK3CA, PTEN and KRAS was explored. Outcome parameters were correlated with RR, PFS and OS. Results: 41% of patients were MET-driven, 66% were PD-L1+ (vCPS≥1) and 3% were TMB >10mut/Mb. Further testing used TMB ≥ median (2.52mut/Mb) 32% of patients were both MET-driven and PD-L1+. 17% of patients were both MET-driven and TMB ≥ median. RR and survival outcomes for combinations are shown in the table. The overall RR in MET driven and non-MET-driven patients was 52.9% and 13%, respectively. The median PFS and OS in the MET-driven group was 12.0 months (95% CI: 2.9-19.4) and 27.4 months (95% CI: 9.3-not reached [NR]), respectively, compared to a median PFS and OS in the non-MET-driven group of 2.7 months (95% CI: 0.5-5.0) and 7.5 months (95% CI: 0.0-16.0), respectively. PIK3CA, PTEN and KRAS mutations occurred in 1, 4 and 2 patients, with RR of 0% (0/1), 25% (1/4) and 50% (1/2), in the PIK3CA, PTEN and KRAS groups, respectively. Conclusions: MET-driven papillary cancers have low mutational burden, but high PD-L1 expression. Small patient numbers limit definitive conclusions, but responses occur irrespective of the immune biomarkers investigated. Other DNA alterations are rare and did not appear to influence outcomes in this cohort. These data support the design of the SAMETA trial (NCT05043090), further investigating the savolitinib and durvalumab combination. [Table: see text]

Health-Related Quality of Life Outcomes With Two Different Starting Doses of Lenvatinib in Combination With Everolimus for Previously Treated Renal Cell Carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Preserving health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important goal during renal cell carcinoma treatment. We report HRQOL outcomes from a phase II trial (NCT03173560).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

HRQOL data were collected during a multicenter, randomized, open-label phase II study comparing the safety and efficacy of 2 different starting doses of lenvatinib (18 mg vs. 14 mg daily) in combination with everolimus (5 mg daily), following one prior vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted treatment. HRQOL was measured using 3 different instruments-FKSI-DRS, EORTC QLQ-C30, and EQ-5D-3L-which were all secondary endpoints. Change from baseline was assessed using linear mixed-effects models. Deterioration events for time to deterioration (TTD) analyses were defined using established thresholds for minimally important differences in the change from baseline for each scale. TTD for each treatment arm was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of the 343 participants randomly assigned to 18 mg lenvatinib (n = 171) and 14 mg lenvatinib (n = 172) were well balanced. Least-squares mean estimates for change from baseline were favorable for the 18 mg group over the 14 mg group for the FKSI-DRS and most EORTC QLQ-C30 scales, but differences between treatments did not exceed the minimally important thresholds. Median TTD was longer among participants in the 18 mg group than those in the 14 mg group for most scales.

CONCLUSIONS

Participants who received an 18 mg lenvatinib starting dose had favorable HRQOL scores and longer TTD on most scales compared with those who received a 14 mg starting dose.

Lenvatinib dose, efficacy, and safety in the treatment of multiple malignancies

INTRODUCTION

Lenvatinib is an oral multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor that has shown efficacy and manageable safety across multiple cancer types. The recommended starting doses for lenvatinib differ across cancer types and indications based on whether it is used as monotherapy or as combination therapy.

AREAS COVERED

This review covers clinical trials that established the dosing paradigm and efficacy of lenvatinib and defined its adverse-event profile as a monotherapy; or in combination with the mTOR inhibitor, everolimus; or the anti-PD-1 antibody, pembrolizumab; and/or chemotherapy.

EXPERT OPINION

Lenvatinib has been established as standard-of-care either as a monotherapy or in combination with other anticancer agents for the treatment of radioiodine-refractory differentiated thyroid carcinoma, hepatocellular carcinoma, renal cell carcinoma, and endometrial carcinoma, and is being investigated further across several other tumor types. The dosing and adverse-event management strategies for lenvatinib have been developed through extensive clinical trial experience. Collectively, the data provide the rationale to start lenvatinib at the recommended doses and then interrupt or dose reduce as necessary to achieve required dose intensity for maximized patient benefit. The adverse-event profile of lenvatinib is consistent with that of other tyrosine kinase inhibitors, and clinicians are encouraged to review and adopt relevant symptom-management strategies.

Imaging Modality and Frequency in Surveillance of Stage I Seminoma Testicular Cancer: Results From a Randomized, Phase III, Noninferiority Trial (TRISST)

PURPOSE

Survival in stage I seminoma is almost 100%. Computed tomography (CT) surveillance is an international standard of care, avoiding adjuvant therapy. In this young population, minimizing irradiation is vital. The Trial of Imaging and Surveillance in Seminoma Testis (TRISST) assessed whether magnetic resonance images (MRIs) or a reduced scan schedule could be used without an unacceptable increase in advanced relapses.

METHODS

A phase III, noninferiority, factorial trial. Eligible participants had undergone orchiectomy for stage I seminoma with no adjuvant therapy planned. Random assignment was to seven CTs (6, 12, 18, 24, 36, 48, and 60 months); seven MRIs (same schedule); three CTs (6, 18, and 36 months); or three MRIs. The primary outcome was 6-year incidence of Royal Marsden Hospital stage ≥ IIC relapse (> 5 cm), aiming to exclude increases ≥ 5.7% (from 5.7% to 11.4%) with MRI (v CT) or three scans (v 7); target N = 660, all contributing to both comparisons. Secondary outcomes include relapse ≥ 3 cm, disease-free survival, and overall survival. Intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses were performed.

RESULTS

Six hundred sixty-nine patients enrolled (35 UK centers, 2008-2014); mean tumor size was 2.9 cm, and 358 (54%) were low risk (< 4 cm, no rete testis invasion). With a median follow-up of 72 months, 82 (12%) relapsed. Stage ≥ IIC relapse was rare (10 events). Although statistically noninferior, more events occurred with three scans (nine, 2.8%) versus seven scans (one, 0.3%): 2.5% absolute increase, 90% CI (1.0 to 4.1). Only 4/9 could have potentially been detected earlier with seven scans. Noninferiority of MRI versus CT was also shown; fewer events occurred with MRI (two [0.6%] v eight [2.6%]), 1.9% decrease (-3.5 to -0.3). Per-protocol analyses confirmed noninferiority. Five-year survival was 99%, with no tumor-related deaths.

CONCLUSION

Surveillance is a safe management approach-advanced relapse is rare, salvage treatment successful, and outcomes excellent, regardless of imaging frequency or modality. MRI can be recommended to reduce irradiation; and no adverse impact on long-term outcomes was seen with a reduced schedule.

Assessing the Safety and Efficacy of Two Starting Doses of Lenvatinib Plus Everolimus in Patients with Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Randomized Phase 2 Trial

BACKGROUND

Lenvatinib (18 mg) plus everolimus (5 mg) is approved for patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after one or more prior antiangiogenic therapies.

OBJECTIVE

To assess whether a lower starting dose of lenvatinib has comparable efficacy with improved tolerability for patients with advanced RCC treated with lenvatinib plus everolimus.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

A randomized, open-label, phase 2 global trial was conducted in patients with advanced clear cell RCC and disease progression after one prior vascular endothelial growth factor-targeted therapy (prior anti-programmed death-1/programmed death ligand-1 therapy permitted).

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to the 14- or 18-mg lenvatinib starting dose, both in combination with everolimus 5 mg/d. Patients in the 14-mg arm were to be uptitrated to lenvatinib 18 mg at cycle 2, day 1, barring intolerable grade 2 or any grade ≥3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) requiring dose reduction occurring in the first 28-d cycle.

OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS AND STATISTICAL ANALYSIS

The primary efficacy endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) as of week 24 (ORR_wk24); the noninferiority threshold of the 14- versus 18-mg arm was p ≤ 0.045. The primary safety endpoint was the proportion of patients with intolerable grade 2 or any grade ≥3 TEAEs within 24 wk of randomization.

RESULTS AND LIMITATIONS

The ORR_wk24 for the 14-mg arm (32% [95% confidence interval {CI} 25-39]) was not noninferior to the ORR_wk24 in the 18-mg arm (35% [95% CI 27-42]; odds ratio: 0.88; 90% CI 0.59-1.32; p = 0.3). The proportion of intolerable grade 2 or any grade ≥3 TEAEs was similar between the two arms (14 mg, 83% vs 18 mg, 80%; p = 0.5). The secondary endpoints of overall ORR, progression-free survival, and overall survival numerically favored the 18-mg arm. A limitation of this study was that the study design did not allow for a full comparison of progression-free survival between treatment arms.

CONCLUSIONS

The study findings support the approved dosing regimen of lenvatinib 18 mg plus everolimus 5 mg daily for patients with advanced RCC.

PATIENT SUMMARY

In this report, we examined two doses of lenvatinib (the approved 18-mg dose and a lower dose of 14 mg) in people with advanced renal cell carcinoma to determine whether the lower dose (which was increased to the approved 18-mg dose after the first treatment cycle) could improve safety without affecting efficacy. The results showed that the efficacy of the lower lenvatinib dose (14 mg) was not the same as that of the approved (18 mg) dose, although safety results were similar, so the approved lenvatinib 18-mg dose should still be used.

Post hoc analysis of the CLEAR study in advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC): Effect of subsequent therapy on survival outcomes in the lenvatinib (LEN) + everolimus (EVE) versus sunitinib (SUN) treatment arms

4562

Background: The multicenter, open-label, randomized, phase 3 CLEAR study showed that LEN + EVE had a significant PFS benefit (HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.53-0.80, P<0.001) and improved objective response rate (relative risk 1.48, 95% CI 1.26-1.74) vs SUN in the first-line treatment of patients (pts) with advanced RCC. The difference in overall survival (OS) for LEN + EVE vs SUN was not statistically significant (HR 1.15, 95% CI 0.88-1.50) (Motzer R et al. NEJM. 2021). Post hoc subgroup analyses were performed to assess the impact of subsequent therapy on OS. Methods: Pts in the CLEAR study were randomly assigned (1:1:1) to 1 of 3 treatment arms, including LEN 18 mg + EVE 5 mg once daily (QD) and SUN 50 mg QD (4 weeks on then 2 weeks off). These post hoc analyses examined OS by subsequent systemic anticancer medication in the LEN + EVE and SUN arms. Hazard ratios (HR; LEN + EVE vs SUN) were based on stratified (geographic region and MSKCC prognostic risk groups) Cox proportional hazards model. Results: Among 1069 pts with advanced RCC randomized in the CLEAR study, 714 pts were randomly assigned to the LEN + EVE and SUN arms (N=357/each). The median duration of survival follow-up was 27 months in the LEN + EVE arm and 26 months in the SUN arm. Given the shorter median duration of study treatment with SUN (7.8 months) vs LEN + EVE (11.0 months), more pts in the SUN arm received subsequent anticancer therapy during survival follow-up (LEN + EVE, n=167; SUN, n=206). Among pts who received subsequent therapy, pts in the LEN + EVE arm had a longer median time from randomization to initiation of subsequent therapy vs those in the SUN arm (8.0 vs 6.6 months, respectively). OS for the overall population, for pts with no subsequent anticancer therapy, and for pts with no subsequent immunotherapy is shown in the table. In the US population subgroup (LEN + EVE, n=62; SUN, n=61) of the CLEAR study, in which a similar number of pts received subsequent systemic anticancer therapies in the LEN + EVE vs SUN arms (62.9% vs 65.6%, respectively), OS was comparable among the 2 arms (HR 0.95, 95% CI 0.51-1.76). Overall, the safety profile was consistent with the known safety profiles of LEN + EVE and SUN. In both arms, most treatment-emergent deaths were due to progressive disease; there were few treatment-related deaths (<1%, per arm) and no clustering of events. Conclusions: In the CLEAR study, LEN + EVE met the primary endpoint of a significant benefit in PFS vs SUN. The results of these exploratory analyses suggest that subsequent systemic anticancer therapy affected the OS outcome results for LEN + EVE vs SUN in the CLEAR study. Clinical trial information: NCT02811861. [Table: see text]

Clinical activity of durvalumab and savolitinib in MET-driven, metastatic papillary renal cancer

4511

Background: Savolitinib is a potent and selective MET inhibitor with activity in MET-driven papillary renal cancer (PRC). Durvalumab is a PD-L1 inhibitor which has been tested in combination with savolitinib in metastatic PRC with response rates of 29% (12/41). Here we describe the efficacy of this combination in MET-driven metastatic PRC. Methods: This single arm phase I/II trial explored durvalumab (1500mg Q4W) and savolitinib (600mg OD) together in metastatic PRC, with a 4wk savolitinib run in. Biomarker analysis results were compared with responses to treatment as planned in the protocol. The analysis presented here focuses on those patients with MET DNA alterations (central analysis:chromosome 7 gain/MET or HGF amplification/MET kinase domain mutations). Confirmed response rate (RR) (RECIST v1.1), progression-free survival (PFS), tolerability (CTCAE v4.03) and overall survival (OS) were analysed. Results: 42 patients were enrolled in the metastatic papillary cohort, of which 41 patients received treatment. The median follow up was 26.8 months. The confirmed RR was 29% (12/41) and median PFS was 4.9 months (95% CI 2.5-10.0). 14/41 (34%) of these patients had MET-driven disease. 71% (10/14) of MET-driven patients had not previously received systemic therapy and 7% (1/14) were PD-L1 positive. IMDC good, intermediate, and poor risk disease occurred in 36% (5/14), 57% (8/14), and 7% (1/14) of MET-driven patients respectively. Confirmed RR in MET-driven patients was 57% (8/14) with duration of response at 9.4 months (95% CI 3.9-Not reached [NR]). Median PFS and OS in MET-driven patients were 10.5 months (95% CI 2.9-15.7) and 27.4 months (95% CI 7.3-NR) respectively. No new safety signals were seen. Conclusions: The combination of savolitinib and durvalumab has clinical activity in MET-driven PRC. A randomised phase III study is planned based upon these data. Clinical trial information: NCT02819596.

Phase II trial of lenvatinib (LEN) at two starting doses + everolimus (EVE) in patients (pts) with renal cell carcinoma (RCC): Results by independent imaging review (IIR) and prior immune checkpoint inhibition (ICI)

307

Background: LEN 18 mg + EVE 5 mg is approved for advanced RCC following anti-angiogenic therapy. Study 218 was a phase II study evaluating LEN 14 mg vs LEN 18 mg, both in combination with EVE 5 mg, for the treatment of clear cell RCC following treatment with a VEGF-targeted therapy. We have previously reported that the LEN 14 mg arm did not demonstrate noninferiority vs the LEN 18 mg arm for objective response rate (ORR) as of wk 24 by investigator assessment, the primary endpoint of the study. In this exploratory analysis of Study 218 data, we evaluated the efficacy of LEN 14 mg vs LEN 18 mg, both in combination with EVE 5 mg, per IIR assessment and by prior ICI status per investigator assessment. Methods: Pts with measurable clear cell RCC (1 prior VEGF-targeted therapy; prior PD-1/PD-L1 therapy permitted) were randomly assigned 1:1 to LEN 14 mg or 18 mg (starting dose) + EVE 5 mg daily. 115 pts in the LEN 14 mg arm were titrated to LEN 18 mg at cycle 2 as they did not experience intolerable grade 2 or any grade ≥3 TEAEs requiring dose reduction within cycle 1. We analyzed ORR and PFS by IIR per RECIST v1.1; additionally, efficacy endpoints (ORR, PFS, and OS) were analyzed by investigator assessment per RECIST v1.1 by prior ICI status. Results: 311 pts (LEN 14 mg arm, n=156; LEN 18 mg arm, n=155) were included in the efficacy analysis and 341 pts (LEN 14 mg arm, n=173; LEN 18 mg arm, n=168) were included in the summary safety analysis. ORR by IIR (LEN 14 mg arm: 39.7%, 95% CI 32.1–47.4; LEN 18 mg arm: 38.7%, 95% CI 31.0–46.4) was similar between treatment arms. PFS by IIR was numerically longer in the LEN 18 mg arm (median 12.9 mos, 95% CI 9.2–17.1) vs the LEN 14 mg arm (median 11.0 mos, 95% CI 9.3–12.9). OS was numerically longer in the LEN 18 mg arm (median not evaluable [NE], 95% CI 23.8–NE) vs the LEN 14 mg arm (median 27.0 mos, 95% CI 18.3-NE) (previously reported). In 82 pts with prior ICI, for the LEN 14 mg (n=43) vs 18 mg (n=39) arms (95% CI): ORR was 30.2% (17.2–46.1) vs 51.3% (34.8–67.6) by investigator assessment, respectively; median PFS was 12.0 mos (8.9–16.7) vs 12.9 mos (8.4–NE) by investigator assessment, respectively; and median OS was 17.1 mos (10.6–NE) vs 18.0 mos (13.1–NE), respectively. Endpoints were generally numerically improved in the LEN 18 mg arm in pts without prior ICI (data will be presented). As previously reported, the safety profile was similar in both treatment arms: 71.7% of pts in the LEN 14 mg arm and 76.8% of pts in the LEN 18 mg arm had grade 3/4 TEAEs. Conclusions: ORR was similar between treatment arms and PFS was numerically longer in the LEN 18 mg arm per IIR. Efficacy outcomes were generally numerically improved for the LEN 18 mg arm compared with the LEN 14 mg arm, regardless of prior ICI. As previously reported, safety was similar in both treatment arms. These results further support starting pts with RCC at the higher 18 mg dose of LEN + EVE 5 mg. Clinical trial information: NCT03173560 .

Health-related quality-of-life outcomes from a phase II open-label trial of two different starting doses of lenvatinib in combination with everolimus for treatment of renal cell carcinoma following one prior VEGF-targeted treatment

314

Background: Renal cell carcinoma (RCC) is the most common type of kidney cancer, constituting 80% to 85% of primary renal neoplasms. Preserving health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important goal during RCC treatment, but HRQOL analyses in prospective clinical trials in RCC are limited. We report changes in HRQOL, a secondary endpoint of this phase II trial. Methods: HRQOL data were collected during a multicenter, randomized, open-label phase II study comparing the safety and efficacy of two different starting doses of lenvatinib (18 mg vs. 14 mg daily [QD]) in combination with everolimus (5 mg QD), following one prior vascular endothelial growth factor–targeted treatment (NCT03173560). HRQOL was measured using three different instruments, including the FKSI-DRS, EORTC QLQ-C30, and EQ-5D-3L. Change from baseline HRQOL was assessed using linear mixed-effects models. Deterioration events for time to deterioration (TTD) analyses were defined using established thresholds for minimally important differences in the change from baseline for each scale (i.e., 10 points for EORTC, 3 points for FKSI-DRS, 0.08 points for EQ-5D index, and 10 points for EQ-VAS). The distribution of TTD and median TTD for each treatment arm were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: Baseline characteristics, including baseline scores of the 343 participants randomly assigned to 14 mg QD lenvatinib (n = 172) and 18 mg QD lenvatinib (n = 171), were well balanced. The average scores for the 18 mg QD group were generally higher, with lower symptom severity than the 14 mg QD group. The least squares mean estimates for change from baseline were favorable for the 18 mg QD group over the 14 mg QD group for the FKSI-DRS and most EORTC QLQ-C30 scales; however, the differences between treatments did not exceed the minimally important difference for clinical significance. Both study arms showed an increase diarrhea severity. Median TTD was longer among participants in the 18 mg QD group than those in the 14 mg QD group for most scales. Conclusions: In most scales, participants who received an 18 mg QD lenvatinib starting dose had better HRQOL and longer time to deterioration than those who received a 14 mg QD starting dose. These findings suggest that the approved treatment regimen of an 18 mg starting dose of lenvatinib in combination with everolimus remains favorable for RCC treatment, following one prior vascular endothelial growth factor–targeted treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT03173560 .

Overall survival results for durvalumab and savolitinib in metastatic papillary renal cancer

619

Background: There is a strong rationale for investigating MET and PD-L1 inhibition in metastatic papillary renal cancer (PRC). We previously reported response rates (RR) and progression free survival (PFS) for savolitinib (MET inhibitor) and durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) together. Here we report overall survival (OS) data available 12 months after the last patient was enrolled. Methods: This single arm phase I/II trial explores durvalumab (1500mg Q4W) and savolitinib (600mg OD) together in PRC, with a 4wk savolitinib run in. Treatment naïve or previously treated patients with metastatic PRC were included. Confirmed RR (RECIST v1.1), PFS, tolerability (CTCAE v4.03) and overall survival (OS) were analysed. MET and PD-L1 biomarkers were explored (NCT02819596). Results: 42 patients were enrolled with 41 receiving at least one dose of study treatment. Safety and efficacy analyses were performed on these 41 patients. The median follow up was 14.3 months. IMDC good, intermediate and poor risk disease occurred in 29%, 63%, and 7% of patients respectively. Overall confirmed RR was 27% while median PFS was 4.9 months (95% CI: 2.5 – 12.0 months). Median OS was 12.3 months (95% CI: 5.8 – 21.3 months). Confirmed RR and median OS in the previously untreated cohort (N=27) were 33% and 12.3 months (95% CI: 4.7 – not reached (NR) months) respectively. Treatment related Grade 3/4 toxicity occurred in 34% of patients. No new safety signals were seen. PD-L1 and MET expression were not associated with higher RR (25% and 40% respectively) or longer OS. Conclusions: The combination of savolitinib and durvalumab has clinical activity in PRC and outcomes were not enhanced in biomarker positive cancers. Clinical trial information: NCT02819596.

Expert Consensus on the Management of Adverse Events During Treatment with Lenvatinib for Thyroid Cancer

AIMS

Lenvatinib is an oral multi-kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of adults with progressive, locally advanced or metastatic, differentiated thyroid carcinoma refractory to radioactive iodine.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A literature review was undertaken to inform the development of consensus-based guidance for the routine management of adverse events associated with lenvatinib. PubMed was searched on 24 October 2017; the search terms were 'lenvatinib' and 'thyroid cancer'.

RESULTS

Hypertension, diarrhoea, weight loss, skin toxicities and cardiovascular adverse events were considered. For grade 1/2 diarrhoea, initial treatment should be loperamide with a 1-week treatment interruption if diarrhoea persists and dose reduction if diarrhoea recurs on reinitiation of lenvatinib. Blood pressure should be monitored daily in patients with pre-existing hypertension, otherwise from 1 week after the initiation of lenvatinib and weekly for the first 2 months. For patients with systolic blood pressure ≥135 mmHg to <160 mmHg or diastolic blood pressure ≥85 mmHg to <100 mmHg, lenvatinib should be continued but antihypertensive therapy initiated/intensified. For patients who remain hypertensive, a treatment break can be considered with lenvatinib reinitiated at a reduced dose once the patient's blood pressure has stabilised for at least 48 h. Weight loss of 10% of baseline body weight or the onset of anorexia should be managed with a 1-week treatment break; patients should maintain a healthy, active lifestyle. For patients with grade 2 proteinuria, lenvatinib may be continued, but an angiotensin II receptor blocker or angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor should be commenced. For grade >3 proteinuria, lenvatinib should be interrupted until proteinuria returns to 1+. For chronic proteinuria, lenvatinib should be stopped. Skin toxicities should be managed with moisturisers or emollients and soap substitutes.

CONCLUSIONS

Prophylaxis, regular monitoring and symptomatic management with appropriate short treatment breaks and, for persistent adverse events, dose reductions, are recommended to enable patients to remain on the optimal dose regimen.

A phase II study investigating the safety and efficacy of savolitinib and durvalumab in metastatic papillary renal cancer (CALYPSO)

545

Background: Metastatic papillary renal cancer (PRC) has poor outcomes and there is need for new treatments. There is a strong rationale for investigating MET and PD-L1 inhibition in this disease. In this study, we investigate savolitinib (MET inhibitor) and durvalumab (PD-L1 inhibitor) together. Methods: This single arm phase I/II trial explored durvalumab and savolitinib at starting doses of 1500mg Q4W and 600mg OD respectively, with a 4wk savolitinib run-in. Treatment naïve or previously treated patients with metastatic PRC were included. Response rate (RR) (RECIST v1.1) was the primary endpoint. Progression free survival (PFS), tolerability (CTCAE v4) and overall survival were secondary endpoints. Biomarkers were explored from archived tissue. Results: Dose escalation work identified a dose of durvalumab of 1500mg Q4W and savolitinib 600mg OD to take forward to phase II. Between Jan 2017 and Jul 2018, 42 patients were enrolled at this dose. 1 patient did not receive study treatment. The following analyses were performed on the remaining 41 patients. 12% of patients did not receive the combination (3 PD, 1 death, 1 PS deterioration). The median follow up was 8.9 months (95% CI: 6.9-10.9 months). IMDC good, intermediate and poor risk disease occurred in 29% (n=12), 63% (n=26), and 7% (n=3) patients respectively. Overall RR was 27% (11/41), while median PFS was 3.3 months (95% CI: 1.5-NR months). RR and median PFS in the previously untreated cohort (N=28) were 29% (8/28) and 12.0 months (95% CI: 1.5-NR months) respectively. Grade 3/4 toxicity occurred in 15 patients. Discontinuation for toxicity occurred in 3 patients, all due to liver toxicities. Biomarker work including PD-L1 and MET expression will be included in the analysis. Conclusions: The combination of savolitinib and durvalumab appears safe and associated with clinical activity in PRC. Clinical trial information: NCT02819596.

Lenvatinib and its use in the treatment of unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the most common primary malignancy of the liver accounting for approximately 90% of cases. Patients often present at an advanced stage when treatment options are limited. Sorafenib, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, has been the first-line treatment in this setting for almost a decade. Several subsequent targeted therapies have failed to demonstrate significant improvement in survival. The results of the REFLECT study suggest that lenvatinib, a multikinase inhibitor, may have promised as a first-line treatment in patients with advanced HCC. This article will review the development of lenvatinib and the evidence behind its potential use in patients with advanced HCC.

A phase 2 trial of lenvatinib 18 mg versus 14 mg once daily (QD) in combination with everolimus (5 mg QD) in renal cell carcinoma (RCC) after 1 prior VEGF-targeted treatment

TPS707

Background: Based on findings from a randomized phase 2 study (Study 205), lenvatinib (LEN) + everolimus (EVE) was approved in the United States and European Union for patients (pts) with advanced RCC following 1 prior anti-angiogenic therapy. In that study, LEN 18 mg QD + EVE 5 mg QD significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with either monotherapy. In the LEN+EVE cohort, grades 3 and 4 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) occurred in 71% of pts. We report the design of an ongoing, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase 2 study (Study 218) to evaluate if a lower LEN starting dosage regimen provides similar efficacy with a better safety profile than LEN 18 mg + EVE 5 mg (NCT03173560). Methods: Eligible pts are aged ≥ 18 years with advanced clear cell RCC, 1 prior anti-VEGF therapy, ≥ 1 measurable target lesion per RECIST 1.1, a KPS score of ≥ 70, and prior nivolumab is allowed. Pts will receive LEN 18 mg or 14 mg QD + EVE 5 mg QD in 28-day cycles until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal of consent. The LEN 14-mg dose will be escalated to 18 mg if no intolerable grade 2, or any grade ≥ 3 TEAEs requiring dose reduction occur in cycle 1. The primary endpoints are objective response rate (ORR) at week 24 (ORR24W) and the proportion of pts with intolerable grade 2 and any grade ≥ 3 TEAEs within 24 wks after randomization. Secondary endpoints include PFS and ORR. An estimated 306 pts will be randomized. Sample size is based on detecting noninferiority (NI) of ORR24W and superiority of the primary safety endpoint. Two interim analyses (IA) will be performed when 150 and 200 pts have completed 24 wks of follow-up or discontinue earlier. Each analysis will test NI and futility of the LEN 14-mg arm ORR24W vs the 18-mg arm ORR24W. An O’Brien-Fleming boundary will be used for NI. If the 1-sided P-value is ≤ 0.005 at the first IA, ≤ 0.014 at the second IA, or ≤ 0.045 at the final analysis, then NI in ORR24W will be claimed. If the futility boundary is crossed (ie, 1-sided P-value is ≥ 0.776 at the first IA or ≥ 0.207 at the second IA), then futility will be claimed. Clinical trial information: NCT03173560.

Serum β-HCG and CA-125 as Tumor Markers in a Patient with Osteosarcoma: Case Report

Background

Elevated β-HCG serum levels are usually an indication of pregnancy or pregnancy-related disorders, but β-HCG can also be elevated in testis and germ cell tumors. HCG expression by osteosarcoma is a rare phenomenon, with a few documented cases. CA-125 is commonly used to monitor disease progression and treatment response in ovarian cancer. CA-125 expression in patients with osteosarcoma has not previously been documented.

Case report

Elevated β-HCG and CA-125 serum levels were observed in a female patient of 57 years of age with metastatic osteosarcoma during screening investigations prior to participation in a phase I clinical trial. Pregnancy was excluded. Immunohistochemical studies revealed the tumor to be the source of the elevated β-HCG serum levels. We found no CA-125 expression in tumor tissue. The patient was treated with E7080, a novel oral multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor. We measured serum β-HCG and CA-125 to monitor treatment response. She had a significant clinical and radiological response after two cycles of treatment, but developed progressive disease after the third cycle. The β-HCG serum levels seemed to better reflect her disease status than those of the other tumor marker, CA-125.

Conclusions

When elevated, β-HCG serum levels in patients with osteosarcoma might be used to monitor treatment. Treatment of advanced osteosarcoma with tyrosine kinase inhibitors, including E7080, warrants further investigation. Free full text available at www.tumorionline.it

Real-world uptake, safety profile and outcomes of docetaxel in newly diagnosed metastatic prostate cancer

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the uptake, safety and efficacy of docetaxel chemotherapy in hormone-naïve metastatic prostate cancer (mPC) in the first year of use outside of a clinical trial.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients in the West of Scotland Cancer Network with newly diagnosed mPC were identified from the regional multidisciplinary team meetings and their treatment details were collected from electronic patient records. The rate of febrile neutropenia, hospitalisations, time to progression, and overall survival were compared between those patients who received docetaxel and androgen-deprivation therapy (ADT), or ADT alone using survival analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 270 eligible patients, 103 received docetaxel (38.1%). 35 patients (34%) were hospitalised and there were 17 episodes of febrile neutropenia (16.5%). Two patients (1.9%) died within 30 days of chemotherapy. Patients who received ADT alone had an increased risk of progression (hazard ratio [HR] 2.03, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.27-3.25; log-rank test, P = 0.002) and had an increased risk of death (HR 5.88, 95% CI: 2.52-13.72; log-rank test, P = 0.001) compared to the docetaxel group. The risk of febrile neutropenia was nine-times greater if chemotherapy was started within 3 weeks of ADT initiation (95% CI: 1.22-77.72; P = 0.032).

CONCLUSION

Docetaxel chemotherapy in hormone-naïve mPC has significant toxicities, but has a similar effect on time to progression and overall survival as seen in randomised trials. Chemotherapy should be started at ≥3 weeks after ADT.

Recommendations on managing lenvatinib and everolimus in patients with advanced or metastatic renal cell carcinoma

INTRODUCTION

There are several second-line treatment options for patients with renal cell carcinoma after first-line failure of a tyrosine kinase inhibitor, especially with the recent approvals of cabozantinib, nivolumab, and the lenvatinib plus everolimus combination. A lack of reliable biomarkers and an overall lack of prospective head-to-head comparisons make it a challenge to choose a second-line treatment in the clinic. Areas covered: In this review/meta-opinion, we describe the safety profile of the lenvatinib plus everolimus combination in renal cell carcinoma. The combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus has achieved the highest rates of objective responses and the longest progression free and overall survival in cross-comparison trials. At the same time, the safety profile of this combination, including the rate of total and severe adverse events, the percentage of dose reductions required, and the rate of treatment discontinuation, was less favorable compared with available monotherapy options, suggesting that better management could help to maximize the activity of this combination while protecting patients from undue harm. Expert opinion: Herein, we aim to postulate multidisciplinary recommendations on the advice to offer to patients and caregivers before starting treatment and how to manage the combination from the perspective of daily clinical practice.

Lenvatinib therapy for the treatment of patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma

Despite advances in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treatments, patients eventually progress and develop resistance to therapies targeting a single pathway. Lenvatinib inhibits VEGFR1–3, FGFR1–4, PDGFRβ, RET and KIT proto-oncogenes. In a randomized, Phase II trial evaluating patients with mRCC who had progressed after one prior VEGF-targeted therapy, progression-free survival was significantly improved with lenvatinib alone or in combination with everolimus versus everolimus alone. This review summarizes the clinical development of lenvatinib in mRCC, and how simultaneous targeting of multiple pathways involved in carcinogenesis and/or therapeutic resistance may improve patient outcomes. Lenvatinib plus everolimus may be a promising second-line treatment in patients with mRCC.

Lenvatinib, everolimus, and the combination in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma: a randomised, phase 2, open-label, multicentre trial

BACKGROUND

Currently, metastatic renal cell carcinoma is treated with sequential single agents targeting VEGF or mTOR. Here, we aimed to assess lenvatinib, everolimus, or their combination as second-line treatment in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

METHODS

We did a randomised, phase 2, open-label, multicentre trial at 37 centres in five countries and enrolled patients with advanced or metastatic, clear-cell, renal cell carcinoma. We included patients who had received treatment with a VEGF-targeted therapy and progressed on or within 9 months of stopping that agent. Patients were randomised via an interactive voice response system in a 1:1:1 ratio to either lenvatinib (24 mg/day), everolimus (10 mg/day), or lenvatinib plus everolimus (18 mg/day and 5 mg/day, respectively) administered orally in continuous 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxic effects. The randomisation procedure dynamically minimised imbalances between treatment groups for the stratification factors haemoglobin and corrected serum calcium. The primary objective was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is closed to enrolment but patients' treatment and follow-up is ongoing. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01136733.

FINDINGS

Between March 16, 2012, and June 19, 2013, 153 patients were randomly allocated to receive either the combination of lenvatinib plus everolimus (n=51), single-agent lenvatinib (n=52), or single-agent everolimus (n=50). Lenvatinib plus everolimus significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with everolimus alone (median 14·6 months [95% CI 5·9-20·1] vs 5·5 months [3·5-7·1]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·40, 95% CI 0·24-0·68; p=0·0005), but not compared with lenvatinib alone (7·4 months [95% CI 5·6-10·2]; HR 0·66, 95% CI 0·30-1·10; p=0·12). Single-agent lenvatinib significantly prolonged progression-free survival compared with everolimus alone (HR 0·61, 95% CI 0·38-0·98; p=0·048). Grade 3 and 4 events occurred in fewer patients allocated single-agent everolimus (25 [50%]) compared with those assigned lenvatinib alone (41 [79%]) or lenvatinib plus everolimus (36 [71%]). The most common grade 3 or 4 treatment-emergent adverse event in patients allocated lenvatinib plus everolimus was diarrhoea (ten [20%]), in those assigned single-agent lenvatinib it was proteinuria (ten [19%]), and in those assigned single-agent everolimus it was anaemia (six [12%]). Two deaths were deemed related to study drug, one cerebral haemorrhage in the lenvatinib plus everolimus group and one myocardial infarction with single-agent lenvatinib.

INTERPRETATION

Lenvatinib plus everolimus and lenvatinib alone resulted in a progression-free survival benefit for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma who have progressed after one previous VEGF-targeted therapy. Further study of lenvatinib is warranted in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

FUNDING

Eisai Inc.

Infraclavicular axillary vein cannulation using ultrasound in a mechanically ventilated general intensive care population

Central venous catheter (CVC) insertion is commonly undertaken in the ICU. The use of ultrasound (US) to facilitate CVC insertion is standard and is supported by guidelines. Because the subclavian vein cannot be insonated where it underlies the clavicle, its use as a CVC site is now less common. The axillary vein, however, can be seen on US just distal to the subclavian vein and placement of a CVC at this site gives a result which is functionally indistinguishable from a subclavian CVC. We evaluated placement of US-guided axillary CVCs in mechanically ventilated intensive care patients. Data were collected for 125 consecutive US-guided axillary CVC procedures in ventilated patients in an adult intensive care setting. All lines were inserted using real-time US guidance with an out-of-plane technique. One hundred and twenty-five procedures occurred in 119 patients. Successful line placement was achieved in 117 out of 125 (94%) procedures. Complications included four procedures that required repeating due to catheter malposition and one arterial puncture. The median number of attempts per procedure was one (IQR 1 to 2). Thirty-nine (31%) patients had a body mass index of 30 or above, 43 (34%) patients had a coagulopathy and 70 (56%) patients had significant ventilator dependence (FiO2 of 0.5 or above, or positive end expiratory pressure 10 cmH20 or above). The technique of US-guided axillary CVC access can be undertaken successfully in ventilated intensive care patients, even in challenging circumstances. Taken together with existing work on the utility and safety of this technique, we suggest that it be adopted more widely in the intensive care population.

A phase I study of E7080, a multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced solid tumours

Background:

The objectives of this phase I study were to assess the safety and tolerability of E7080 in patients with advanced, refractory solid tumours; to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and pharmacokinetics profile of E7080; and to explore preliminary evidence of its anti-tumour efficacy.

Methods:

E7080 was administered orally in escalating doses on a once-daily continuous schedule in 28-day cycles to eligible patients. Samples for pharmacokinetic analyses were collected on days 1, 8, 15 and 22 of cycle 1 and day 1 of cycle 2. Anti-tumour efficacy was assessed every two cycles.

Results:

Eighty-two patients received E7080 in dose cohorts from 0.2 to 32 mg. Dose-limiting toxicities were grade 3 proteinuria (two patients) at 32 mg, and the MTD was defined as 25 mg. The most frequently observed cumulative toxicities (all grades) were hypertension (40% of patients), diarrhoea (45%), nausea (37%), stomatitis (32%) and vomiting (23%). Seven patients (9%) had a partial response and 38 patients (46%) had stable disease as best response. E7080 has dose-linear kinetics with no drug accumulation after 4 weeks’ administration.

Conclusion:

E7080 is well tolerated at doses up to 25 mg per day. Encouraging anti-tumour efficacy was observed in patients with melanoma and renal cell carcinoma.

Active surveillance for prostate cancer: Scottish experience

167

Background: Prostate cancer is the second most common malignancy in men worldwide with 910,000 cases registered in 2008. The prognosis for low-risk prostate cancer patients remains excellent and arguably the majority may either not require radical treatment or may benefit from deferred radical treatment. Active surveillance involves serial prostate-specific antigen (PSA) monitoring, digital rectal examinations, and periodic trans-rectal ultrasound guided prostate biopsies. Patients for active surveillance are carefully selected, counselled and actively followed-up. Radical treatment is deferred until there is evidence of biochemical, pathological or clinical disease progression.

Methods: Retrospective review of prostate cancer patients enrolled on to the active surveillance program within NHS Ayrshire and Arran Hospitals. Clinical examination and PSA monitoring was undertaken 3-monthly in year 1, 4-monthly in year 2 and 6-monthly thereafter. The protocol stipulates repeat TRUS biopsies at years 1, 4, 7 and every 3 years thereafter.

Results: 105 patients with low-intermediate risk prostate cancer with a median age of 68yrs (48–78yrs) were followed for a median duration of 30 months (4–152 months). The median PSA at presentation was 7ng/ml (0.5-31). Repeat biopsies were performed in 82 patients and 37% had no histological evidence of cancer. The median time to re-biopsy was 16 months (10–85 months). Of the patients who received radical treatment; 3 underwent radical prostatectomy and 23 received radical radiotherapy. The indications for radical treatment were pathological progression in 73%, PSA progression in 23% and co-existing bladder cancer in 4%. One patient died due to unrelated medical problems and one patient developed metastatic disease.

Conclusions: With appropriate counselling, a significant percentage of men with low-moderate risk prostate cancer choose active surveillance. In this study, active surveillance does not appear to compromise outcomes for patients with low-intermediate risk prostate cancer. Less then 25% of patients needed radical treatment and therefore this approach appears cost-effective and avoids treatment-related morbidity.

E7080, a multi-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor suppresses tumor cell migration and invasion

Background

E7080 is an orally active multi-targeted kinase inhibitor whose targets include vascular endothelial growth factor receptors (VEGFR), fibroblast growth factor receptor (FGFR) and platelet derived growth factor receptors (PDGFR). It has been shown to inhibit tumor angiogenesis by targeting endothelial cells. A number of the targets of E7080 are also expressed on tumor cells and here we have looked at the direct effects of E7080 on tumor cell behavior.

Methods

Using a panel of human tumor cell lines we determined the effect of E7080 on cell proliferation, migration and invasion. Inhibition of FGFR and PDGFR signaling in the cells was measured.

Results

E7080 had little effect on tumor cell proliferation. However, it blocked migration and invasion at concentrations that inhibited FGFR and PDGFR signaling. Knock-down of PDGFR-β in U2OS osteosarcoma cells also inhibited cell migration which, could not be further inhibited in the presence of E7080. Furthermore, E7080 could not inhibit the migration of a PDGFR negative cell line.

Conclusion

E7080 does not significantly affect tumor cell proliferation but can inhibit their migration and invasion at concentrations that both inhibit its known targets and are achievable clinically.

Redefining adjuvant chemotherapy in patients with stage III colon cancer: X-ACT trial

The current standard adjuvant chemotherapy for suitable patients with stage III colon cancer is the combination of oxaliplatin and 5-fluorouracil plus folinic acid (5-FU/LV). However, until recently and for many years prior to this, the accepted standard adjuvant chemotherapy was 6-8 months of bolus 5-FU/LV. However, bolus treatment was associated with significant toxicity, namely stomatitis, diarrhea and neutropenia, in addition to multiple hospital visits for drug administration for patients. The X-ACT trial (Xeloda in Adjuvant Colon Cancer Therapy) compared traditional bolus 5-FU/LV (as per the Mayo Clinic regimen) with capecitabine, in the adjuvant treatment of 1987 stage III colon cancer patients. The main safety, efficacy and pharmacoeconomic results have all been published, and the updated 5-year efficacy results have also recently been presented. This trial demonstrated that capecitabine was at least as effective as bolus 5-FU/LV in terms of disease-free and overall survival, with trends towards superiority for both. Moreover, there was much less toxicity associated with capecitabine, apart from hand-foot syndrome which was significantly more prevalent. On the basis of the X-ACT trial, capecitabine was approved by the US FDA, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence and the Scottish Medicines Consortium as monotherapy for the adjuvant treatment of stage III colon cancer.

A phase I dose finding study of E7080 in patients (pts) with advanced malignancies

14073

Background: E7080 is a potent inhibitor of the split-kinase family of transmembrane growth factor receptors including Flt-1 and KDR. In addition, E7080 also potently inhibits FGFR1 and PDGFRβ tyrosine kinase activities. In an in vitro angiogenic model, E7080 inhibited VEGF-driven umbilical vein endothelial cell (HUVEC) proliferation and tube formation. Using H460 and Colo205 mouse xenograft models, E7080 significantly inhibited tumor growth at doses from 1 to 100 mg/kg. Methods: A Phase I and pharmacologic study was conducted to determine the Maximum Tolerated Dose (MTD) and Dose Limiting Toxicity (DLT) of E7080 in pts with advanced malignancies. Eligible pts with adequate hematologic, renal and hepatic function, and with tumors refractory to standard therapies, were treated with E7080 administered orally on a once daily continuous dose schedule in cycles of 4 weeks. Dose escalation was performed according to an accelerated design of 100% dose increases in subsequent cohorts until the first patient experienced ≥ CTC grade 2 toxicity. Results: As of November 17th, 2006, 37 pts with documented progressive disease (PD) have been treated at the following dose levels: 0.2 mg/d, 0.4 mg/d, 0.8 mg/d, 1.6 mg/d, 3.2 mg/d, 6.4 mg/d, 12.5 mg/d and 16 mg/d. Median number of cycles was 1 (0–11). Median age = 60 years (25–84), 20 pts were male, 17 were female. 37 pts were evaluable for toxicity. 1 patient experienced grade 3 hypertension (DLT) in the 16 mg/d cohort, other related toxicities ≥ grade 2 include hemorrhage and thrombosis (n=1), tachycardia (n=1), febrile neutropenia (n=1), proteinuria (n=1), thrombocytopenia (n=1) and hypertension (n=1). MTD has not been reached and this study is continuing to recruit. 24 pts were evaluable for efficacy, 3 are too early to evaluate. 1 patient had a partial response (high grade sarcoma) after 2 cycles, and 15 pts experienced stable disease from 2+ to 11 months, and 11 pts continue on therapy. Pharmacokinetic (PK) studies: preliminary data suggest that the PK is linear over the range 0.2 mg/d to 12.5 mg/d. Conclusions: E7080 is safe and well tolerated at doses acheived so far and has shown promising first signs of anti-cancer activity associated with potent activity in pre-clinical models. Clinical and PK data from subsequent doses and follow- up will be presented.

No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Multicentre phase II pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of OSI-7904L in previously untreated patients with advanced gastric or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma

A two-stage Simon design was used to evaluate the response rate of OSI-7904L, a liposome encapsulated thymidylate synthase inhibitor, in advanced gastric and/or gastroesophageal adenocarcinoma (A-G/GEJA), administered intravenously at 12 mg m(-2) over 30 min every 21 days. Fifty patients were treated. Median age was 64 years (range 35-82), 62% were male and 89% had ECOG PS of 0/1. A total of 252 cycles were administered; median of 4 per patient (range 1-21). Twelve patients required dose reductions, mainly for skin toxicity. Investigator assessed response rate was 17.4% (95% CI 7.8-31.4) with one complete and seven partial responses in 46 evaluable patients. Twenty-one patients (42%) had stable disease. Median time to progression and survival were 12.4 and 36.9 weeks, respectively. NCI CTCAE Grade 3/4 neutropenia (14%) and thrombocytopenia (4%) were uncommon. The main G3/4 nonhaematological toxicities were skin-related 22%, stomatitis 14%, fatigue/lethargy 10%, and diarrhea 8%. Pharmacokinetic data showed high interpatient variability. Patients with higher AUC were more likely to experience G3/4 toxicity during cycle 1 while baseline homocysteine did not predict toxicity. Response did not correlate with AUC. Elevations in 2'-dU were observed indicating target inhibition. Analysis of TS genotype, TS protein and expression did not reveal any correlation with outcome. OSI-7904L has activity in A-G/GEJA similar to other active agents and an acceptable safety profile.

Phase I Study of OSI-7904L, a Novel Liposomal Thymidylate Synthase Inhibitor in Patients with Refractory Solid Tumors

PURPOSE

OSI-7904L is a liposomal formulation of a potent noncompetitive thymidylate synthase inhibitor (TSI) that does not require polyglutamation for activity. This phase I study was done to establish the safety, tolerability, maximum tolerated dose, recommended dose, and pharmacokinetics of OSI-7904L in patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapy.

DESIGN

OSI-7904L was given as a 30-minute i.v. infusion every 21 days to 31 patients at eight dose levels from 0.4 to 15.0 mg/m(2), using three patients per dose level, up to 10 patients at the recommended dose. Baseline plasma homocysteine and 2'-deoxyuridine and genotype polymorphism were measured as potential predictors of biological activity.

RESULTS

Minimal toxicity was reported up to 9.6 mg/m(2), but dose-limiting toxicity was seen in both patients at 15 mg/m(2) including stomatitis, fatigue, tachyarrhythmia, rash and hand-foot syndrome, diarrhea, and fatal neutropenic sepsis. Other toxicity such as nausea and vomiting was mild or moderate. This resulted in the investigation of an intermediate dose level of 12 mg/m(2), identified as the recommended dose for phase II studies. Prolonged disease stabilization was reported in 11 of 31 heavily pretreated patients. Pharmacokinetic data indicate that this liposomal formulation alters the disposition properties of the parent drug resulting in a prolonged plasma residence time.

CONCLUSIONS

OSI-7904L given as a 30-minute i.v. infusion every 21 days is feasible and well tolerated at the recommended phase II dose of 12 mg/m(2). The main toxicities are rash, pruritus, lethargy, stomatitis, and myelosuppression. Observed toxicities were predictable and characteristic for TSIs.

8th international conference: primary therapy of early breast cancer, St Gallen, Switzerland, March 12-15 2003

The International St Gallen Breast Cancer Conference concentrates almost exclusively on adjuvant, multimodal primary therapy for early breast cancer. Begun 25 years ago, this meeting was initially held every 4 years, but therapeutic progress, new strategies and provocative trials data have accelerated to the extent that conferences are now held biennially. The meeting this year was attended by almost 3000 delegates. Major topics included new prognostic and predictive markers in early breast cancer, the best use of adjuvant chemotherapy and endocrine therapy, and innovations in local surgery and radiation therapy.