c-Met abnormatities in patients with genitourinary (GU) malignancies and outcomes with c-MET inhibitors.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 407-407
Author(s):  
Denis Leonardo Fontes Jardim ◽  
Debora De Melo Gagliato ◽  
Gerald Steven Falchook ◽  
Jennifer J. Wheler ◽  
Ralph Zinner ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Tyrosine Kinase Receptor ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Met Amplification ◽  
Genetic Abnormalities ◽  
Met Inhibitor ◽  
Metastatic Sites

407 Background: c-MET is a tyrosine kinase receptor involved in cancer growth, migration, development of metastasis and angiogenesis. Deregulation of this gene has been associated with poor prognosis and resistance to treatment in prostate, bladder and renal cell cancer (RCC). Methods: Patients with GU malignancies referred to the phase I clinic were evaluated for the presence of c-MET mutation and amplification. Their outcomes on protocols containing c-METinhibitors were also analyzed. Results: c-MET amplification was detected in 7 out of 97 (7.2%) patients (4/27 renal, 1/18 urothelial and 2/12 adrenocortical carcinoma), while c-MET mutation/variant in 3 out of 53 (5.7%) patients (2/20 renal and 1/15 prostate cancer). No demographic characteristics were associated with either c-MET abnormalities, but patients tested positive for either mutation or amplification had a higher number of metastatic sites (median number of sites of 4 versus 3 for wild type patients). Median overall survival from phase I consult was 4.4 and 10.6 months for patients with and without a c-MET alteration, respectively. Twenty-nine (25%) patients were treated under a protocol containing a c-MET inhibitor. Overall 6 (21%) patients had a partial response (all prostate and RCC) and 10 (34%) had stable disease as best response. Median time to tumor progression was 2.3 months (0.4-19.7) for all treated patients. No responses were detected in patients with a c-MET genetic abnormality or treated with a specific c-MET inhibitor as a single agent. Conclusions: c-MET mutation and amplification are present in different GU malignancies conferring a worse prognosis for patients referred to the phase I program. We observed activity of c-MET inhibitors for patients without c-MET genetic abnormalities and when c-MET inhibition was combined with other targets/drugs.

Clinical and molecular characterization of refractory BRAF mutant metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC): Vall d’Hebron Institute of Oncology phase I program cohort.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 587-587
Author(s):  
Enrique Sanz-Garcia ◽  
Elena Elez ◽  
Guillem Argiles ◽  
Javier Hernandez-Losa ◽  
Ana Vivancos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Phase I Trial ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Braf Inhibitor ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Braf V600e ◽  
Mass Detection ◽  
Pi3k Inhibition ◽  
Metastatic Sites ◽  
Low Expression

587 Background: BRAF mutation (mt) occurs in 5-8% of mCRC and its role as a negative prognostic factor is well known. The up-front detection of BRAF mt is not standardized beyond the boundaries of research. However, since novel emerging specific therapies are increasingly available in clinical trials, the prior determination of this mutation is now warranted. Methods: From 07/2010 to 01/2014, 581 patients (pts) with advanced refractory mCRCunderwent genetic tumor profiling as part of the VHIO Phase I Trial Molecular Prescreening Program. BRAF mt was determined by Sanger sequencing or multiplex PCR and mass detection (MassARRAY, Sequenom) of 268 frequent hotspots in 25 oncogenes including, KRAS, NRAS, and PIK3CA. PTEN status was also assessed by immunohistochemistry. Results: 581 samples were analyzed detecting BRAF mt in 56 (9.6%). In the BRAF mt population, median age was 61 years (45-80) and 54% had right-sided CRC. Metastatic sites were found at: liver 61%; peritoneum 52%; lung 39%. Median number of standard treatment was 4 (0-8) including cetuximab and/or panitumumab in 73%. BRAF V600E mutation was detected in 53 samples whereas V600K, D594V and D594G were seen in one sample each. PTEN was analyzed in 44.6% of samples resulting in low expression (H-score <50) in 56%. Other co-existing mutations were PIK3KCA H1047R, PIK3CA E545K, NRAS G12V, GNAS R201C and EGFR S768I. 22 pts were enrolled at least in one phase I trial with drugs targeting either BRAF alone (n=12) or combined with anti-EGFR (n=5), MEK (n=2), PI3K (n=1) inhibitors or double MEK/PI3K inhibition (n=2). Partial responses (PR) were seen in 3 pts (2 with BRAF inhibitor and EGFR inhibitor and 1 with BRAF inhibitor as a single agent). Conclusions: BRAF mt mCRC pts in our institution have a similar pattern to other series reported. Notably, PTEN low expression was present in almost half of the samples analyzed and other co-existent mutations in the ERK and PI3K pathways were detected. This observation, coupled with the clinical outcome observed with single agent BRAF inhibition in this population, suggests that these patients may derive greater benefit from dual BRAF and either EGFR, MEK or PI3K inhibition.

Safety and efficacy of MET inhibitor tivantinib (ARQ 197) combined with sorafenib in patients (pts) with renal cell carcinoma (RCC) from a phase I study.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4545-4545 ◽  
Author(s):  
Igor Puzanov ◽  
Jeffrey Alan Sosman ◽  
Armando Santoro ◽  
Robert E. Martell ◽  
Grace K. Dy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Antitumor Activity ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Vegf Receptor ◽  
Chromophobe Rcc ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Met Inhibitor ◽  
Clear Cell Rcc

4545 Background: Inhibitors of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and VEGF receptor are standard therapy for RCC, and the MET signaling pathway is implicated in tumor angiogenesis. Tivantinib is an oral, selective MET inhibitor. In several tumor models, tivantinib plus sorafenib exhibited synergistic antitumor activity vs single-agent activity. This phase I dose-escalation study assessed the safety of tivantinib plus sorafenib in pts with advanced solid tumors. Methods: Endpoints were safety, the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of tivantinib plus sorafenib, and antitumor activity. Previously, dose escalation established the RP2D as tivantinib 360 mg twice daily (BID) plus sorafenib 400 mg BID. Extension cohorts enrolled ≤ 20 pts each with RCC or other tumors. Patients were treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Results: 20 pts (mean age, 60 yr) including 16 clear cell, 3 papillary, and 1 clear cell/chromophobe RCC pts received treatment at the RP2D (n = 19) or tivantinib 360 mg BID plus sorafenib 200 mg BID (n = 1). 4 pts are still on study. 16 pts (13 with clear cell RCC) received ≥ 1 previous systemic therapy (median, 2; range, 0-4) including VEGF (14 pts) and/or mTOR (5 pts) inhibitors. The most common (≥ 25%) adverse events were rash (65%), diarrhea (45%), alopecia (40%), hypophosphatemia (35%), and fatigue, stomatitis, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome, and pruritus (25% each). Best response was partial response (PR) in 3 pts (all clear cell RCC pts) and stable disease (SD) in 15 pts (11 clear cell, 3 papillary, and 1 clear cell/chromophobe RCC pts). 7 pts with SD had ≥ 10% tumor size reduction. The overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR; PR + SD) were 15% and 90%, respectively. Median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 12.7 mo (95% CI, 7.1-14.5 mo). In 14 pts previously treated with a VEGF inhibitor, best response was 2 PR and 10 SD, the ORR and DCR were 14% and 86%, respectively, and mPFS was 12.7 mo (95% CI, 5.3-NR mo). Conclusions: Oral combination therapy with tivantinib plus sorafenib was well tolerated and exhibited preliminary anticancer activity in pts with RCC, including pts pretreated with VEGF inhibitors.

Phase 1/2 study of cirmtuzumab and ibrutinib in mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) or chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7556-7556
Author(s):  
Hun Ju Lee ◽  
Michael Y. Choi ◽  
Tanya Siddiqi ◽  
Jacqueline Claudia Barrientos ◽  
William G. Wierda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase 1 ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Lymphocytic Leukemia ◽  
Synergistic Activity ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Car T ◽  
Treatment Naïve

7556 Background: Cirmtuzumab (Cirm) is a humanized monoclonal antibody that inhibits the tumor promoting activity of ROR1 and had demonstrated additive/synergistic activity with many anti-cancer agents including ibrutinib (Ibr). Methods: Patients (Pts) with relapsed or refractory (RR) MCL or treatment naïve (TN) or RR CLL were enrolled. In Part 1 (Dose Escalation), doses of Cirm IV q2wks x5 then q4wks of 2-16 mg/kg and 300 or 600 mg were examined. Safety of Cirm alone was assessed during the first 28 days, then Ibr was started at approved doses for each indication. Cirm 600 mg IV q2wks x3 then q4wks in combination with Ibr starting day 0 was chosen as the recommended dosing regimen for use in Part 2 (Expansion) and Part 3 (CLL only, Cirm/Ibr vs. Ibr alone). Results: Twelve evaluable MCL pts were enrolled into Part 1, and 5 into Part 2. Median number of prior regimens was 2 (1-5), including pts relapsing after Ibr (4), auto-SCT (3), auto-SCT/ allo-SCT (1), auto-SCT/CAR-T (1). In CLL, 34 evaluable pts (12 TN and 22 RR) enrolled into Part 1 (18) or Part 2 (16). At least 74% of CLL pts in Parts 1 and 2 were high risk as determined by unmutated IGHV, del17p, and/or del11q. In Part 3, 22 evaluable pts received Cirm/Ibr (15) or Ibr (7). As of the 30OCT2020 safety cut-off for MCL and CLL, common TEAEs (all grades) included diarrhea (41%), contusion (39%), fatigue (39%), URI (31%), hypertension (25%) arthralgia (23%). Grade ≥3 neutropenia was 13% and thrombocytopenia 1%. There were no Cirm dose reductions or discontinuations for toxicity. Overall, Cirm did not appear to negatively impact the safety of Ibr. Efficacy (MCL): As of the 02FEB2021 efficacy cutoff, the best response of 17 evaluable pts in Parts 1 and 2 included an objective response rate (ORR) of 82%, 41% CR/CMR, 41% PR, 12% SD, and 6% PD. CR/CMR remain durable from 8-28+ mos. Most responses occurred rapidly after ̃3 mos of Cirm/Ibr. Notably, responses were achieved in all pts who received prior SCT+/- CAR-T (4CR, 1PR) or prior Ibr (2CR, 2PR). At a median follow-up of 14.6 mos, the median PFS (mPFS) had not been reached (NR) (95% CI: 17.5, NA). Efficacy (CLL): The best response of 34 evaluable pts in Parts 1 and 2 included 91% ORR, 3% CR, 88% PR/PR-L, 9% SD, 0% PD. In Part 3, both arms achieved 100% ORR (all PRs). At a median follow-up of 20.2 mos, the mPFS was NR (95% CI: NA, NA), and the PFS estimate at 24 months was 95% for R/R, and 87% for TN, respectively, for evaluable CLL pts receiving Cirm/Ibr. Conclusions: Cirm/Ibr is a well-tolerated, active regimen in both MCL and CLL. For MCL, the mPFS of NR (95% CI: 17.5, NA) and CRR (41%), with all CRs remaining without PD, compare favorably to mPFS of 12.8 mos (95% CI 8.5-16.6) and CRR (20%) reported for single agent Ibr (Rule 2017). For CLL, the high ORR and PFS are encouraging, particularly for RR CLL. The study is ongoing, with MCL enrollment expanded to study Cirm + Ibr in pts who have had a suboptimal response to an Ibr regimen, or who have failed other approved BTKi agents. Clinical trial information: NCT03088878.

scholarly journals Phase I clinical trial of the combination of eribulin and everolimus in patients with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin Sun Lee ◽  
Susan E. Yost ◽  
Suzette Blanchard ◽  
Daniel Schmolze ◽  
Hongwei Holly Yin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Dose Level ◽  
Triple Negative Breast Cancer ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Number Of Cycles

Abstract Background Alteration of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway is a common genomic abnormality detected in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC). Everolimus acts synergistically with eribulin in TNBC cell lines and xenograft models. This phase I trial was designed to test the safety and tolerability of combining eribulin and everolimus in patients with metastatic TNBC. Methods The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the safety and toxicities of the combination. Patients with metastatic TNBC who had up to four lines of prior chemotherapies were enrolled. The combination of eribulin and everolimus was tested using three dosing levels: A1 (everolimus 5 mg daily; eribulin 1.4 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks), A2 (everolimus 7.5 mg daily; eribulin 1.4 mg/m2, days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks), and B1 (everolimus 5 mg daily; eribulin 1.1 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks). Results Twenty-seven patients with median age 55 years were enrolled. Among 8 evaluable patients who received dose level A1, 4 had dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Among 3 evaluable patients treated with dose level A2, 2 had DLTs. Among 12 evaluable patients who received dose level B1, 4 had DLTs. The DLTs were neutropenia, stomatitis, and hyperglycemia. Over the study period, 59% had a ≥ grade 3 toxicity, 44% had ≥ grade 3 hematologic toxicities, and 22% had grade 4 hematologic toxicities. The most common hematological toxicities were neutropenia, leukopenia, and lymphopenia. Thirty-three percent had grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities. The most common non-hematological toxicities were stomatitis, hyperglycemia, and fatigue. The median number of cycles completed was 4 (range 0–8). Among 25 eligible patients, 9 patients (36%) achieved the best response as partial response, 9 (36%) had stable disease, and 7 (28%) had progression. The median time to progression was 2.6 months (95% CI [2.1, 4.0]), and median overall survival (OS) was 8.3 months (95% CI [5.5, undefined]). Conclusion Eribulin 1.1 mg/m2 days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks with everolimus 5 mg daily was defined as the highest dose with acceptable toxicity (RP2D). The combination is safe, and efficacy is modest. A post hoc analysis showed that participants that used dexamethasone mouthwash stayed on treatment for one additional cycle. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02120469. Registered 18 April 2014

Preliminary Results of a Phase I/II Trial of BBR-2778 (Pixantrone) in Combination with Fludarabine, Dexamethasone, and Rituximab (FPD-R) in the Treatment of Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Indolent Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma (NHL).

Blood ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 104 (11) ◽  
pp. 1324-1324 ◽  
Author(s):  
Luis Fayad ◽  
James Liebmann ◽  
Manuel Modiano ◽  
Gary I. Cohen ◽  
Barbara Pro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
B Cell ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
B Cell Lymphoma ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Outpatient Basis ◽  
Significant Activity ◽  
Cardiac Events

Abstract Background: Fludarabine-mitoxantrone-dexamethasone-rituximab (FND-R) is a combination chemotherapy with significant activity in untreated and relapsed indolent B-cell lymphoma patients (pts). Pixantrone is a novel aza-anthracenedione that has no delayed cardiotoxicity in animal models and has single agent activity in NHL. We conducted an outpatient phase I/II trial, to define the recommended dose (RD) of pixantrone when substituting for mitoxantrone in the FND-R regimen, and the safety and efficacy of this regimen in pts with relapsed or refractory indolent NHL. Methods: Pts received pixantrone with fludarabine (25mg/m2/day, days 1–3), dexamethasone (20mg/day, days 1–5), and rituximab (375mg/m2/day on day 1) in a 28 day regimen (FPD-R). Based on previous single agent clinical studies, the starting dose of pixantrone was defined as 80mg/m². The RD was established to be 120mg/m2 and the protocol was amended to treat patients in the phase II part. Results: 9 pts (6 males) with a median age of 65 years (range 41–78) were included in the dose-finding part of the study. Following the protocol amendment, 23 pts (11 males) of WHO performance status 0–1, median age 61 (range 32–78) have been enrolled in the currently ongoing phase II part. Pathology included SLL/CLL, follicular grade I, follicular grade II, MALT, marginal cell, and other indolent B-cell lymphomas. All pts had received a prior anthracycline-containing regimen (median number 1, range 1–4). The study regimen was well tolerated; median number of courses received was 5 (range 2–8). Grade 4 toxicities were neutropenia in 10 pts, leukopenia in 5 pts, and thrombocytopenia in 1 pt. No clinically significant cardiac events or decreases in LVEF ≥20% were noted. However 4 pts went below 50% LVEF including 1 pt who was below 50% at baseline. Non-hematologic adverse events were primarily grade 1 or 2 in severity. Response rate was 75% for the 20 pts evaluable for response, with 11 (55%) complete remission [7 confirmed (CR), 4 unconfirmed (CRu)], and 4 (20%) partial remission (PR). Two responders went onto bone marrow transplant (BMT): one had a CRu and one a PR. A third patient was pending BMT after CR. At a median follow-up of 345 days, the median duration of response has not been reached, as only two pts have progressed: the first progression occurred at 113 days, and the second pt progressed at 699 days. The remaining pts are still in remission. Conclusions: The RD of pixantrone in the FPD-R regimen is 120mg/m2. The primary toxicity is hematologic. The regimen can be given on an outpatient basis, is associated with major responses, and is very well tolerated in relapsed and refractory indolent NHL pts.

A Phase I/II Study of Bortezomib and Low Dose Intravenous Melphalan (BM) for Relapsed Multiple Myeloma.

Blood ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 106 (11) ◽  
pp. 2555-2555 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rakesh Popat ◽  
Heather E. Oakervee ◽  
Nicola Foot ◽  
Samir Agrawal ◽  
Patricia Smith ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Progressive Disease ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Overall Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Number Of Cycles

Abstract Background: Bortezomib as a single agent has known efficacy in the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma. The overall response rate (CR+PR+MR) was 35% in the SUMMIT study and 46% in the APEX study. In-vitro studies including our own have demonstrated potent synergy with other chemotherapeutic agents such as melphalan. It therefore follows that responses to bortezomib may be further improved by the combination of such drugs. Aims: The primary objectives of this Phase I/II study was to assess the safety, tolerability and response rates in patients with relapsed multiple myeloma; secondary objectives being time to progression (TTP) and overall surival (OS). Methods: This was a multi-centre, non-randomised trial for patients with relapsed myeloma. Patients received bortezomib 1.3mg/m2 on days 1,4,8 and 11 of each 28 day cycle with melphalan on day 2 at increasing dose levels. This was initially at 10mg/m2, but due to cytopenias subsequently at 2.5 and 5mg/m2 (levels 1a, 1 and 2) and we plan to escalate to 7.5mg/m2. Up to 8 cycles were given with dexamethasone added for stable or progressive disease after 4 or 2 cycles respectively. Responses were determined by EBMT criteria. Results: To date, 18 patients have been enrolled (12 male 6 female; median age 60 [range 44–73]; median number of prior therapies 3 [range 1–5] of which 17 have had at least one autologous stem cell procedure with high dose melphalan; 10 prior thalidomide and 2 prior bortezomib). 12 patients received melphalan at 10mg/m2 but due to unacceptable delays predominantly due to thrombocytopaenia, subsequent treatment levels commenced at 2.5mg/m2. The median number of cycles completed thus far is 4 (range 0–8) and of the 16 evaluable, the overall response rate (CR+PR+MR) across all treatment levels was 50% rising to 75% following the addition of dexamethasone as per protocol. At level 1a (melphalan 10mg/m2 ,N=12, median number of cycles completed =5) the best responses (with dexamethasone as indicated) were: 1CR, 1 VGPR, 5 PR, 2 MR; at level 1 (melphalan 2.5mg/m2, N=4) 1 PR, 2 MR (after 2 cycles only). The median time to any response was 1 cycle (range 1–3 ). Three patients have progressive disease, but the median TTP and OS have not yet been reached (median follow-up 3 months). Non-haematological toxicities have been modest with 7 SAEs reported of which only 1 was possibly drug related (myocardial infarction), and 4 episodes of Grade 3 neuropathy (2 resulting in study withdrawal). The commonest grade 3–4 haematological toxicity was thrombocytopaenia (N=10) complicated by bleeding in one patient, followed by neutropenia (N=6). Summary: The combination of bortezomib and intravenous melphalan can be given safely to patients with relapsed multiple myeloma and dose escalation is ongoing. Myelosupression was the commonest grade 3–4 adverse event. A response rate of 50% was seen, which was further improved to 75% with the addition of dexamethasone. This combination may therefore result in higher responses than single agent bortezomib in heavily pretreated patients.

Final Report of a Phase I/II Study of Hyper-CVAD Plus RAD001 (Everolimus) in Patients with Relapsed/Refractory Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia

Blood ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 120 (21) ◽  
pp. 3567-3567
Author(s):  
Yanis Boumber ◽  
Deborah A. Thomas ◽  
Farhad Ravandi ◽  
Michael E. Rytting ◽  
Marian R Love ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Lymphoblastic Leukemia ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Philadelphia Chromosome ◽  
Mtor Inhibitors ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Mtor Signaling ◽  
Final Report ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Abstract 3567 Background: Acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) is an aggressive lymphoproliferative disorder, responsive to frontline standard induction and consolidation chemotherapy. However, the prognosis of patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory ALL is extremely poor. Deregulation of the PI3K/Akt/mTOR signal transduction pathway is central to leukemic cell growth, proliferation and survival, and has been implicated in ALL pathogenesis. In a recent phase II study of pts with relapsed/refractory non-Hodgkin lymphoma, single agent mTOR inhibitor everolimus showed ORR 30% and acceptable toxicity in 77 heavily pretreated pts (Witzig TE et al, Leukemia 2011; 25,341–7). The purpose of this study was to establish the safety and efficacy of everolimus in combination with hyper-CVAD in pts with relapsed/refractory ALL, and to study effects of everolimus on AKT/mTOR signaling in ALL blasts. Methods: In this single center phase I/II study, pts aged 10 years or older with relapsed/refractory ALL or lymphoblastic lymphoma were treated with oral everolimus at a daily dose of 5 mg or 10 mg in combination with the standard hyper-CVAD regimen (Kantarjian HM et al, J Clin Oncol. 2000 Feb;18(3):547–61) until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoints were to establish safety (after 2 cycles) and efficacy. Secondary endpoints included assessments of pharmacodynamics and pharmacokinetics. Results: Twelve pts have been enrolled and are evaluable for response. Median was age 24 years (range, 11–59). Five pts had T-ALL and 7 had Philadelphia chromosome negative precursor-B-ALL. Median number of prior treatments was 2 (range, 1–4); 5 pts were 1st salvage attempts. Three pts received everolimus 5 mg/day and 9 were treated with 10 mg/day continuously in combination with hyper-CVAD. Median number of cycles given was 2 (range, 1–4). Median follow-up was 12 months (range, 7–23). Three pts achieved CR (all were 1st salvage attempts) and 1 patient had CRi (second salvage); 2 pts achieved PR. No responses were seen beyond second salvage. Of the 9 pts completing 2 cycles, both EFS and OS were not reached for 3 pts in the 1st salvage, and were 8.5 weeks and 18.5 weeks respectively for pts in second salvage and beyond (P=.01 and P=0.04). Of the 12 pts (including 3 only treated with one cycle), both EFS and OS were not reached for 3 pts in the 1st salvage, and were 10 weeks and 18 weeks respectively for pts in second salvage and beyond (P=0.17 and P=0.05). Treatment-related toxicities in the 9 pts evaluable for MTD (completed 2 cycles) included 3 episodes of grade 3 mucositis, which was a dose-limiting toxicity, 3 episodes of grade 4 infections (sepsis) and 9 episodes of grade 3 infections (neutropenic fever, pneumonia, bacteremia). There was no deaths on-study. Inhibition of mTOR signaling (p-pS6K) was observed in 5 of 8 (62%) patient samples tested, at both the 5 and 10 mg dose levels, suggesting that 5 mg is sufficient to block the pathway. Lack of inhibition of p-pEBP1 and pAKT argues for potential benefit of second generation mTOR inhibitors or dual PI3K/mTOR inhibitors. Conclusions: We conclude that administration of hyper-CVAD plus everolimus is well-tolerated. The study warrants further investigation of next generation mTOR inhibitors in combination with hyper-CVAD for ALL in relapsed and frontline settings. Disclosures: Cortes: Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding.

A Phase I-II Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Lenalidomide (LEN) Combined to Azacitidine (AZA) in Higher Risk MDS and AML with Del 5q - a Study By the Groupe Francophone Des Myelodysplasies (GFM)

Blood ◽  
2015 ◽  
Vol 126 (23) ◽  
pp. 2892-2892 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lionel Ades ◽  
Christian Récher ◽  
Julie Lejeune ◽  
Aspasia Stamatoullas ◽  
Marie Sebert ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Early Death ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Cytogenetic Response ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Intensive Chemotherapy ◽  
Best Response

Abstract Background: Higher risk MDS and AML with del(5q) carry very poor prognosis, but show some response to AZA and LEN as single agents (Adès Blood 2009, Itzykson, Blood 2010). The combination of LEN and AZA has been tested in non-del 5q MDS patients with encouraging results and limited toxicity (Sekeres, Blood 2012). Sequential combination of AZA and LEN has also shown to be feasible and potentially effective in 20 patients with higher-risk MDS with del(5q) in a phase I study (Platzbecker, Leukemia 2013). In this phase I-II trial, we combined escalating doses of LEN to AZA in higher risk MDS and AML with del(5q). Methods: Patients with IPSS int-2 or high MDS, CMML with WBC < 13,000/mm3 and marrow blasts > 10% and AML (20-30% marrow blasts) with 5q deletion with or without additional cytogenetic abnormalities could be included provided they had not previously received LEN or AZA. Patients should also have contra indication to intensive chemotherapy (IC), precluding inclusion in a GFM competing trial combining IC and LEN in higher risk MDS and AML with del 5q. In the present trial, patients received AZA (75 mg/m2 x5 d, every 28 days) combined with escalating doses of LEN (5 mg/d x14 d in cohort 1, 5 mg/d x21 d in cohort 2 and 10 mg/d x21 d in cohort 3). For patients in hematological CR, PR, HI or marrow CR (MDS) and CR or PR (AML) after cycle 2 or 4, treatment was to be continued at the same schedule unless unacceptable toxicity or overt progression occurred. The primary endpoint was response assessed according to IWG 2006 criteria. Secondary endpoints were best response over the 4 cycles and survival. Medians [IQR] are reported unless specified. Intent-to-treat analyses were made. Results: 49 patients were enrolled, including 15, 10 and 24 patients in cohort 1 (LEN 5 mg/d x14d), 2 (LEN 5 mg/d x21d) and 3 (LEN 10 mg/d x21d). 24 were males and the median age was 69 (63-74). According to WHO classification, 1 patient had CMML, 9 RAEB1, 22 RAEB2 and 17 AML. PS was 0, 1 and 2, in 30.8%, 43.6% and 25.6% patients, respectively. However, as said above, patients included in this trial were considered unfit for IC due to their age and/or comorbidities (cardiovascular in 30 patients, pulmonary e in 10, and neurological in 6 pts). Del(5q) was isolated in only 8.3% pts, while 85.4% had del (5q) and at least 2 additional abnormalities (i.e., complex).. IPSS was int-2 in 33% patients and high in 66% patients. Overall, 143 cycles were administered (median 2/patient, including 9 patients who received 6 or more cycles). In the three cohorts, the median number of cycles received was 2 (1-2), 2 (1-4.75) and 4 (2-5.5) respectively. Fifteen (30.6%) patients discontinued treatment before the second cycle, due to early death (n=9), adverse events (n=3), progression (n=2), or CNS hemorrhage (n=1). They were all considered as non responders (primary endpoint). After 2 cycles, 4 (8.2%) achieved CR, 4 (8.2%) marrow CR and 4 (8.2%) stable disease with hematological improvement (ORR= 24%). The best response rate over the 4 courses was 2/15 (13.3%) in cohort 1, 1/10 (10%) in cohort 2, and 9/24 (37.5%) in cohort 3 (ORR=24%). The response rate was 37.5% in patients receiving 10 mg/d, versus 12% in those receiving 5 mg (p=0.051) while other baseline parameters had no impact on response: IPSS (p=0.073), marrow blasts >10% (p=0.16), sex (p=0.74), cytogenetic complexity (p=0.26) or PS (p=0.419). 2/6 CR patients achieved cytogenetic complete response: 0/2 in cohort 1, 0/0 in cohort 2, and 2/4 in cohort 3. One year OS was estimated at 22.9% [95% IC: 12.3-42.5]. We failed to identified any prognostic factor associated with OS (IPSS (p=0.52), marrow blasts >10% (p=0.28), sex (p=0.99), isolated del(5q) (p=0.68), cohort (p=0.2) and PS (p=0.33)). Regarding toxicity, 58 SAEs (grade 3-4) were reported in 38 patients, including 35 infectious events, 7 bleding events, 3 deep venous thrombosis. Conclusion: In this elderly population of higher risk MDS or AML considered unfit for intensive chemotherapy, and with del 5q that was part of a complex karyotype in almost all cases, the combination of AZA with escalated doses of LEN was associated with early discontinuation (<4 cycles) in 30/49 (61.2%) of the patients, mostly due to progression or toxicity, and only 12/49 (24.5%) response. The fact that some responders also achieved cytogenetic response may however be encouraging. Disclosures Vey: Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria. Park:Hospira: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding. Fenaux:Amgen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Novartis: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding.

A Phase I/II Trial of Ixazomib (Ix), Pomalidomide (POM), and Dexamethasone (DEX), in Relapsed/Refractory (R/R) Multiple Myeloma (MM) Patients: Responses in Double/Triple Refractory Myeloma and Poor Risk Cytogenetics

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 3316-3316 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amrita Krishnan ◽  
Prashant Kapoor ◽  
Joycelynne Palmer ◽  
Ni-Chun Tsai ◽  
Shaji Kumar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Refractory Disease ◽  
Poor Risk

Abstract Triplet regimens combining an immunomodulatory agent, a proteasome inhibitor (PI), and a steroid are used to treat newly diagnosed and relapsed multiple myeloma (MM). Although ixazomib (Ix), an oral PI with single agent activity, can be combined with lenalidomide (LEN), patients (pts) with relapsed/refractory (R/R) MM are often LEN-refractory. Pomalidomide (POM) has single agent activity in LEN-refractory disease, and both POM and Ix also show activity in poor cytogenetic risk pts. Methods: Primary objectives: 1) determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of Ix in combination with standard dose POM and dexamethasone (DEX), and 2) evaluate the anti-tumor activity of the triplet. The treatment regimen included two dose levels (3 mg and 4 mg) of Ix on days 1, 8, 15; POM 4 mg days 1-21; and DEX 40 mg days 1, 8, 15, 22, of a 28 day cycle. Eligibility: R/R MM after >1 prior therapy, LEN-refractory, and ≤ grade(gr) 1 peripheral neuropathy (PN). Pts were treated until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Design: Phase I study utilizing a standard 3+3 design; dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) defined during cycle 1. Results: 32 pts treated, 31 evaluable for toxicity and response. Pts received a median 4 cycles (range 1-13); median follow-up is 5.5 months (range 1.8-21.1). Six pts treated on DL1, 25 treated on DL2, the MTD/Phase II dose (P2D). Median age: 62 years (range 38-84); median time from diagnosis: 3.7 years (range 1.0-8.9); median number prior therapies: 3 (range 1-5); prior transplant: n = 23 (74%); double (LEN/Bortezomib[BOR]) or triple (LEN/BOR/Carfilzomib[CFZ]) refractory: 19 (61%). Phase I: DL1 expanded to n=6 after 1/3 pts experienced DLT (gr3 lung infection); no further DLT seen on DL 1 or 2. Adverse events (AEs) related to POM and/or Ix: ANC decrease Gr1/2 n=11 (35%), Gr3/4 n=10 (32%), platelet decrease Gr1/2 n=9 (29%), lymphocyte decrease Gr1/2 n=8 (26%), Gr3/4 n=11 (35%), PN Gr1/2 n=9 (29%), no Gr3/4. Response: Phase I and II, n=31 pts treated. ORR: 45% (6 VGPR, 8 PR); Clinical Benefit Rate (CBR): 81% (6 VGPR, 8 PR, 3 MR, 8 SD). In the pts with high risk cytogenetics (7[23%] 1q, 3[10%] 17p, 2[6%] t(4;14)) an ORR of 58% (3 VGPR, 4 PR) was seen, and the CBR was 83%. In the double or triple refractory pts, an ORR of 26% and CBR of 79% (1 VGPR, 4 PR, 3 MR, 7 SD) were observed. Conclusions: Ix/POM/DEX is a well-tolerated oral combination therapy, and responses were seen even at DL1 and in high risk patients, including those with poor-risk cytogenetics or advanced refractory disease. Disclosures Kapoor: Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Takeda: Research Funding. Kumar:Millennium: Consultancy, Research Funding; AbbVie: Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Consultancy; Sanofi: Consultancy, Research Funding; Noxxon Pharma: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; BMS: Consultancy; Kesios: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy, Research Funding; Skyline: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Array BioPharma: Consultancy, Research Funding. Lonial:Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Merck: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Millenium: Consultancy; Janssen: Consultancy; Onyx: Consultancy. Nathwani:Carevive Systems, Inc.: Research Funding. Forman:Mustang Therpapeutics: Other: Construct licensed by City of Hope. Berdeja:Abbvie, Acetylon, Amgen, Bluebird, BMS, Calithera, Celgene, Constellation, Curis, Epizyme, Janssen, Karyopharm, Kesios, Novartis, Onyx, Takeda, Tragara: Research Funding.

Clinical activity and safety of the histone deacetylase inhibitor MGCD0103: Results of a phase I study in patients with leukemia or myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6500-6500 ◽  
Author(s):  
G. Garcia-Manero ◽  
M. Minden ◽  
Z. Estrov ◽  
S. Verstovsek ◽  
W. M. Newsome ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase I ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Myelogenous Leukemia ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Tumour Suppressor Genes ◽  
Dependent Manner ◽  
Hdac Inhibition ◽  
Dose Dependent

6500 Background: MGCD0103 is a novel inhibitor of human histone deacetylases (HDACs), with selectivity for the cancer-associated isoforms of class I HDACs. Deacetylation of histones by HDACs is postulated to inactivate tumour suppressor genes leading to neoplastic transformation, and therefore inhibition of this enzyme may result in antineoplastic activity. Methods: To study the safety and activity of MGCD0103, we have developed a phase I open-label dose escalation study of MGCD0103 administered orally, three-times weekly in patients with leukemia or MDS, with the primary endpoints being the determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) characteristics of MGCD0103. Eligibility criteria included appropriate performance status and renal and hepatic functions. Patients with relapsed/refractory leukemia or MDS and older patients with untreated AML/MDS were eligible. Results: Twenty patients have been enrolled at four dose levels (20, 40, 80 and 60 mg/m2) so far. Their characteristics are: median age 60 years (range 33–76); the majority of patients so far treated have AML; median number of prior therapies is 1 (range 0–3). Most patients had complex cytogenetics. MGCD0103 has been well tolerated at doses below 80 mg/m2. The MTD has been reached, with 3 out of 4 patients at a dose of 80 mg/m2 developing grade 3 toxicity, mainly fatigue, nausea, vomiting or diarrhea. Grade 2 toxicities include anorexia, constipation, dehydration. The median number of courses is 1 (range 1 to 6). As of January 2006, 7 patients are on study. PK evaluations show dose-dependent exposure. Analysis of peripheral blood cell HDAC activity indicates that HDAC inhibition occurs in all patients in a dose-dependent manner. Two patients with multiple relapsed/refractory acute myelogenous leukemia, and one with MDS have achieved a complete marrow response (blasts less than 6%). Of importance, maximal HDAC inhibition was observed in those patients at the time of best response. Conclusions: Single-agent MGCD0103 has clinical activity and is well tolerated at doses below 80 mg/m2 orally three times a week in patients with advanced leukemia. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document