An open-label, phase II study of rucaparib, a PARP inhibitor, in HER2- metastatic breast cancer patients with high genomic loss of heterozygosity: RUBY.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS1117-TPS1117 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne Patsouris ◽  
Cecile Vicier ◽  
Loic Campion ◽  
Wilfried Gouraud ◽  
Marta Jimenez ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Homologous Recombination ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Snp Array ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Open Label

TPS1117 Background: BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 mutations confer sensitivity to poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (PARPi). In addition to BRCA1/2, alterations of other genes (PALB2, RAD51C….) implicated in homologous recombination repair (HRR) pathways leads to a BRCAness phenotype that is also associated with PARPi sensitivity. Rucaparib, a potent oral PARP-1, -2 and -3 inhibitor, has shown activity in a phase 1 study of patients (pts) with homologous recombination deficient (HRD) breast cancer (Kristeleit, RS. J Clin Oncol 32:5s, 2014 [suppl; abstr 2573]). This single arm, open-label, multicenter phase II study (NCT02505048) is evaluating the efficacy and safety of rucaparib in pts with HER2- metastatic breast cancer (MBC) associated with a BRCAness phenotype determined by “high tumor genomic LOH” score and/or a somatic BRCAmutation. Methods: Pts with HER2- MBC exhibiting a BRCAness phenotype will receive oral rucaparib 600 mg BID continuously in 21-day cycles until disease progression. The primary endpoint is clinical benefit rate (CBR), defined by complete and partial response and stable disease lasting for at least 16 weeks and, if CBR is significant, the objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, overall survival, safety, and the prognostic value of the BRCAness signature. Targeted enrollment is 41 pts using a Simon two-stage design. Eligibility: Women with HER2- MBC with a BRCAness phenotype who received 1-4 prior chemotherapy regimens are eligible. ECOG PS 0-1 and adequate organ function is required. The BRCAness phenotype is defined by high tumor genomic LOH (LOH cutoff of 18%) that can identify HRD tumors, including both known BRCA1 methylation and unknown genetic/epigenetic mechanisms and somatic BRCA1/2 mutations. Pts with a known BRCA1 and/or BRCA2 germline mutation are excluded. “high tumor genomic LOH” score will be generated from the CytoScan HD SNP array, which is available from the SAFIR02 protocol or other molecular programs. To date, 13 pts have been enrolled, with enrollment ongoing. This trial design is intended to establish proof-of-concept that rucaparib can improve ORR in HER2- MBC with HRD. Clinical trial information: NCT02505048.

scholarly journals TBCRC 048: Phase II Study of Olaparib for Metastatic Breast Cancer and Mutations in Homologous Recombination-Related Genes

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (36) ◽  
pp. 4274-4282 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine M. Tung ◽  
Mark E. Robson ◽  
Steffen Ventz ◽  
Cesar A. Santa-Maria ◽  
Rita Nanda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Homologous Recombination ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Parp Inhibition ◽  
Mutation Carriers ◽  
Metastatic Setting

PURPOSE Olaparib, a poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitor (PARPi), is approved for the treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)–negative metastatic breast cancer (MBC) in germline (g) BRCA1/ 2 mutation carriers. Olaparib Expanded, an investigator-initiated, phase II study, assessed olaparib response in patients with MBC with somatic (s) BRCA1/ 2 mutations or g/s mutations in homologous recombination (HR)–related genes other than BRCA1/2. METHODS Eligible patients had MBC with measurable disease and germline mutations in non- BRCA1/ 2 HR-related genes (cohort 1) or somatic mutations in these genes or BRCA1/ 2 (cohort 2). Prior PARPi, platinum-refractory disease, or progression on more than two chemotherapy regimens (metastatic setting) was not allowed. Patients received olaparib 300 mg orally twice a day until progression. A single-arm, two-stage design was used. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR); the null hypothesis (≤ 5% ORR) would be rejected within each cohort if there were four or more responses in 27 patients. Secondary endpoints included clinical benefit rate and progression-free survival (PFS). RESULTS Fifty-four patients enrolled. Seventy-six percent had estrogen receptor–positive HER2-negative disease. Eighty-seven percent had mutations in PALB2, s BRCA1/ 2, ATM, or CHEK2. In cohort 1, ORR was 33% (90% CI, 19% to 51%) and in cohort 2, 31% (90% CI, 15% to 49%). Confirmed responses were seen only with g PALB2 (ORR, 82%) and s BRCA1/ 2 (ORR, 50%) mutations. Median PFS was 13.3 months (90% CI, 12 months to not available/computable [NA]) for g PALB2 and 6.3 months (90% CI, 4.4 months to NA) for s BRCA1/ 2 mutation carriers. No responses were observed with ATM or CHEK2 mutations alone. CONCLUSION PARP inhibition is an effective treatment for patients with MBC and g PALB2 or s BRCA1/ 2 mutations, significantly expanding the population of patients with breast cancer likely to benefit from PARPi beyond g BRCA1/ 2 mutation carriers. These results emphasize the value of molecular characterization for treatment decisions in MBC.

Pharmacokinetics, safety, and early activity of a nanoparticle micellar formulation of docetaxel in women with metastatic breast cancer: Results of two randomized trials (phase I and II).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3526-3526 ◽  
Author(s):  
Markus Joerger ◽  
Helena Bjermo ◽  
Per Blom ◽  
Nina Anna Heldring
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Intravenous Infusion ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Third Party ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Early Activity

3526 Background: Docetaxel micellar (DM) is a nano-sized particle formulation of docetaxel in which a retinoic acid derivative is used as solubilizer with a high drug to excipient ratio possibly resulting in reduced systemic toxicity or hypersensitivity reactions due to the excipient. DM is given without standard use of premedication, avoiding steroid-associated immunosuppression. Here we present the pharmacokinetics (PK) after a single dose of DM or polysorbate-solubilized docetaxel (D) as well as safety and early activity including overall response rate (ORR) in female patients with metastatic breast cancer. Methods: The PK study was a two-cycle, cross-over study where 30 patients were included and randomized to either DM followed by D or D followed by DM, both given as a 1-hour intravenous infusion at a dose of 100mg/m2. The phase II study was a prospective, multicenter, open-label, third-party blinded, randomized, parallel group, active-controlled study including 200 patients to compare the early activity and safety of DM and D, both given as 100 mg/m2 1-hour intravenous infusion every 21 days (1 cycle) for a total of 6 cycles. Results: Bioequivalence of total docetaxel in plasma, AUC0-last and Cmax, was demonstrated for DM compared to D. The incidence of adverse events was higher in the D arm than in the DM arm for the majority of SOCs and PTs in the phase II study. Overall, Grade 3 or 4 AEs were reported for 82.7% of patients from DM arm and 99.0% of patients from D arm. Twelve (12.2%) patients in the DM arm and 24 (24.0%) patients in the D arm needed at least one dose reduction due to AEs. The primary efficacy endpoint in the phase II study was based on the assessment according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Soldid Tumors (RECIST) 1.1 and non-inferiority was not reached based on the pre-defined non-inferiority margin. A post-hoc analysis investigating the ORR based on tumour assessment at the end of chemotherapy, and non-inferiority of DM as compared to D was shown (ITT population). Conclusions: DM is bioequivalent to D regarding total drug in plasma and provides a docetaxel formulation that spares patients steroid premedication. An improved safety profile for DM compared to D was shown while additional efficacy data is needed for future development of DM. Eudra CT: 2012-005161-12 and 2013-004889-33. Clinical trial information: 2012-005161-12 and 2013-004889-33 .

Randomized, Placebo-Controlled, Double-Blind, Phase II Study of Axitinib Plus Docetaxel Versus Docetaxel Plus Placebo in Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (18) ◽  
pp. 2459-2465 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hope S. Rugo ◽  
Alison T. Stopeck ◽  
Anil A. Joy ◽  
Stephen Chan ◽  
Shailendra Verma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Adjuvant Chemotherapy ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
The Difference ◽  
To Receive

Purpose This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase II study assessed safety and efficacy of axitinib plus docetaxel in metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and Methods Women with MBC were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive docetaxel 80 mg/m2 once every 3 weeks plus axitinib 5 mg twice per day (combination arm) or placebo (placebo arm), following a lead-in phase I trial. The primary end point was time to progression (TTP). Results In all, 168 patients were enrolled; 112 were randomly assigned to axitinib and 56 to placebo. Median TTP was numerically longer in the combination arm than in the placebo arm (8.1 v 7.1 months), but this difference was not statistically significant (hazard ratio, 1.24; 95% CI, 0.82 to 1.87; one-sided P = .156). The difference in median TTP was greatest among patients who had received prior adjuvant chemotherapy (9.2 v 7.0 months; P = .043, prespecified subgroup analysis). Objective response rate was higher in the combination arm (41.1% v 23.6%; P = .011). The most common grades 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events (combination/placebo) included diarrhea (10.8%/0%), fatigue (10.8%/5.4%), stomatitis (12.6%/1.8%), mucositis (9.0%/0%), asthenia (7.2%/0%), and hypertension (4.5%/0%). Three patients in the combination arm experienced serious thromboembolic events (one death). Febrile neutropenia was more frequent in the combination arm (15.3% v 7.1%); rates of other hematologic toxicities were comparable. Increased toxicity with axitinib was generally managed by dose reduction and/or growth factor support. Conclusion The addition of axitinib to docetaxel did not improve TTP in first-line MBC treatment. Combination therapy may be more effective in patients previously exposed to adjuvant chemotherapy.

scholarly journals Phase II study of sequential S-1 and cyclophosphamide therapy in patients with metastatic breast cancer

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Keiko Yanai ◽  
Takaaki Fujii ◽  
Jun Horiguchi ◽  
Yuko Nakazawa ◽  
Sasagu Kurozumi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Sequential Therapy ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Overall Response

Abstract Purpose: S-1 and cyclophosphamide (CPA) can be given orally, and their combination may have great potential for treating metastatic breast cancer (MBC). A phase I study of sequential S-1 and CPA therapy was conducted in patients with MBC; the recommended doses that were determined for this regimen were 80 mg/m 2 /day for S-1 and 100 mg/m 2 /day for CPA. We then conducted a phase II study of this oral S-1 and CPA regimen. Patients and Methods: This was a single-arm, open-label, single-center prospective phase II study to evaluate the efficacy of a sequential S-1 and CPA regimen for MBC. S-1 was administered orally 2´/day for 14 consecutive days, and then CPA was administered orally 1´/day for 14 consecutive days in a repeating 4-week cycle (S-1 for 2 weeks, CPA for 2 weeks). The primary endpoint was the overall response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included the overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), clinical benefit rate (CBR) and safety. Results: Thirty-six patients were enrolled in this study. The overall response was complete response in 0 (0%), partial response in 12 (33.3%), stable disease in 12 (33.3%), and progressive disease in 11 (30.1%) patients. The ORR was 33.3% (12/36). The CBR was 66.7% (24/36). The mean PFS was 9.5 months (95%CI: 7.1–11.9 months). The OS was 20.2 months (95%CI: 15.0–25.6 months) Grade 3/4 adverse events included neutropenia in seven patients (19.4%). Dose reductions because of adverse events occurred in 12 patients (33.3%). There was no treatment-related mortality. Conclusion: The combination of sequential therapy with S-1 and CPA was tolerable and had efficacy with good disease control. Sequential therapy with S-1 and CPA is a feasible new treatment option for patients with MBC.

Randomized Phase II Study of Two Irinotecan Schedules for Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer Refractory to an Anthracycline, a Taxane, or Both

2004 ◽  
Vol 22 (14) ◽  
pp. 2849-2855 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edith A. Perez ◽  
David W. Hillman ◽  
James A. Mailliard ◽  
James N. Ingle ◽  
J. Michael Ryan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Median Overall Survival ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Response Duration ◽  
Median Response

Purpose A pressing need exists for agents active against anthracycline- or taxane-refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC), or both. Previous clinical trials suggested that irinotecan might have such activity. We conducted this multicenter phase II study to assess efficacy and tolerability of two irinotecan schedules. Patients and Methods MBC patients who experienced disease progression after one to three chemotherapy regimens, including at least one anthracycline- or taxane-based regimen, were randomly assigned to irinotecan in 6-week cycles comprising 100 mg/m2 weekly for 4 weeks, then a 2-week rest (weekly) or 240 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Results The weekly arm had 52 assessable patients; the every-3-weeks arm had 51 assessable patients. In the weekly arm, the objective response (complete regression [CR] + partial regression [PR]) rate was 23% (one CR, 11 PR; 95% CI, 13% to 37%). Median response duration was 4.9 months (range, 1.9 to 15.9 months), and median overall survival was 9.7 months (95% CI, 8.0 to 14.2 months). In the every-3-weeks arm, the objective response rate was 14% (nine PR; 95% CI, 6% to 26%), median response duration was 4.2 months (range, 3.1 to 13.9 months), and median overall survival was 8.6 months (95% CI, 7.0 to 12.3 months). Treatment generally was well tolerated, especially in the weekly arm. Grade 3 to 4 adverse events with ≥ 10% incidence included neutropenia (29%) and diarrhea (17%) in the weekly arm and neutropenia (36%), vomiting (20%), dyspnea (18%), nausea (16%), and diarrhea (12%) in the every-3-weeks arm. Conclusion Irinotecan is active with good tolerability in refractory MBC. Irinotecan (especially weekly) warrants additional study as monotherapy and in combination regimens in this setting.

Gemcitabine and Vinorelbine Combination Chemotherapy in Taxane-Pretreated Patients with Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Phase II Study of the Kinki Multidisciplinary Breast Oncology Group (KMBOG) 1015

Chemotherapy ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 62 (5) ◽  
pp. 307-313 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jun Yamamura ◽  
Norikazu Masuda ◽  
Daigo Yamamoto ◽  
Shigeru Tsuyuki ◽  
Masahide Yamaguchi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Breast Cancer ◽  
Phase Ii ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Phase Ii Study ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Metastatic Breast ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Breast Cancer Patients ◽  
Free Survival

Background: This phase II study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of the chemotherapy combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine in taxane-pretreated Japanese metastatic breast cancer patients. Methods: In this multicenter, phase II, single-arm study, patients with recurrent or metastatic HER2-negative breast cancer were administered gemcitabine (1,200 mg/m2) and vinorelbine (25 mg/m2) intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks. The primary endpoint was the objective response rate, and other endpoints included progression-free survival, overall survival, and safety. Results: A total of 42 patients were enrolled in this study. The objective response rate and clinical benefit rate were 24 and 43%, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 4.0 months. The median overall survival was 11.1 months. Grade 3/4 neutropenia was the most common hematologic toxicity, occurring in 22 patients (54%). Nonhematologic toxicity was moderate and transient, with fatigue (48%) being the most common condition and no severe adverse event reported. Conclusion: The combination of gemcitabine and vinorelbine is an effective and tolerable regimen for HER2-negative, taxane-pretreated, metastatic breast cancer patients in Japan.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document