Precision oncology in sarcoma drug development: Impact of genomic matching on response, clinical benefit, and survival in sarcoma patients on phase 1 trials.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11018-11018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shiraj Sen ◽  
Roberto Pestana ◽  
Kenneth R. Hess ◽  
David S. Hong ◽  
Filip Janku ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Precision Oncology ◽  
Sequencing Data ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Phase 1 Trials ◽  
Clinical Benefit Rate ◽  
Bone Sarcomas

11018 Background: Genomic analyses have revealed many potentially actionable mutations across sarcoma subtypes. Whether sarcoma patients enrolled on genomically matched early phase trials have improved clinical outcomes over patients enrolled on non-genomically matched trials remains unclear. Methods: We analyzed clinical and next gen sequencing data from sarcoma patients on phase 1 trials at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) and performed logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses to compare response rate (RR), median time to progression (mTTP), clinical benefit rate (CBR = CR, PR, or SD > 6 months), and median overall survival (mOS) between patients treated on genomically-matched and non-genomically matched trials. Results: Among the 406 patients with advanced sarcomas (321 soft tissue sarcoma [STS], 85 bone sarcomas) treated on phase 1 trials at MDACC from May 2006 to May 2018, median age was 53 (range 11-84), 48% were female, and patients had a median 3 prior lines of therapy (range 0-9). The most commonly treated STS subtypes were leiomyosarcoma (n = 66; 16%), liposarcoma (n = 52; 13%), GIST (n = 44; 11%), and synovial sarcoma (n = 11; 3%) and most commonly treated bone sarcomas were osteosarcoma (n = 34; 8%), chondrosarcoma (n = 28; 7%), and Ewing's sarcoma (n = 25; 6%). 23% (n = 93) of sarcoma patients treated on phase 1 trials were treated on genomically-matched trials. RR on non-genomically matched trials was 6% compared to 11% on genomically-matched trials, OR 1.97 (95% CI 0.88, 4.44), p = 0.10. Responses on genomically-matched trials were seen with novel agents targeting TRK, LRRC15, cMET, mTOR, VEGF, MDM2, KIT/PDGFRA, and FGFR. mTTP on non-genomically matched trials was 2.7 months compared to 3.7 months on genomically-matched trials, HR 0.72 (95% CI 0.57, 0.91), p = 0.0048. CBR on non-genomically matched trials was 19% compared to 41% on genomically-matched trials, OR 2.91 (95% CI 1.77, 4.80), p < 0.0001. mOS on non-genomically matched trials was 15.5 months compared to 22.1 months on genomically-matched trials, HR 0.70 (95% CI 0.50,0.98), p = 0.031. Conclusions: Enrollment on genomically-matched phase 1 trials is associated with an improvement in clinical benefit rate, time to progression, and overall survival in heavily pretreated, metastatic sarcoma patients. While RR remained low, we report the mutations associated with responses on genomically-matched trials. A prospective, biomarker-driven genomically-matched basket trial for these alterations is warranted in advanced sarcomas.

A phase II, multicenter, open-label study of YM155 plus docetaxel in subjects with stage III (unresectable) or stage IV melanoma.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8587-8587 ◽  
Author(s):  
Joyce Leta Steinberg ◽  
Agop Y. Bedikian ◽  
D. Scott Ernst ◽  
Bartosz Chmielowski ◽  
Bruce Redman ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Continuous Infusion ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Clinical Benefit Rate

8587 Background: Survivin is a microtubule-associated protein implicated in both preservation of cell viability and regulation of mitosis in tumor cells. It is over-expressed in melanoma, breast, and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. YM155 is a first in class survivin inhibitor. Methods: The study had 2 parts: Part 1 established the dose of docetaxel that was tolerable in combination withYM155 at 5 mg/m2/day continuous infusion over 168 hours q 3 weeks. Part 2 utilized the dose of docetaxel established in Part 1 to further evaluate the tolerability and activity of the combination. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints were overall response rate, 1-year overall survival (OS), time from first response to progression, clinical benefit rate, time to response, and safety. Results: 64 patients with metastatic melanoma were treated with docetaxel followed by continuous infusion YM155. 7 patients were treated with 100mg/m2 of docetaxel and 57 patients were treated with 75mg/m2 of docetaxel. Median age was 59, with 44 men and 20 women treated. 6-month PFS per Independent Review Committee (IRC) was 34.8% (95% CI 21.3 – 48.6%). Overall objective response rate per IRC was 12.5%, with no complete responses (CR) and 8 patients with partial responses (PR). The Stable disease (SD) rate was 51.6%, leading to a clinical benefit rate (CR + PR + SD) of 64.1%. Estimated 1-year overall survival is 50.5%. 87.5% of patients experienced a Grade 3 (G3) or Grade 4 (G4) event attributable to either YM155 or docetaxel. The clinically pertinent G3 or 4 toxicities occurring in greater than 5% of patients treated included neutropenia (59.4%), febrile neutropenia (12.5%), mucositis (9.4%), fatigue (7.8%), diarrhea (6.3%), and dehydration (6.3%). There were 3 deaths on study, all attributable to disease progression. Conclusions: YM155 is a novel agent that shows modest activity when combined with docetaxel in patients with melanoma. YM155 was generally well tolerated, but the pre-determined primary endpoint for efficacy was not achieved.

Characteristics and outcomes of patients with gallbladder cancer and cholangiocarcinoma referred to a phase I clinic.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 364-364 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ishwaria Mohan Subbiah ◽  
Vivek Subbiah ◽  
Ahmed Omar Kaseb ◽  
Filip Janku ◽  
Jennifer J. Wheler ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Phase I ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Median Survival ◽  
Phase I Trial ◽  
Mutational Analysis ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Phase I Clinical Trials

364 Background: The prognosis of cholangiocarcinoma (CC) and gallbladder carcinoma (GC) remains grim. The purpose of this study was to report the presenting characteristics and outcomes of patients with CC and GC treated on phase 1 clinical trials focused on targeted agents at a major cancer center. Methods: We reviewed the records of consecutive patients with GC and CC in the Phase I Clinical Trials Program at the M. D. Anderson Cancer Center from Nov 2004. We assessed the relationship between overall survival, patients' tumor types, and mutations, demographic and clinical characteristics. Results: Fifty-two patients were identified (7 with GC, 45 with CC). The median age was 58 yrs (range, 20-75 yrs). ECOG performance status (PS) was 0, 1, 2, and 3 in 9 (17%), 30 (58%), 7 (13%), and 6 (12%) pts, respectively. Median number of prior therapies was 3 (range 0-17). The median time from diagnosis of metastatic disease to primary Phase I clinic evaluation was 14.6 months. Of 52 patients, 17 (33%) were not enrolled on a Phase I trial due to decline in PS (n=13) or decision to pursue other treatments (n=4). Of 35 patients evaluable for response, 2 (6%) had a partial response (PR), and 3 (9%) had stable disease > 4 months. Prognostic factors analyzed include Hg < 10.5 g/dL, elevated CA 19-9 (>47 ng/mL), ECOG PS > 3, LDH > 618 IU/L, albumin < 3.5 g/dL, platelets < 150 K/UL, and number of metastatic sites. Full analysis including the mutational analysis for PIK3CA, KRAS, BRAF, TP53 is in progress. Median survival since presentation to the Phase I clinic was 4.1 months (range 2.3 - 30.8 months). Median overall survival from diagnosis was 23.9 months. The median survival since enrollment in a Phase I trial was 4.6 months w the median time to disease progression on Phase I treatment was 2.2 months (range 0.6 - 25.6 months). Conclusions: Prognosis of pts with CC and GC referred for phase I studies remains poor. Further analysis including complete mutational profiles of CC and GC patients will be reported.

Survival and signals of response in advanced sarcoma patients enrolled on phase 1 trials in the era of precision oncology and novel immunotherapies.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11063-11063
Author(s):  
Shiraj Sen ◽  
Kenneth R. Hess ◽  
David S. Hong ◽  
Gerald Steven Falchook ◽  
Roberto Pestana ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Soft Tissue ◽  
Ewing’S Sarcoma ◽  
Ewing's Sarcoma ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Phase 1 Trials ◽  
Best Response ◽  
Bone Sarcomas ◽  
Us Fda ◽  
Advanced Sarcoma

11063 Background: Few effective US FDA approved therapies exist for refractory, metastatic sarcomas. Many of these patients therefore enroll onto phase 1 clinical trials. Because tumor-specific outcomes are not always reported in less common cancers such as sarcomas, outcomes of sarcoma patients treated with novel immunotherapy and targeted therapy approaches remains unknown. Methods: We analyzed clinical and next generation sequencing data from all sarcoma patients treated on phase 1 trials at MD Anderson Cancer Center (MDACC) and performed logistic and Cox proportional hazards regression analyses to evaluate response rate (RR), median time to progression (mTTP), clinical benefit rate (CBR; defined as CR, PR, or SD > 6 months), and median overall survival (OS). Results: Among the 406 patients with advanced sarcomas (321 soft tissue sarcoma, 85 bone sarcomas) treated on phase 1 trials at MDACC from May 2006 to May 2018, median age was 53 (range 11-84), 48% were female, with a median 3 prior lines of therapy (range 0-9). The most commonly treated soft tissue sarcoma subtypes included leiomyosarcoma (n = 66; 16%), liposarcoma (n = 52; 13%), GIST (n = 44; 11%), UPS (n = 14; 3%), and synovial sarcoma (n = 11; 3%) and most commonly treated bone sarcomas included osteosarcoma (n = 34; 8%), chondrosarcoma (n = 28; 7%), and Ewing’s sarcoma (n = 25; 6%). RR was 7% (95% CI 5, 10), mTTP was 2.9 months (95%CI 2.6, 3.1), CBR was 24% (95% CI 20, 29), mOS was 17.2 months (95% CI 13.8, 20.8). 2 patients had a CR as best response, 1 chondrosarcoma patient treated with an anti-APO2L/Trail agent and 1 Ewing’s sarcoma patient treated with the combination of an IGF1R inhibitor plus mTOR inhibitor. 26 patients (6%) had a PR as best response using novel immunotherapies targeting PD1, PDL1 plus CCR4, CTLA4 plus KIT, and TLR7/8 and novel targeted therapies against TRK, LRRC15, cMET, mTOR, VEGF, MDM2, KIT/PDGFRA, and FGFR. Responses were seen across sarcoma subtypes - ASPS, UPS, myxoid sarcoma, liposarcoma, GIST, carcinosarcoma, clear cell sarcoma, embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma, epitheliod sarcoma, fibrious histiosarcoma, and Ewing’s sarcoma. Conclusions: Our analysis identifies a reasonable survival in heavily pretreated, metastatic refractory sarcoma patients with responses seen with novel targeted therapies and immunotherapies that are not yet US-FDA approved. Biomarker analysis is ongoing to help identify the subset of responders in our cohort. Advanced sarcoma patients should be considered for molecular profiling and early phase clinical trials.

Trial in Progress: A Phase I Trial of BTX-A51 in Patients with Relapsed or Refractory AML or High-Risk MDS

Blood ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 136 (Supplement 1) ◽  
pp. 18-19
Author(s):  
Brian J. Ball ◽  
Anthony S. Stein ◽  
Gautam Borthakur ◽  
Crystal Murray ◽  
Karin Kook ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
High Risk ◽  
Complete Remission ◽  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Phase 1 Study ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Expansion Phase

Background: For patients with relapsed or refractory (R/R) acute myeloid leukemia (AML) or high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), low response rates and poor overall survival remain unmet clinical needs. AML cells evade apoptosis through overexpression of antiapoptotic genes and inactivation of p53. The antiapoptotic gene Mcl1 is overexpressed in AML cell lines resistant to venetoclax. Similarly, the sensitivity of AML patients' samples to venetoclax inversely correlates with the presence of a TP53 mutation or low expression of p53. In AML, p53 inactivation more commonly results from overexpression of its negative regulators, Mdmx and Mdm2. BTX-A51 is a novel, oral, direct inhibitor of Casein kinase 1α (CK1α), cyclin dependent kinase 7 (CDK7), and CDK9. CK1α phosphorylates Mdmx and Mdm2 leading to enhanced binding and degradation of p53. CDK7 and CDK9 phosphorylate RNA polymerase II (Pol II) to enable transcriptional initiation and elongation, particularly at large clusters of transcriptional enhancers termed super-enhancers (SE). Preclinical studies have demonstrated that BTX-A51 robustly increased p53 protein levels via CK1a inhibition and Mdm2 downregulation while preferentially decreasing SE transcription of key oncogenes such as Myc andMcl1, enabling selective apoptosis of leukemia cells. The combination of CK1α, CDK7, and CDK9 inhibition was synergistic and prolonged survival in multiple genetic and patient-derived xenograft AML models. Study Design and Methods: This is an open-label, multi-center, first-in-human Phase 1 study evaluating the safety of BTX-A51 in patients with R/R AML or high-risk MDS. The trial will be performed in two phases, a dose escalation (phase 1a) and dose expansion (phase 1b). Phase 1a utilizes a hybrid accelerated titration with single patient cohorts and a Bayesian optimal interval (BOIN) design to assess 8 potential dosing cohorts. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) will be the dose for which the isotonic estimate of the toxicity rate is closest to the target toxicity rate of 0.3. Up to a maximum of 35 patients will be enrolled in the dose escalation phase of the study at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center, MD Anderson Cancer Center, and City of Hope Cancer Center. Following determination of the MTD, 15 patients will be enrolled in the dose expansion phase for further evaluation of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and for preliminary evidence of efficacy. BTX-A51 will be dosed 3 weeks on drug, followed by 1 week off drug over a 28-day cycle. For the first cycle, patients will receive tumor lysis syndrome prophylaxis with allopurinol and intravenous fluids and be closely monitored. Key inclusion criteria are age ³ 18 years, R/R AML or R/R high-risk MDS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) £ 2 and life expectancy of ³ 6 weeks, and adequate kidney and liver function. Key exclusion criteria are receipt of cancer chemotherapy (other than hydroxyurea) within 2 weeks prior to the start of study drug, transplantation within 3 months prior to screening, active graft-versus-host disease requiring systemic immunosuppressive medications, and a white blood cell count &gt; 20 × 109/L. The primary objective for the Phase 1 study is to determine the MTD and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of BTX-A51. Secondary objectives include evaluating overall response (complete remission, complete remission with incomplete blood count recovery, and partial remission) according to the European LeukemiaNet (ELN) 2017 criteria (Döhner et al. Blood. 2017), survival (overall survival and event-free survival) and pharmacokinetics. Correlative objectives include determining the changes in SEs and SE-driven expression of antiapoptotic genes by chromatin immunoprecipitation and RNA-sequencing. Recruitment is ongoing and this trial is registered on clinicaltrials.gov: NCT04243785 Disclosures Stein: Amgen: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Stemline: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau. Borthakur:BioLine Rx: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; PTC Therapeutics: Consultancy; FTC Therapeutics: Consultancy; BioTherix: Consultancy; Curio Science LLC: Consultancy; Xbiotech USA: Research Funding; Oncoceutics: Research Funding; Polaris: Research Funding; PTC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Cyclacel: Research Funding; GSK: Research Funding; Jannsen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; BioLine Rx: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Nkarta Therapeutics: Consultancy; Treadwell Therapeutics: Consultancy. Murray:Salamandra: Current Employment. Kook:Salamandra: Current Employment. Chan:BioTheryx: Current Employment. Stein:Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Syros: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Syndax: Consultancy, Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Research Funding; Biotheryx: Consultancy; Agios Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy; PTC Therapeutics: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; Celgene Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding.

363 Dose of the molecularly targeted agents (MTA) in Phase 1 trials correlates with clinical benefit

2010 ◽  
Vol 8 (7) ◽  
pp. 115 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Gupta ◽  
A. Alqwasmi ◽  
S. Hunsberger ◽  
L. Rubinstein ◽  
P. Ivy ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Targeted Agents ◽  
Phase 1 Trials ◽  
Molecularly Targeted Agents

scholarly journals Real-world data of fulvestrant as first-line treatment of postmenopausal women with estrogen receptor-positive metastatic breast cancer

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I. Blancas ◽  
C. Olier ◽  
V. Conde ◽  
J. L. Bayo ◽  
C. Herrero ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Estrogen Receptor ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Real World ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
First Line ◽  
Clinical Benefit Rate ◽  
Er Positive

AbstractGoals of endocrine therapy for advanced breast cancer (ABC) include prolonging survival rates, maintaining the quality of life, and delaying the initiation of chemotherapy. We evaluated the effectiveness of fulvestrant as first-line in patients with estrogen receptor (ER)-positive ABC with relapse during or after adjuvant anti-estrogenic therapy in real-world settings. Retrospective, observational study involving 171 postmenopausal women with ER-positive ABC who received fulvestrant as first-line between January 2011 and May 2018 in Spanish hospitals. With a median follow-up of 31.4 months, the progression-free survival (PFS) with fulvestrant was 14.6 months. No differences were seen in the visceral metastatic (14.3 months) versus non-visceral (14.6 months) metastatic subgroup for PFS. Overall response rate and clinical benefit rate were 35.2% and 82.8%. Overall survival was 43.1 months. The duration of the clinical benefit was 19.2 months. Patients with ECOG performance status 0 at the start of treatment showed a significant greater clinical benefit rate and overall survival than with ECOG 1–2. Results in real-world settings are in concordance with randomized clinical trials. Fulvestrant continues to demonstrate clinical benefits in real-world settings and appears be well tolerated as first-line for the treatment of postmenopausal women with ER-positive ABC.

Comparing survival outcomes for advanced cancer patients who access comprehensive genomic sequencing using a registry-based synthetic control arm.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e18851-e18851
Author(s):  
Sophie O Haire ◽  
Koen Degeling ◽  
Fanny Franchini ◽  
Ben Tran ◽  
Stephen James Luen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Cancer Patients ◽  
Advanced Cancer ◽  
Real World ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Treatment Plan ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Trial Participation ◽  
Genomic Sequencing ◽  
Cancer Types

e18851 Background: Studies evaluating the clinical benefit from Comprehensive Genomic Sequencing (CGS) in cancer patients (pts) have been limited by heterogeneous populations in cancer types and treatment history, outcomes analysis focused on pts who received treatment, and single arm designs. This study evaluated the clinical utility of CGS in a unique real-world advanced cancer patient cohort by comparing a series of pts who received CGS to inform investigational treatment compared to those who did not. Methods: Two cohorts of advanced and refractory pts with diverse cancer types seen for early phase trial consideration were identified from the Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre (PMCC) phase 1 trials clinic. The CGS group (N = 142) accessed an in-house assay on FFPE tissue and matched blood (PMCC Comprehensive Cancer Panel - 391 genes) through a research study between 2017-2018. A second cohort was defined as clinic pts in the following 12 months when profiling was unavailable (NoCGS, N = 133). Difference in overall survival (OS) from initial appointment between the two cohorts was analysed through Kaplan-Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models. Potential confounding was analysed and adjusted for using stabilised weights based on propensity scores. Results: Within the CGS group, 25 (17.6%) pts received targeted treatment informed by CGS results via trials recruiting at that time (n = 16) or off label drug access (n = 9). This subgroup had improved survival compared with CGS pts in whom results did not alter treatment plan (unadjusted HR = 0.48, (0.27-0.88), p = 0.02). Comparing the CGS and NoCGS cohorts, there were proportional differences in clinical factors including ECOG, cancer types and previous lines of therapy, with standardised differences ranging from 0.23-0.63. Rates of trial participation were similar (CGS: n = 31 [22%], NoCGS: n = 34 [26%]) and CGS had improved unadjusted median OS of 14.5 mos (12.3-19.0) compared to 9.9 (8.6-13.4) for NoCGS (unadjusted HR = 0.71, (0.53-0.96), p = 0.03). In the adjusted analysis, weights ranged from 0.54-2.89 ensuring no individual pts had excessive influence on analysis and resulted in well-balanced populations (range of standardised differences: 0.0-0.09). Adjusted median OS for CGS was 13.5 mos (9.9-17.8) compared to 11.0 (9.2-17.4) for NoCGS (adjusted HR = 0.88, 0.63-1.23, p = 0.50). Conclusions: We utilised real world data in a novel approach to comparative analysis of the clinical benefit of CGS in a heterogenous cancer cohort. Although the subset of CGS pts who went on to receive targeted treatments had improved outcomes, this was insufficient to drive an overall survival gain when considering the overall CGS vs NoCGS cohort. Therefore, translation into clinics requires strategies to ensure a greater proportion of tested pts obtain benefit to deliver on the value proposition of CGS in an advanced cancer population.

Lenalidomide (L) in Combination with Dexamethasone (D) Improves Survival and Time to Progression in Elderly Patients (pts) with Relapsed or Refractory (rel/ref) Multiple Myeloma (MM).

Blood ◽  
2006 ◽  
Vol 108 (11) ◽  
pp. 3551-3551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Asher Alban Chanan-Khan ◽  
Donna Weber ◽  
Meletius Dimopoulos ◽  
Christine Chen ◽  
Reuben Niesvizky ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Clinical Trials ◽  
Median Time ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Randomized Clinical Trials ◽  
The Elderly ◽  
Elderly Group ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Time To Progression ◽  
Overall Response

Abstract Introduction: Treatment of elderly pts (age >65 years) with rel/ref MM remains a challenge due to concurrent comorbid conditions and poor tolerability to chemotherapy limiting therapeutic options. Recently, 2 phase III randomized clinical trials (MM-090 and MM-010) demonstrated superiority of the LD combination over D alone in previously treated MM pts. We examined the clinical benefit of LD combination in elderly pts enrolled in these 2 clinical trials. Methods: This is a retrospective data analysis of pts enrolled on the MM-090 and MM-010. All elderly pts (>65 years) were identified and parameters of clinical outcome (overall response, OR; time to progression, TTP; overall survival, OS) recorded. To determine the clinical benefit of L in elderly pt population, we compared the group of elderly pts who received LD combination with those who received D + placebo as well as with the group of younger pts who received the LD combination in these studies. Results: Collectively, 704 pts were enrolled with 285 identified as elderly. In the elderly group, 146 pts were randomized to LD combination and 139 to D + placebo. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics of these two groups. In the elderly group who received LD, median time from diagnosis was 3.3 yrs (range 0.5–14.7) and 77.4% had received ≥ 2 prior therapies (prior D and/or thalidomide in 69% and 32% respectively). Using the Blade criteria, the overall response (ORR) was significantly better in pts on combination treatment vs. D alone (58.9% vs. 20.9%; p<0.001). On an intent-to-treat analysis, the median time to progression (TTP; primary endpoint) for pts treated with D alone was 20 vs. 60 wks on combination (p<0.001) and the median overall survival was 79 wks and has not been reached (p=<0.001) in the combination group, respectively. We then compared the elderly pts with the younger pts who received LD combination. The ORR and median TTP was (58.9% vs. 60.9%) and (60 wks vs. 47.3 wks), respectively. The OS was 128 wks in the younger pts and is not reached in the elderly. Conclusion: L when combined with D improves ORR, prolongs TTP and OS in elderly pts with rel/ref MM and thus offers an important treatment option for this pt population. This clinical benefit of L achieved in the elderly is comparable to that in the younger pts and thus is irrespective of age of the pt treated. The availability of L as an oral formulation provides an added benefit in the management of elderly pts population.

A phase I study of MM-121 in combination with multiple anticancer therapies in patients with advanced solid tumors.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 2609-2609 ◽  
Author(s):  
Monica Arnedos ◽  
Crystal Shereen Denlinger ◽  
Wael A. Harb ◽  
Olivier Rixe ◽  
John Charles Morris ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dose Escalation ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Human Monoclonal Antibody ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Clinical Benefit Rate

2609 Background: MM-121 is a fully human monoclonal antibody targeting the epidermal growth factor receptor family member ErbB3. ErbB3 has been implicated in driving cancer growth and in the development of resistance to conventional chemotherapies across multiple malignancies. Here we present results of an open-label, Phase 1, multicenter, non-randomized, dose-escalation trial which recently completed enrollment evaluating MM-121 in combination with one of the following chemotherapies: Gemcitabine (Arm A, n=11), carboplatin (Arm B, n=11), pemetrexed (Arm C, n=10), or cabazitaxel (Arm D, n=11). Methods: Patients were treated in a dose escalation “3+3” design to assess the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics (PK) of MM-121 administered weekly in combination with anticancer therapies in subjects with advanced cancer. Doses were escalated until the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was identified or the combination was shown to be tolerable at the highest planned doses. Secondary objectives included: Determining the objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, PK and immunogenicity of MM-121. Data summarized are as of 1/17/2013 from a live database. Results: Overall, 43 patients, [22 (51%) female and 21 (49%) male] have been treated with a median treatment duration of 57 days (range 1-302). The median age was 59 years (range 42-84) and patients had received a median of four prior lines of therapy (range 0-13). Common (>20%) adverse events of any grade and causality across all arms included diarrhea (74%), nausea (54%), fatigue (51%), anemia (44%), vomiting (33%), hypokalemia (30%), decreased appetite (26%), thrombocytopenia (26%), peripheral edema (23%), neutropenia (21%), and constipation (21%). Four DLTs were observed: Two in combination with carboplatin (G4 thrombocytopenia and G3 rash), one with gemcitabine (G4 thrombocytopenia), and one with pemetrexed (G4 hyperuricemia). Overall 38 (88%) patients were evaluable for response and the overall clinical benefit rate (PR or SD >18 weeks), is 32% (12/38). Conclusions: MM-121 can be combined at its recommended single agent dose with standard doses of gemcitabine, pemetrexed, and cabazitaxel and adapted doses of carboplatin. Clinical trial information: NCT01447225.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document