Phase I study of tremelimumab (CP-675 206) plus PF-3512676 (CPG 7909) in patients with melanoma or advanced solid tumours.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Millward M
PROVIDER: S-EPMC3670507 | biostudies-other | 2013 May
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundThis phase 1 study evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of bosutinib (competitive Src/Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitor) plus capecitabine.MethodsPatients with locally advanced/metastatic breast, pancreatic, or colorectal cancers; cholangiocarcinoma; or glioblastoma received bosutinib plus capecitabine at eight of nine possible dose combinations using an 'up-down' design to determine the toxicity contour of the combination.ResultsAmong 32 enrolled patients, none of the 9 patients receiving MTD (bosutinib 300 mg once daily plus capecitabine 1000 mg m(-2) twice daily) experienced dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs). Overall, 2 out of 31 (6%) evaluable patients experienced DLTs (grade 3 neurologic pain (n=1); grade 3 pruritus/rash and increased alanine aminotransferase (n=1)). Most common treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were diarrhoea, nausea, vomiting, palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE), fatigue; most frequent grade 3/4 AEs: PPE, fatigue, and increased alanine/aspartate aminotransferase. Although diarrhoea was common, 91% of affected patients experienced maximum grade 1/2 events that resolved. Best overall confirmed partial response or stable disease >24 weeks (all tumour types) was observed in 6 and 13% of patients.ConclusionsIn this population of patients with advanced solid tumours, bosutinib plus capecitabine demonstrated a safety profile similar to that previously reported for bosutinib or capecitabine monotherapy; limited efficacy was observed.
| S-EPMC4260032 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn patients with melanoma, ipilimumab (an antibody against cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated antigen 4 [CTLA-4]) prolongs overall survival, and nivolumab (an antibody against the programmed death 1 [PD-1] receptor) produced durable tumor regression in a phase 1 trial. On the basis of their distinct immunologic mechanisms of action and supportive preclinical data, we conducted a phase 1 trial of nivolumab combined with ipilimumab in patients with advanced melanoma.MethodsWe administered intravenous doses of nivolumab and ipilimumab in patients every 3 weeks for 4 doses, followed by nivolumab alone every 3 weeks for 4 doses (concurrent regimen). The combined treatment was subsequently administered every 12 weeks for up to 8 doses. In a sequenced regimen, patients previously treated with ipilimumab received nivolumab every 2 weeks for up to 48 doses.ResultsA total of 53 patients received concurrent therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab, and 33 received sequenced treatment. The objective-response rate (according to modified World Health Organization criteria) for all patients in the concurrent-regimen group was 40%. Evidence of clinical activity (conventional, unconfirmed, or immune-related response or stable disease for ≥24 weeks) was observed in 65% of patients. At the maximum doses that were associated with an acceptable level of adverse events (nivolumab at a dose of 1 mg per kilogram of body weight and ipilimumab at a dose of 3 mg per kilogram), 53% of patients had an objective response, all with tumor reduction of 80% or more. Grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to therapy occurred in 53% of patients in the concurrent-regimen group but were qualitatively similar to previous experience with monotherapy and were generally reversible. Among patients in the sequenced-regimen group, 18% had grade 3 or 4 adverse events related to therapy and the objective-response rate was 20%.ConclusionsConcurrent therapy with nivolumab and ipilimumab had a manageable safety profile and provided clinical activity that appears to be distinct from that in published data on monotherapy, with rapid and deep tumor regression in a substantial proportion of patients. (Funded by Bristol-Myers Squibb and Ono Pharmaceutical; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01024231.).
| S-EPMC5698004 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundWe conducted a phase I study in patients with advanced solid tumours to identify the recommended dose, assess pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamic activity and preclinical antitumour efficacy of the combination of sirolimus and gemcitabine.MethodsNineteen patients were treated with sirolimus 2 or 5 mg daily and gemcitabine 800 or 1000 mg m(-2) on days 1 and 8. Dose escalation depended on dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) rate during the first 3-week period. Paired skin biopsies were evaluated for phosphorylated S6 (pS6) as marker of mTOR (mammalian target of rapamycin) inhibition. Pharmacokinetics and preclinical evaluation of efficacy using two different sarcoma cell lines and leiomyosarcoma xenografts were also conducted.ResultsThree DLTs were observed: grade 3 transaminitis, grade 3 thrombocytopenia and grade 4 thrombocytopenia. Common treatment-related adverse events included anaemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and transaminitis. Pharmacodynamic analyses demonstrated mTOR inhibition with sirolimus 5 mg and PK showed no influence of sirolimus concentrations on gemcitabine clearance. In vitro and in vivo studies suggested mTOR pathway hyperactivation by gemcitabine that was reversed by sirolimus. Tumour growth in leiomyosarcoma xenografts was dramatically inhibited by the treatment.ConclusionsRecommended dose was sirolimus 5 mg per 24 h plus gemcitabine 800 mg m(-2). Antitumour activity in preclinical sarcoma models and mTOR signalling inhibition were observed. A phase II study is currently ongoing.
| S-EPMC4150275 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundOlaparib (Lynparza) is an oral poly(adenosine diphosphate [ADP]-ribose) polymerase inhibitor that induces synthetic lethality in cancers with homologous recombination defects.Patients and methodsIn this phase I, dose-escalation trial, patients with advanced solid tumours received olaparib (50-200 mg capsules b.i.d.) continuously or intermittently (days 1-14, per 28-day cycle) plus gemcitabine [i.v. 600-800 mg/m(2); days 1, 8, 15, and 22 (cycle 1), days 1, 8, and 15 (subsequent cycles)] to establish the maximum tolerated dose. A separate dose-escalation phase evaluated olaparib in tablet formulation (100 mg o.d./b.i.d.; days 1-14) plus gemcitabine (600 mg/m(2)). In an expansion phase, patients with genetically unselected locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomised 2 : 1 to the tolerated olaparib capsule combination dose or gemcitabine alone (1000 mg/m(2)).ResultsSixty-six patients were treated [dose-escalation phase, n = 44 (tablet cohort, n = 12); dose-expansion phase, n = 22 (olaparib plus gemcitabine, n = 15; gemcitabine alone, n = 7)]. In the dose-escalation phase, four patients (6%) experienced dose-limiting toxicities (raised alanine aminotransferase, n = 2; neutropenia, n = 1; febrile neutropenia, n = 1). Grade ≥3 adverse events were reported in 38/47 patients (81%) treated with olaparib capsules plus gemcitabine; most common were haematological toxicities (55%). Tolerated combinations were olaparib 100 mg b.i.d. capsule (intermittently, days 1-14) plus gemcitabine 600 mg/m(2) and olaparib 100 mg o.d. tablet (intermittently, days 1-14) plus gemcitabine 600 mg/m(2). There were no differences in efficacy observed during the dose-expansion phase.ConclusionsOlaparib 100 mg b.i.d. (intermittent dosing; capsules) plus gemcitabine 600 mg/m(2) is tolerated in advanced solid tumour patients, with no unmanageable/unexpected toxicities. Continuous dosing of olaparib or combination with gemcitabine at doses >600 mg/m(2) was not considered to have an acceptable tolerability profile for further study.ClinicaltrialsgovNCT00515866.
| S-EPMC8890482 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:This phase 1 first-in-human study aimed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities, and safety of E6201, and to establish recommended dosing in patients with advanced solid tumours, expanded to advanced melanoma. METHODS:Part A (dose escalation): sequential cohorts received E6201 intravenously (IV) over 30 min (once-weekly [qw; days (D)1 + 8 + 15 of a 28-day cycle]), starting at 20 mg/m2, increasing to 720 mg/m2 or the MTD. Part B (expansion): patients with BRAF-mutated or wild-type (WT) melanoma received E6201 320 mg/m2 IV over 60 minutes qw (D1 + 8 + 15 of a 28-day cycle) or 160 mg/m2 IV twice-weekly (D1 + 4 + 8 + 11 + 15 + 18 of a 28-day cycle; BRAF-mutated only). RESULTS:MTD in Part A (n = 25) was 320 mg/m2 qw, confirmed in Part B (n = 30). Adverse events included QT prolongation (n = 4) and eye disorders (n = 3). E6201 exposure was dose-related, with PK characterised by extensive distribution and fast elimination. One patient achieved PR during Part A (BRAF-mutated papillary thyroid cancer; 480 mg/m2 qw) and three during Part B (2 BRAF-mutated melanoma; 1 BRAF-WT melanoma; all receiving 320 mg/m2 qw). CONCLUSIONS:An intermittent regimen of E6201 320 mg/m2 IV qw for the first 3 weeks of a 28-day cycle was feasible and reasonably well-tolerated in patients with advanced solid tumours, including melanoma with brain metastases, with evidence of clinical efficacy.
| S-EPMC6008465 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study had two aims: (a) to test the hypothesis that advanced age is associated with lower levels of tolerability and clinical benefit to experimental Phase I trial agents; (b) to assess the validity of the Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) prognostic score as a patient selection tool in older patients.MethodsClinico-pathological characteristics and treatment outcomes of all patients treated consecutively from 2005 to 2009 in phase I trials at the RMH were recorded. All toxicity and clinical outcome data were compared between patients aged below and above 65 years of age.ResultsOne thousand and four patients were treated in 30 Phase I trials, with 315 (31%) patients aged 65 years and older. Grade 3-5 toxicities (22.8% vs 24.8% (P=0.52)), trial discontinuation (6% vs 4%; P=0.33), and dose interruptions (8.0% vs 8.0% (P=0.96)) were observed at similar rates in patients below and above 65 years of age, respectively. The overall response rate 5.2% vs 4.1%, progression-free survival (PFS) 1.9 vs 3.5 months and clinical benefit rate (CBR) at 6 months 15.2% vs 14.3% were comparable in both groups. To avoid bias due to the potential therapeutic benefit of abiraterone, comparisons were repeated excluding prostate cancer patients with similar results (ORR 4.6% vs 4%, PFS 1.8 vs 3.0 months, CBR at 6 months 13.5% vs 9.5%). Multivariate analysis indicated that the previously identified RMH score (including albumin and lactate dehydrogenase levels) was an accurate predictor of outcome.ConclusionsPhase I clinical trials should be considered in patients with advanced cancers regardless of age, as older patients who enter these have similar safety and efficacy outcomes as their younger counterparts. The RMH prognostic score can assist in the selection of suitable older patients.
| S-EPMC4742590 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectiveOveractivation of the PI3K/AKT pathway can occur in many cancers. Capivasertib is a potent, selective pan-AKT inhibitor. The objectives of this analysis were to develop a population pharmacokinetic model for capivasertib and to quantitatively assess the impact of intrinsic and extrinsic factors on the pharmacokinetics of capivasertib.MethodsPharmacokinetic data from four phase I and II studies were combined. Capivasertib was administered orally at a dose range of 80-800 mg twice daily over 28-day and 21-day cycles as monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel or fulvestrant, using continuous dosing or one of two intermittent dosing schedules: either 4 days on, 3 days off (4/3) or 2 days on, 5 days off (2/5). Several models and approaches were tested for their ability to describe capivasertib disposition. The covariates assessed included dose, schedule, age, body weight, race, sex, creatinine clearance, hepatic function, renal function, smoking status, food effect, formulation, and concomitant use with paclitaxel, fulvestrant, cytochrome P450, family 3, subfamily A (CYP3A) inducers, CYP3A inhibitors and acid-reducing agents.ResultsA total of 3963 capivasertib plasma concentrations from 441 patients were included. Capivasertib pharmacokinetics was adequately described by a three-compartment model where the apparent clearance (CL/F) presented a moderate time-dependent and dose-dependent clearance. Following oral administration of multiple doses of capivasertib (400 mg twice daily; [4/3]), the initial CL/F was 62.2 L/h (between-subject variability 39.3%), and after approximately 120 hours, CL/F decreased by 18%. The effective half-life was 8.34 h. Steady state was predicted to be reached on every third and fourth dosing day each week from the second week with exposure levels that produced robust inhibition of AKT but not of other related kinases. The area under the plasma concentration-time curve and maximum plasma concentration of capivasertib were proportional between the dose levels of 80-480 mg after multiple doses but more than proportional beyond 480 mg. Schedule, age, race, sex, creatinine clearance, hepatic function, renal function, smoking status and concomitant use with fulvestrant, CYP3A inducers, CYP3A inhibitors or acid-reducing agents were not significant covariates for capivasertib pharmacokinetics. Concomitant use of paclitaxel, food effect and formulation statistically significantly affected capivasertib pharmacokinetics, but the effect was low. Body weight was statistically significantly related to capivasertib CL/F, with a 12% reduction in CL/F at steady state and a 14% increase in the area under the curve for 12 hours at steady state and maximum concentration at steady state at a lower body weight (47 kg vs 67 kg reference).ConclusionsCapivasertib pharmacokinetics showed moderate between-subject variability, and most covariates assessed had no significant impact. Body weight, dose, concomitant use of paclitaxel, food effect and formulation showed statistically significant effects. However, these were predicted to impact exposure to capivasertib by <20% and were not expected to be clinically relevant. Based on the population pharmacokinetics, no a priori dose adjustment is needed for intrinsic and extrinsic factors.
| S-EPMC11343776 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Plasma exposure of sunitinib shows large inter-individual variation. Therefore, a pharmacokinetic (PK) study was performed to determine safety and feasibility of sunitinib dosing based on PK levels.Patients were treated with sunitinib 37.5?mg once daily. At days 15 and 29 of treatment, plasma trough levels of sunitinib and N-desethyl sunitinib were measured. If the total trough level (TTL) was <50?ng?ml(-1) and the patient did not show any grade ?3 toxicity, the daily sunitinib dose was increased by 12.5?mg. If the patient suffered from grade ?3 toxicity, the sunitinib dose was lowered by 12.5?mg.Twenty-nine out of 43 patients were evaluable for PK assessments. Grade ?3 adverse events were experienced in seven patients (24%) at the starting dose and in nine patients (31%) after dose escalation. TTLs were below target in 15 patients (52%) at the starting dose. Of these, five patients (17%) reached target TTL after dose escalation without additional toxicity.In a third of the patients that were below target TTL at standard dose, the sunitinib dose could be increased without additional toxicities. This could be the basis for future studies and the implementation of a PK-guided dosing strategy in clinical practice.
| S-EPMC4021528 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThis study assessed the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the first-in-class dual mammalian target of rapamycin complex (mTORC)1/mTORC2 inhibitor, AZD8055.MethodsPatients with advanced solid malignancies or lymphomas were recruited into this phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study of AZD8055 starting at 10 mg twice-daily oral dosing (BID).ResultsForty-nine patients received AZD8055. Dose-limiting toxicities were reported at 40 mg (n=1), 90 mg (n=1) and 120 mg (n=3) BID; all were grade 3 rises in transaminases, reversible in all patients, apart from one who had liver metastases. The maximum tolerated dose was defined as 90 mg BID. The most frequent adverse events assessed to be related to AZD8055 were increased alanine aminotransferase (22%), increased aspartate aminotransferase (22%) and fatigue (16%). AZD8055 was rapidly absorbed (median t(max) ∼0.5 h) and exposure increased with increasing doses. Seven patients had stable disease for ≥ 4 months. Partial metabolic responses, assessed by fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography, were observed at ≥ 40 mg BID (n=8 at day 35).ConclusionThe maximum tolerated dose for AZD8055 is 90 mg BID. Apart from elevated transaminases, which occurred at most dose levels, the drug had an acceptable toxicity profile; however, no RECIST responses were seen.
| S-EPMC3461162 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundBrivanib is a selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor and fibroblast growth factor (FGF) signalling. We performed a phase II randomised discontinuation trial of brivanib in 7 tumour types (soft-tissue sarcomas [STS], ovarian cancer, breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, non-small-cell lung cancer [NSCLC], gastric/esophageal cancer and transitional cell carcinoma [TCC]).Patients and methodsDuring a 12-week open-label lead-in period, patients received brivanib 800 mg daily and were evaluated for FGF2 status by immunohistochemistry. Patients with stable disease at week 12 were randomised to brivanib or placebo. A study steering committee evaluated week 12 response to determine if enrolment in a tumour type would continue. The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS) for brivanib versus placebo in patients with FGF2-positive tumours.ResultsA total of 595 patients were treated, and stable disease was observed at the week 12 randomisation point in all tumour types. Closure decisions were made for breast cancer, pancreatic cancer, NSCLC, gastric cancer and TCC. Criteria for expansion were met for STS and ovarian cancer. In 53 randomised patients with STS and FGF2-positive tumours, the median PFS was 2.8 months for brivanib and 1.4 months for placebo (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.58, p = 0.08). For all randomised patients with sarcomas, the median PFS was 2.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.4-4.0) for those treated with brivanib compared with 1.4 months (95% CI: 1.3-1.6) for placebo (HR = 0.64, 95% CI: 0.38-1.07; p = 0.09). In the 36 randomised patients with ovarian cancer and FGF2-positive tumours, the median PFS was 4.0 (95% CI: 2.6-4.2) months for brivanib and 2.0 months (95% CI: 1.2-2.7) for placebo (HR: 0.56, 95% CI: 0.26-1.22). For all randomised patients with ovarian cancer, the median PFS in those randomised to brivanib was 4.0 months (95% CI: 2.6-4.2) and was 2.0 months (95% CI: 1.2-2.7) in those randomised to placebo (HR = 0.54, 95% CI: 0.25-1.17; p = 0.11).ConclusionBrivanib demonstrated activity in STS and ovarian cancer with an acceptable safety profile. FGF2 expression, as defined in the protocol, is not a predictive biomarker of the efficacy of brivanib.
| S-EPMC8852771 | biostudies-literature