Search

Purpose: Rindopepimut is a vaccine targeting the tumor-specific EGF driver mutation, EGFRvIII. The ReACT study investigated whether the addition of rindopepimut to standard bevacizumab improved outcome for patients with relapsed, EGFRvIII-positive glioblastoma., Patients and Methods: In this double-blind, randomized, phase II study (NCT01498328) conducted at 26 hospitals in the United States, bevacizumab-naïve patients with recurrent EGFRvIII-positive glioblastoma were randomized to receive rindopepimut or a control injection of keyhole limpet hemocyanin, each concurrent with bevacizumab. The primary endpoint was 6-month progression-free survival (PFS6) by central review with a one-sided significance of 0.2., Results: Between May 2012 and 2014, 73 patients were randomized (36 rindopepimut, 37 control). Rindopepimut toxicity included transient, low-grade local reactions. As primary endpoint, PFS6 was 28% (10/36) for rindopepimut compared with 16% (6/37) for control ( P = 0.12, one-sided). Secondary and exploratory endpoints also favored the rindopepimut group including a statistically significant survival advantage [HR, 0.53; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.32-0.88; two-sided log-rank P = 0.01], a higher ORR [30% (9/30) vs. 18% (6/34; P = 0.38)], median duration of response [7.8 months (95% CI, 3.5-22.2) vs. 5.6 (95% CI, 3.7-7.4)], and ability to discontinue steroids for ≥6 months [33% (6/18) vs. 0% (0/19)]. Eighty percent of rindopepimut-treated patients achieved robust anti-EGFRvIII titers (≥1:12,800), which were associated with prolonged survival (HR = 0.17; 95% CI, 0.07-0.45; P < 0.0001)., Conclusions: Our randomized trial supports the potential for targeted immunotherapy among patients with GBM, but the therapeutic benefit requires validation due to the small sample size and potential heterogeneity of bevacizumab response among recurrent patients with GBM. See related commentary by Wick and Wagener, p. 1535 ., (©2020 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: To characterize the pharmacokinetics of temsirolimus and its major metabolite, sirolimus, in patients receiving enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAED) compared with patients receiving non-EIAEDs. An additional objective was to determine whether concentrations of temsirolimus or sirolimus were achieved in brain tumor tissue., Experimental Design: Patients with recurrent malignant gliomas not receiving EIAEDs initially received temsirolimus weekly at a dose of 250 mg i.v. The dose was subsequently reduced to 170 mg due to intolerable side effects. For patients taking EIAEDs, the starting dose of temsirolimus was 250 mg with standard dose escalation until the maximal tolerated dose was established. Ten whole blood samples were obtained over a period of 24 h after administration of temsirolimus for pharmacokinetic assessments. Patients eligible for cytoreductive surgery received temsirolimus before tumor resection. Whole blood and tumor tissue were obtained for analysis., Results: Significant differences in the pharmacokinetic variables for temsirolimus and sirolimus were observed between the two patient groups at a comparable dose level of 250 mg. For patients receiving EIAEDs, the systemic exposure to temsirolimus was lower by 1.5-fold. Likewise, peak concentrations and exposure to sirolimus were lower by 2-fold. Measurable concentrations of temsirolimus and sirolimus were observed in brain tumor specimens. The average tissue to whole blood ratio for temsirolimus was 1.43 and 0.84 for sirolimus., Conclusions: Drugs that induce cytochrome P450 3A4, such as EIAEDs, significantly affect the pharmacokinetics of temsirolimus and its active metabolite, sirolimus. Total exposure to temsirolimus and sirolimus was lower in the EIAED group at the maximum tolerated dose of 250 mg compared with the non-EIAED group at the maximum tolerated dose of 170 mg. However, brain tumor tissue concentrations of temsirolimus and sirolimus were relatively comparable in both groups of patients at their respective dose levels. Correlative analyses of the tissue for the inhibition of the key regulators (p70S6 kinase and 4E-binding protein 1) of mammalian target of rapamycin are necessary to define the therapeutic significance of the altered exposure to temsirolimus.

Purpose: To determine the maximum tolerated dose of irinotecan when administrated with temozolomide every 28 days, in patients with recurrent malignant glioma who were also receiving CYP450 enzyme-inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAED), and to characterize the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and its metabolites. The study was also intended to assess whether temozolomide affects the conversion of irinotecan to SN-38., Design: Patients with recurrent malignant glioma received a fixed dose of temozolomide (150 mg/m(2)) daily for 5 days from days 1 to 5 every 28 days, and an i.v. infusion of irinotecan on days 1 and 15 of each cycle. The starting dose of irinotecan was 350 mg/m(2), which was escalated to 550 mg/m(2) in 50-mg/m(2) increments. The plasma pharmacokinetics of irinotecan and its active metabolite, SN-38, were determined during the infusion of irinotecan on cycle 1, day 1., Results: Thirty-three patients were enrolled into the study and treated. Thirty-one patients were evaluable for both tumor response and toxicity and two patients were evaluable for toxicity only. Common toxicities included neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea. Dose-limiting toxicities were grade 3 diarrhea and nausea/vomiting. The maximum tolerated dose for irinotecan was determined to be 500 mg/m(2)., Conclusions: The recommended phase II dose of irinotecan in combination with temozolomide for patients receiving EIAEDs is 500 mg/m(2), administrated every 15 days on a 28-day schedule. This study also confirmed that concomitant administration of EIAEDs increases irinotecan clearance and influences SN-38 disposition. No pharmacokinetic interaction was observed between temozolomide and irinotecan.