Search

Purpose:The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rational combination of TORC1/2 inhibitor TAK-228 and Aurora A kinase inhibitor alisertib in preclinical models of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and to conduct a phase I dose escalation trial in patients with advanced solid tumors.Experimental Design:TNBC cell lines and patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models were treated with alisertib, TAK-228, or the combination and evaluated for changes in proliferation, cell cycle, mTOR pathway modulation, and terminal cellular fate, including apoptosis and senescence. A phase I clinical trial was conducted in patients with advanced solid tumors treated with escalating doses of alisertib and TAK-228 using a 3+3 design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD).Results:The combination of TAK-228 and alisertib resulted in decreased proliferation and cell-cycle arrest in TNBC cell lines. Treatment of TNBC PDX models resulted in significant tumor growth inhibition and increased apoptosis with the combination. In the phase I dose escalation study, 18 patients with refractory solid tumors were enrolled. The MTD was alisertib 30 mg b.i.d. days 1 to 7 of a 21-day cycle and TAK-228 2 mg daily, continuous dosing. The most common treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia, fatigue, nausea, rash, mucositis, and alopecia.Conclusions:The addition of TAK-228 to alisertib potentiates the antitumor activity of alisertib in vivo, resulting in increased cell death and apoptosis. The combination is tolerable in patients with advanced solid tumors and should be evaluated further in expansion cohorts with additional pharmacodynamic assessment.

Pharmacodynamic effects of alisertib and TAK-228 in patient tissue samples

PDF file, 84KB.

PDF file, 70KB, Platelet P-AKT Inhibition.

PDF file, 36KB.

PDF file, 54KB, Mutational Status for Arm 1.

Purpose: The objectives of the study were to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of PX-866 in patients with incurable cancers.Experimental Design: This was a phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study. Drug was administered orally once per day either on an intermittent (arm 1; days 1–5 and 8–12 of a 28-day cycle) or continuous (arm 2; days 1–28 of a 28-day cycle) schedule. Additional patients were treated at the arm 2 MTD in a food effects substudy.Results: Eighty-four patients were treated in the arm 1 (n = 51), arm 2 (n = 20), and food effects (n = 13) cohorts. The most frequent study drug–related adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders (69.0%), with diarrhea being the most common (48.8%). The MTD was 12 and 8 mg for arm 1 and 2, respectively. The dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) consisted of grade III diarrhea (n = 3) and grade III elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST; n = 1). The pharmacokinetics profile was dose proportional, with no evidence of drug accumulation. PX-866–associated inhibition of platelet pAKTSER473 was observed at the arm 2 MTD. The best response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) was stable disease in 22% of evaluable patients in arm 1, 53% in arm 2, and 11% in the food effects cohort. Eight patients were on study for 4 or more months.Conclusions: This first-in-human study shows that PX-866, an irreversible small-molecule inhibitor of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K), was well tolerated and was associated with prolonged stable disease, particularly when using a continuous dosing schedule. Clin Cancer Res; 18(15); 4173–82. ©2012 AACR.

Purpose The purpose of this study is to characterize niraparib pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety in patients with normal hepatic function (NHF) versus moderate hepatic impairment (MHI). Methods Patients with advanced solid tumors were stratified by NHF or MHI (National Cancer Institute-Organ Dysfunction Working Group criteria [bilirubin > 1.5–3 × upper limit of normal and any aspartate aminotransferase elevation]). In the PK phase, all patients received one 300 mg dose of niraparib. In the extension phase, patients with MHI received niraparib 200 mg daily; patients with NHF received 200 or 300 mg based on weight (max), area under the curve to last measured concentration (AUClast) and extrapolated to infinity (AUCinf). Safety was assessed in both phases. Exposure–response (E–R) modeling was used to predict MHI effects on exposure and safety of niraparib doses ≤ 200 mg or 300/200 mg or 200/100 mg weight/platelet regimens. Results In the PK phase (NHF, n = 9; MHI, n = 8), mean niraparib Cmax was 7% lower in patients with MHI versus NHF. Mean exposure (AUClast, AUCinf) was increased by 45% and 56%, respectively, in patients with MHI without impacting tolerability. In the extension phase (NHF, n = 8; MHI, n = 7), the overall safety profile was consistent with previous trials. In patients with MHI, E–R modeling predicted niraparib 200 mg reduced Grade ≥ 3 thrombocytopenia incidence, whereas a 200/100 mg regimen yielded exposures below efficacy-associated levels in 15% of patients. Conclusion These findings support adjusting the 300 mg niraparib starting dose to 200 mg QD in patients with MHI. Trial registration NCT03359850; registered December 2, 2017

Aims The histone deacetylase inhibitor belinostat has activity in various cancers. Because belinostat is metabolized by the liver, reduced hepatic clearance could lead to excessive drug accumulation and increased toxicity. Safety data in patients with liver dysfunction are needed for this drug to reach its full potential in the clinic. Methods We performed a phase 1 trial to determine the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and pharmacokinetics of belinostat in patients with advanced cancer and varying degrees of liver dysfunction. Results Seventy-two patients were enrolled and divided into cohorts based on liver function. In patients with mild dysfunction, the MTD was the same as the recommended phase 2 dose (1000 mg/m2 /day). Belinostat was well tolerated in patients with moderate and severe liver dysfunction, although the trial was closed before the MTD in these cohorts could be determined. The mean clearance of belinostat was 661 mL/min/m2 in patients with normal liver function, compared to 542, 505 and 444 mL/min/m2 in patients with mild, moderate and severe hepatic dysfunction. Although this trial was not designed to assess clinical activity, of the 47 patients evaluable for response, 13 patients (28%) experienced stable disease. Conclusion While a statistically significant difference in clearance indicates increased belinostat exposure with worsening liver function, no relationship was observed between belinostat exposure and toxicity. An assessment of belinostat metabolites revealed significant differences in metabolic pathway capability in patients with differing levels of liver dysfunction. Further studies are needed to establish formal dosing guidelines in this patient population.

3112 Background: In prior work, senescence and up-regulation of genes in the PI3K/AKT/mTor pathway were observed in patient-derived xenograft models treated with alisertib to resistance, and tumor growth inhibition was observed when MLN0128 (sapanisertib) was added to alisertib. In a previously reported dose escalation cohort of patients with advanced solid tumors treated with the combination of alisertib and MLN0128, the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was alisertib 30mg BID days 1-7 of a 21-day cycle and MLN0128 2mg daily on a continuous schedule. Presented here are final results from the dose expansion portion of this clinical trial. Methods: Three cohorts of patients were treated with the combination at the MTD. Patients with advanced solid tumors, refractory to standard therapy, were assigned to either single-agent treatment with alisertib (Group 1) or MLN0128 (Group 2) on days 1-7 of Cycle 1. For the remainder of the study, patients received combination treatment. Group 3 enrolled patients with refractory pancreatic adenocarcinoma who were treated with standard dosing of the combination. Biopsies were performed in Groups 1 and 2 prior to treatment initiation and after both the single-agent lead-in and 7 days of combination treatment, with assessment of pharmacodynamic markers. Functional imaging was performed pre-treatment and after Cycle 1. Results: A total of 31 patients with refractory cancers were treated. Group 1 included patients with breast (5), colorectal (2), ovarian (2), and pancreatic (1) cancers. Group 2 included patients with breast (4), colorectal (2), pancreatic (2), uterine (1), and kidney (1) cancers. Eleven patients with refractory pancreatic cancer were treated in Group 3. Median time on study was 11.6 weeks in Group 1, 6 weeks in Group 2, and 9 weeks in Group 3. One partial response was documented in Group 1. One patient with pancreatic cancer in Group 1 continued on study for 47 weeks, and another pancreatic cancer patient in Group 3 continued on study for 28 weeks. Toxicity was similar across cohorts, with mucositis, fatigue, hyperglycemia and neutropenia reported as most common. Biopsy results were significant for increased apoptosis and tumor-infiltrating immune cells noted in tissues from 4 patients treated with the MLN0128 lead-in. Decreased F18-FDG uptake on PET/CT, often with increased ADC values in diffusion MRI, was observed in metastatic liver lesions in 4 patients after Cycle 1. Conclusions: In an expansion cohort of 31 patients treated with the combination of MLN0128 and alisertib at the previously defined MTD, treatment was tolerable with an expected toxicity profile. Prolonged stable disease was observed in 2 patients with pancreatic cancer. Increased apoptosis and tumor-infiltrating immune cells were noted in tissues from patients treated with a lead-in of MLN0128. Clinical trial information: NCT02719691.

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the rational combination of TORC1/2 inhibitor TAK-228 and Aurora A kinase inhibitor alisertib in preclinical models of triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and to conduct a phase I dose escalation trial in patients with advanced solid tumors. Experimental Design: TNBC cell lines and patient-derived xenograft (PDX) models were treated with alisertib, TAK-228, or the combination and evaluated for changes in proliferation, cell cycle, mTOR pathway modulation, and terminal cellular fate, including apoptosis and senescence. A phase I clinical trial was conducted in patients with advanced solid tumors treated with escalating doses of alisertib and TAK-228 using a 3+3 design to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Results: The combination of TAK-228 and alisertib resulted in decreased proliferation and cell-cycle arrest in TNBC cell lines. Treatment of TNBC PDX models resulted in significant tumor growth inhibition and increased apoptosis with the combination. In the phase I dose escalation study, 18 patients with refractory solid tumors were enrolled. The MTD was alisertib 30 mg b.i.d. days 1 to 7 of a 21-day cycle and TAK-228 2 mg daily, continuous dosing. The most common treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia, fatigue, nausea, rash, mucositis, and alopecia. Conclusions: The addition of TAK-228 to alisertib potentiates the antitumor activity of alisertib in vivo, resulting in increased cell death and apoptosis. The combination is tolerable in patients with advanced solid tumors and should be evaluated further in expansion cohorts with additional pharmacodynamic assessment.

Introduction At our institution, an increased incidence of hypersensitivity reactions was reported following standardization of fosaprepitant as the preferred agent for the prophylaxis of chemotherapy induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) caused by highly emetogenic therapies. The purpose of this evaluation was to assess the incidence of systemic hypersensitivity reactions (HSRs) to fosaprepitant infusions compared to available literature. Methods This evaluation is a retrospective review of electronic health records of adult patients who received their first dose of fosaprepitant for CINV prophylaxis beginning January 1, 2017 through June 30, 2017 at the University of Colorado Cancer Center outpatient infusion center. Subjects were identified using medication administration reports. Individual chart reviews were performed for all patients who received fosaprepitant during the specified timeframe and had a reaction reported on the same date. Results A total of 868 patients received fosaprepitant in the outpatient infusion center during the study time period. Four patients (0.461%) had a systemic HSR attributed to fosaprepitant. Two of the reactions were reported as HSRs in the adverse reaction reporting system and two were found in provider notes during chart review. Due to the small sample size, risk factors for HSRs to fosaprepitant were not able to be determined. Conclusion The incidence of HSRs to fosaprepitant at our institution was found to be consistent with the

PURPOSE: The ability to predict and detect clinical and subclinical nephrotoxicity early in the course of therapy has the potential to improve long-term outcomes in cancer patients receiving cisplatin chemotherapy. Pharmacokinetic parameters could serve as predictors of cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity. METHODS: Participants [n=13] were treated with a one-hour cisplatin infusion [30–75 mg/m(2)]. Blood was collected pre-dose and up to 6 h post-dose. Urinary biomarkers [KIM-1, calbindin, clusterin, GST-pi, β2M, albumin, NGAL, osteopontin, clusterin, MCP-1, cystatin C and TFF3] were measured at baseline, day 3 and day 10. Total and unbound platinum concentrations were measured using ICP/MS. Noncompartmental analysis was performed and correlation and regression analyses evaluated the relationships between platinum pharmacokinetics and nephrotoxicity. RESULTS: Peak platinum urinary concentrations correlated with urinary levels of KIM-1, calbindin, clusterin, GST-pi, β2M, albumin, NGAL, osteopontin, clusterin, cystatin C and TFF3 at day 10. Unbound platinum plasma concentrations at 2 h also correlated with urinary clusterin, β2M, cystatin C, NGAL, osteopontin, and TFF3 at day 3. Regression analyses suggested 2 h total plasma platinum concentrations greater than 2,000 ng/ml and peak urinary platinum concentrations above 24,000 ng/ml may serve as potential approximations for elevated risk of nephrotoxicity. Platinum area under the plasma concentration time curve was associated with serum creatinine and estimated glomerular filtration rate. CONCLUSIONS: Peak plasma and urinary platinum concentrations and pharmacokinetic parameters were associated with risk of subclinical cisplatin-induced kidney injury as assessed using novel urinary biomarkers. Future studies will examine these relationships in larger clinical populations of cisplatin-induced acute kidney injury.

PURPOSE: This phase 1 study evaluated the effect of hepatic impairment on pharmacokinetics and safety of crizotinib in patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Patients were dosed according to hepatic function classified by modified National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group criteria and group assignment [normal (A1 and A2), mild (B), moderate (C1 and C2), or severe (D)]. Primary pharmacokinetic endpoints included area under the concentration–time curve as daily exposure (AUC(daily)) and maximum plasma concentration (C(max)) at steady state. Safety endpoints included types, incidence, seriousness, and relationship to crizotinib of adverse events. RESULTS: The AUC(daily) and C(max) in patients with normal liver function were 7107 ng h/mL and 375.1 ng/mL (A1) and 5422 ng h/mL and 283.9 ng/mL (A2), respectively. The AUC(daily) and C(max) ratios of adjusted geometric means for Groups B, C2, and D versus Group A1 were 91.12 and 91.20, 114.08 and 108.87, and 64.47 and 72.63, respectively. Any grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 75% of patients; grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 25%, including fatigue (6%), hyponatremia (5%), and hyperbilirubinemia (3%). CONCLUSIONS: No adjustment to the approved 250 mg twice daily (BID) dose of crizotinib is recommended for patients with mild hepatic impairment. The recommended dose is 200 mg BID for patients with moderate hepatic impairment, and the dose should not exceed 250 mg daily for patients with severe hepatic impairment. Adverse events appeared consistent among the hepatic impairment groups.

This phase I study evaluates the safety, MTD, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics, and preliminary anticancer activity of enavatuzumab, a humanized IgG1 antibody to the TWEAK receptor, in patients with advanced solid malignancies. Patients received escalating doses of enavatuzumab given intravenously over 60 minutes every 2 weeks. Blood was obtained for PK and biomarker assessment. Three patients were enrolled per dose level in a standard 3+3 design with response assessment by RECIST version 1.0, every 8 weeks. Thirty patients were enrolled at 6 dose levels ranging from 0.1 to 1.5 mg/kg. Dose-limiting toxicities included grade 4 (G4) lipase, G3 bilirubin, and G4 amylase elevations. There was no apparent correlation of liver or pancreatic enzyme elevation with drug exposure or the presence of liver metastases. Enavatuzumab exhibited a two-compartment linear PK model. Estimated systemic clearance was 23 to 33 mL/h with an elimination half-life of 7 to 18 days. The predicted target efficacious peak and trough concentrations occurred at 1.0 mg/kg following the second dose. There were no objective responses; 4 patients had stable disease. The MTD of enavatuzumab is 1.0 mg/kg i.v. every 2 weeks. Higher doses were not tolerated due to hepatopancreatic lab abnormalities. Further evaluation of the mechanisms of the liver and pancreatic enzyme toxicities is needed before embarking on further single-agent or combination strategies. Mol Cancer Ther; 17(1); 215–21. ©2017 AACR.

Purpose A pharmacist-managed chronic pain clinic (PMCPC) in a primary care setting is described. Summary As primary care providers (PCPs) may be unprepared or lack time to manage high-risk patients receiving opioids for chronic nonmalignant pain, alternative models of care are needed. The University of Colorado PMCPC is integrated into an internal medicine outpatient clinic. The PMCPC is staffed by 1 clinical pharmacist, with pharmacy students and residents also performing clinic duties. The pharmacy team reviews health records to determine eligibility for PMCPC services and documents referral requests in the electronic health record (EHR); on PCP acceptance of a referral, the pharmacy team assumes primary responsibility for the patient’s pain management under a collaborative practice agreement. Using a collaborative drug therapy management (CDTM) protocol, the pharmacy team conducts patient assessments, including an assessment for signs of aberrant drug-taking behaviors; provides initial and ongoing counseling and education; and makes recommendations to the PCP for opioid dosage adjustments and regimen additions and discontinuations. Experience at the clinic to date indicates that the PMCPC model is feasible and accepted by PCPs and patients. Conclusion A PMCPC based in a primary care setting was established to improve the care of patients with chronic nonmalignant pain who are prescribed opioid therapy for a period of 3 months or longer. Clinic patients are referred to the clinic through the EHR and managed by a pharmacist under a CDTM protocol.

Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is the most common skin malignancy. Deregulated hedgehog signaling plays a central role in BCC development; therefore hedgehog inhibitors have been approved to treat locally advanced or metastatic BCC. However, the development of resistance to hedgehog inhibitors is the major challenge in effective treatment of this disease. Herein, we evaluated the efficacy of a natural agent silibinin to overcome resistance with hedgehog inhibitors (Sant-1 and GDC-0449) in BCC cells. Silibinin (25–100 μM) treatment for 48 hrs strongly inhibited growth and induced death in ASZ001, Sant-1 resistant (ASZ001-Sant-1) and GDC-0449 resistant (ASZ001-GDC-0449) BCC cells. Furthermore, colony forming ability of ASZ001, ASZ001-Sant-1 and ASZ001-GDC-0449 cells was completely inhibited by silibinin treatment. Molecular analysis showed that silibinin treatment decreased the level of phosphorylated-EGFR (Tyrosine-1173) and total EGFR in ASZ001-Sant-1 cells; key signaling molecules responsible for BCC resistance towards hedgehog inhibitors. Further, silibinin treatment decreased the phosphorylated-Akt (Serine-473), phosphorylated-ERK1/2 (Threonine 202/Tyrosine 204), cyclin D1 and Gli-1 level but increased the SUFU expression in ASZ001-Sant-1 resistant cells. Silibinin treatment of ASZ001-Sant-1 resistant cells also decreased bcl-2 but increased cleaved caspases 3 and PARP cleavage, suggesting induction of apoptosis. Together, these results support silibinin use to target hedgehog inhibitors resistant BCC cells.

The success of cisplatin-containing regimens to treat solid tumors is limited, in part, by nephrotoxicity. In rodents, several urinary proteins have emerged that are sensitive indicators of cisplatin-induced kidney injury. We sought to characterize time-dependent changes in the urinary concentrations of 12 proteins, including kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), calbindin, beta 2-microglobulin (β2M), and trefoil factor 3 (TFF3) after cisplatin therapy. Urine was collected at baseline, 3 days (range, 2-5 days), and 10 days (range, 9-11 days) from 57 patients with solid tumors receiving outpatient cisplatin therapy (≥25 mg/m2 ). Serum creatinine was largely unchanged after cisplatin infusion. However, compared with baseline values, several novel biomarkers were significantly increased in the urine, including β2M, which was threefold higher by day 3 (P < 0.0001). Urinary KIM-1 and TFF3 were elevated twofold by day 10 (P = 0.002 and P = 0.002, respectively), whereas calbindin levels were increased eightfold (P < 0.0001). We report novel time-dependent changes in the urinary excretion of noninvasive markers of subclinical kidney injury after cisplatin treatment.

Graphical abstract, Highlights • KIM-1, calbindin, and TFF3 are increased in urine of patients prescribed cisplatin. • KIM-1 concentrations remain elevated with subsequent cisplatin treatment cycles. • Calbindin concentrations increased only during initial cycles of cisplatin chemotherapy. • TFF3 increased similarly on both cycles and returned to baseline in between., Proteins secreted into urine following tubular injury are being increasingly used as biomarkers of clinical and subclinical nephrotoxicity. In the present study, we sought to characterize the time-dependent urinary excretion of three promising biomarkers, kidney injury molecule-1 (KIM-1), calbindin, and trefoil factor 3 (TFF3), during two different chemotherapy cycles in 27 patients with solid tumors prescribed the anticancer drug cisplatin (≥25 mg/m2). Urinary biomarkers were evaluated at Days 3 and 10 during an initial and a subsequent cycle of cisplatin chemotherapy. Longitudinal analyses compared the mean difference estimations for biomarker concentrations during and across the initial and subsequent cycles of cisplatin treatment. Traditional biomarkers including serum creatinine, estimated glomerular filtration rate, and blood urea nitrogen were unchanged during and across both cycles of cisplatin therapy. In response to the initial cycle, urinary KIM-1 concentrations increased from baseline and remained elevated through a subsequent cycle of cisplatin chemotherapy. By comparison, urinary levels of calbindin were elevated 10 days after the initial cisplatin treatment, but largely unchanged by cisplatin exposure in a subsequent cycle. Early elevations in urinary TFF3 at 3 days after cisplatin administration were observed consistently in both the initial and subsequent cycle of cisplatin treatment. In conclusion, the longitudinal assessment of biomarker performance in the same cohort of oncology patients reveals different patterns of urinary excretion between initial and subsequent cycles of cisplatin-containing chemotherapy. These data add novel cycle-dependent insight to the growing literature addressing the ability of urinary biomarkers to detect subclinical renal injury in patients receiving cisplatin.

Purpose: With an aging US population, the number of patients who need cancer treatment will increase significantly by 2020. On the basis of a predicted shortage of oncology physicians, nonphysician health care practitioners will need to fill the shortfall in oncology patient visits, and nurse practitioners and physician assistants have already been identified for this purpose. This study proposes that appropriately trained oncology pharmacists can also contribute. The purpose of this study is to estimate the supply of Board of Pharmacy Specialties–certified oncology pharmacists (BCOPs) and their potential contribution to the care of patients with cancer through 2020. Methods: Data regarding accredited oncology pharmacy residencies, new BCOPs, and total BCOPs were used to estimate oncology residencies, new BCOPs, and total BCOPs through 2020. A Delphi panel process was used to estimate patient visits, identify patient care services that BCOPs could provide, and study limitations. Results: By 2020, there will be an estimated 3,639 BCOPs, and approximately 62% of BCOPs will have completed accredited oncology pharmacy residencies. Delphi panelists came to consensus (at least 80% agreement) on eight patient care services that BCOPs could provide. Although the estimates given by our model indicate that BCOPs could provide 5 to 7 million 30-minute patient visits annually, sensitivity analysis, based on factors that could reduce potential visit availability resulted in 2.5 to 3.5 million visits by 2020 with the addition of BCOPs to the health care team. Conclusion: BCOPs can contribute to a projected shortfall in needed patient visits for cancer treatment. BCOPs, along with nurse practitioners and physician assistants could substantially reduce, but likely not eliminate, the shortfall of providers needed for oncology patient visits.

6054 Background: Niraparib is approved for the maintenance treatment of adult patients (pts) with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer who are in a complete or partial response to platinum-based chemotherapy, or with similar cancers but advanced, associated with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD) and have been treated with ³3 prior chemotherapy regimens. Niraparib is extensively metabolized in the liver and eliminated via both hepatobiliary and renal routes. Objectives of this study included characterization of niraparib pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety in pts with normal hepatic function vs. pts with moderate hepatic impairment. Methods: This phase I, open-label, parallel-group, single-dose study enrolled pts with advanced solid tumors into 2 groups: normal hepatic function and moderately impaired hepatic function, defined as bilirubin >1.5 to 3 times the upper limit of normal and any aspartate aminotransferase elevation. Pts received a single 300-mg dose and underwent PK sampling for 7 days. Exposure parameters included maximum concentration (Cmax), area under the concentration-time curve calculated to last measured concentration (AUClast), and extrapolated to infinity (AUCinf). PK parameters were determined using a non-compartmental analysis in WinNonlin. Results: Seventeen pts were enrolled; 9 with normal hepatic function and 8 with hepatic impairment. Niraparib Cmax was 7% lower in pts with moderate hepatic impairment compared with pts with normal hepatic function (Table). Overall exposure was increased in pts with moderate hepatic impairment, with niraparib AUClast and AUCinf increased 45% and 60%, respectively. Safety data during the PK phase of the study is consistent with the known profile for niraparib. Conclusions: Pts with moderate hepatic impairment experienced increased niraparib exposure which did not noticeably alter the toxicity profile in this population. Clinical trial information: NCT03359850. [Table: see text]

e19507 Background: Studies evaluating VEN with hypomethylating agents in AML patients have reported no incidence of clinical TLS. However, little is known about TLS development in a real-world setting. Here, we investigate our institutional incidence of clinical TLS and describe these patients’ presentations. Methods: This is a single-center, retrospective study of 156 adult pts treated with AZA/VEN for AML between 2015-2019. The primary outcome is the absolute incidence of clinical TLS after AZA/VEN administration per Cairo-Bishop (CB) criteria. Secondary outcomes include median time to TLS, CTCAE grade of TLS, and mortality. All patients received TLS mitigation strategies including fluids, uric acid lowering agents, and frequent lab monitoring. VEN was escalated over 3-4 days, starting at 100 mg, and given with AZA at the standard dose and schedule. Results: The median age was 70 years (22-89); 80 pts (51%) were female. 121 pts (78%) were treatment-naïve, 26 pts (17%) were relapsed, and 9 pts (6%) were refractory. Four pts (3%) developed clinical TLS per CB criteria after AZA/VEN administration. Two pts were relapsed, one pt was treatment-naïve, and one pt had mixed phenotype acute leukemia, B/myeloid. All four pts developed renal insufficiency. No seizures, cardiac arrhythmias, or mortality occurred secondary to TLS. Two pts required renal replacement therapy, and two pts required escalation of care to ICU for TLS management. Median time to TLS onset was 12 hours (10-25) after receiving the first dose of VEN. CTCAE grade 3 TLS occurred in 2 pts (1%) and grade 4 TLS occurred in 2 pts (1%). VEN was held in 2 pts (8, 10 days); no pts required permanent discontinuation of VEN. Baseline features for each patient are listed in the table. Conclusions: Though we report higher rates of clinical TLS compared to prior studies, the incidence of clinical TLS with AZA/VEN remains low. These results support close monitoring of pts, particularly in the first 24 hours of receiving VEN. [Table: see text]

Nephrotoxicity is a dose limiting side effect associated with the use of cisplatin in the treatment of solid tumors. The degree of nephrotoxicity is dictated by the selective accumulation of cisplatin in renal tubule cells due to: (1) uptake by organic cation transporter 2 (OCT2) and copper transporter 1 (CTR1); (2) metabolism by glutathione S-transferases (GSTs) and γ-glutamyltransferase 1 (GGT1); and (3) efflux by multidrug resistance-associated protein 2 (MRP2) and multidrug and toxin extrusion protein 1 (MATE1). The purpose of this study was to determine the significance of single nucleotide polymorphisms that regulate the expression and function of transporters and metabolism genes implicated in development of acute kidney injury (AKI) in cisplatin treated patients. Changes in the kidney function were assessed using novel urinary protein biomarkers and traditional markers. Genotyping was conducted by the QuantStudio 12K Flex Real-Time PCR System using a custom open array chip with metabolism, transport, and transcription factor polymorphisms of interest to cisplatin disposition and toxicity. Traditional and novel biomarker assays for kidney toxicity were assessed for differences according to genotype by ANOVA. Allele and genotype frequencies were determined based on Caucasian population frequencies. The polymorphisms rs596881 (SLC22A2/OCT2), and rs12686377 and rs7851395 (SLC31A1/CTR1) were associated with renoprotection and maintenance of estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Polymorphisms in SLC22A2/OCT2, SLC31A1/CTRI, SLC47A1/MATE1, ABCC2/MRP2, and GSTP1 were significantly associated with increases in the urinary excretion of novel AKI biomarkers: KIM-1, TFF3, MCP1, NGAL, clusterin, cystatin C, and calbindin. Knowledge concerning which genotypes in drug transporters are associated with cisplatin-induced nephrotoxicity may help to identify at-risk patients and initiate strategies, such as using lower or fractionated cisplatin doses or avoiding cisplatin altogether, in order to prevent AKI.

The American College of Clinical Pharmacy and other stakeholder organizations seek to advance clinical pharmacist practitioners, educators, and researchers. Unfortunately, there remains an inadequate supply of residency-trained clinical specialists to meet the needs of our health care system, and nonspecialists often are called on to fill open specialist positions. The impact of clinical pharmacy specialists on pharmacotherapy outcomes in both acute care and primary care settings demonstrates the value of these specialists. This commentary articulates the need for postgraduate year two (PGY2)-trained clinical specialists within the health care system by discussing various clinical and policy rationales, interprofessional support, economic justifications, and their impact on quality of care and drug safety. The integrated practice model that has grown out of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists Pharmacy Practice Model Initiative (PPMI) could threaten the growth and development of future clinical specialists. Therefore, the ways in which PGY2-trained clinical pharmacist specialists are deployed in the PPMI require further consideration. PGY2 residencies provide education and training opportunities that cannot be achieved in traditional professional degree programs or postgraduate year one residencies. These specialists are needed to provide direct patient care to complex patient populations and to educate and train pharmacy students and postgraduate residents. Limitations to training and hiring PGY2-trained clinical pharmacy specialists include site capacity limitations and lack of funding. A gap analysis is needed to define the extent of the mismatch between the demand for specialists by health care systems and educational institutions versus the capacity to train clinical pharmacists at the specialty level.

Background Vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitors such as bevacizumab, sorafenib, and sunitinib are utilized in the treatment of multiple cancers. Although these agents are associated with hypertension, there is a lack of evidence describing patterns of antihypertensive use in patients with vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-associated hypertension in a non-trial, “real-world” setting. Objective To describe the occurrence and severity of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-associated hypertension, patterns of antihypertensive use and occurrence of cardiovascular complications in a non-trial population, and to describe patterns of initial antihypertensive therapy in patients developing hypertension during treatment with a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor. Methods This retrospective cohort study utilized claims data from the Medstat MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounter database to identify patients with claims for a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor and a diagnosis of cancer using International Classification of Diseases, 9th Revision, Clinical Modification codes, Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System J-codes and National Drug Codes. The study period encompassed claims from one year before the patient’s first claim for a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor, and continued through one year after the initial vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor claim. Patients meeting study criteria were classified into cohorts A1, patients with no hypertension throughout the study period; A2, patients without hypertension at baseline who developed hypertension after starting a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor; and cohort B, patients with hypertension prior to receiving a vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor. We utilized medical and pharmacy claims data to describe the presence of hypertension, its severity, and the occurrence of cardiovascular complications throughout the study period. Initial antihypertensive use in cohort A2 was described. Results In all, 2177 patients met study criteria and were categorized into cohorts A1 (n = 708), A2 (n = 333) and B (n = 1136). Approximately 32% of patients without hypertension at baseline had claims suggestive for hypertension during the study period. Life-threatening (Grade 4) hypertension increased throughout the study period for cohorts A1, A2, and B, to 3.4%, 10.2%, and 16.4%, respectively ( p Conclusion Our study provides valuable insight into non-trial patterns of vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-associated hypertension occurrence and severity, and is consistent with prior claims analysis. Identification of optimal strategies to manage vascular endothelial growth factor inhibitor-associated hypertension remain to be clarified with the advent of more comprehensive data sets.

OBJECTIVE: To review the characteristics and clinical trial data of crizotinib in ALK-positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). DATA SOURCE: A literature search using PubMed/MEDLINE (up to December 2012) was performed using the terms crizotinib, ALK-positive, non-small cell lung cancer, and PF-02341066. STUDY SELECTION/DATA EXTRACTION: Phase 1, 2, and 3 trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of crizotinib in a cohort of patients with ALK rearrangements and advanced NSCLC were evaluated. All peer-reviewed articles with clinically relevant information were reviewed. DATA SYNTHESIS: ALK rearrangement results in an aberrant EML4-ALK fusion oncogene that constitutively activates ALK tyrosine kinase, resulting in inhibition of apoptosis and promotion of tumor cell proliferation. Approximately 3–5% of NSCLC exhibit this rearrangement. Crizotinib is an oral selective inhibitor of ALK and mesenchymal epithelial growth factor tyrosine kinases. Early phase trials with crizotinib showed improved response rates of 50–57% and extended duration of response of 6–10 months. Results of these studies led to accelerated Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval of crizotinib. Further clinical trial results confirmed improvement in response rates, duration of response, as well as progression-free survival in ALK-positive patients with NSCLC receiving crizotinib. The drug undergoes hepatic metabolism by CYP3A4 and demonstrates autoinhibition of CY3A4, thus predisposing it to drug interactions. The most frequent toxicities with crizotinib include mild visual disturbances, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, constipation, edema, and generally reversible, sometimes severe, elevations in aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase. CONCLUSIONS: Crizotinib is a novel targeted anticancer agent that appears to be a favorable treatment option for patients with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC that is ALK-positive as detected by an FDA-approved test.

Heart failure is a common, costly, and debilitating syndrome that is associated with a highly complex drug regimen, a large number of comorbidities, and a large and often disparate number of healthcare providers. All of these factors conspire to increase the risk of heart failure exacerbation by direct myocardial toxicity, drug-drug interactions, or both. This scientific statement is designed to serve as a comprehensive and accessible source of drugs that may cause or exacerbate heart failure to assist healthcare providers in improving the quality of care for these patients.

Antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) combine highly specific monoclonal antibodies with potent cytotoxic drugs. Their synergy allows for targeted delivery of toxic drugs to cancer cells while sparing systemic exposure. In this review, we focus on the history and clinical applications of ADCs approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the treatment of cancer and highlight new ADCs in the drug development pipeline. Three ADCs have received FDA approval thus far. Gemtuzumab ozogamicin, although withdrawn from the U.S. market, may still be an effective treatment modality in subsets of patients with acute myeloid leukemia. Brentuximab vedotin and ado-trastuzumab emtansine have shown improved efficacy and safety data compared with standard chemotherapy for the treatment of advanced lymphoma and breast cancer, respectively. With a number of ADCs with promising preliminary data in the clinical trial pipeline, cancer therapy is moving forward from traditional chemotherapy to targeted treatment modalities driven by the specificity of monoclonal antibodies and advancing biotechnology.

OBJECTIVE: To present the current clinical evidence on everolimus for use in pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET). DATA SOURCES: A literature search was performed using PubMed and MEDLINE (1946-March 2012). Search terms were everolimus, RAD001, mTOR inhibitor, and pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors. Abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2000-2012 meetings and Food and Drug Administration (FDA) reviews were searched to obtain otherwise unpublished data. The national clinical trials registry was searched for current and future studies of everolimus in pNET. STUDY SELECTION AND DATA EXTRACTION: Clinical studies available in the English language describing the pharmacology, pharmacokinetics, clinical activity, and safety of everolimus in pNET were included. All peer-reviewed, clinically relevant publications were reviewed for inclusion. DATA SYNTHESIS: Everolimus is an oral mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitor approved by the FDA in May 2011 for the treatment of progressive, advanced pNET. Everolimus exerts its effect by inhibiting multiple downstream pathways of mTOR, which decreases cell proliferation, survival, and angiogenesis. Its pNET indication was based on the results of RADIANT-3, a Phase 3 trial demonstrating increased median progression-free survival (11 months) with everolimus 10 mg orally once daily compared to placebo (4.6 months). Everolimus was well tolerated in clinical trials. The most commonly reported adverse events included stomatitis, rash, diarrhea, fatigue, infections, nausea, and decreased appetite. Grade 3/4 events including anemia, thrombocytopenia, pneumonitis, and hyperglycemia occurred in approximately 5% of patients. CONCLUSIONS: Based on review of the available literature, everolimus is a safe and effective treatment option for patients with low- to intermediate-grade, unresectable or metastatic pNET that have progressed on prior therapies. Until results of head-to-head, randomized controlled trials are conducted to compare everolimus to other treatment options, it cannot be said whether everolimus is more efficacious or tolerable than other treatment options.

Purpose: The objectives of the study were to evaluate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, pharmacodynamics, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of PX-866 in patients with incurable cancers. Experimental Design: This was a phase I, open-label, dose-escalation study. Drug was administered orally once per day either on an intermittent (arm 1; days 1–5 and 8–12 of a 28-day cycle) or continuous (arm 2; days 1–28 of a 28-day cycle) schedule. Additional patients were treated at the arm 2 MTD in a food effects substudy. Results: Eighty-four patients were treated in the arm 1 (n = 51), arm 2 (n = 20), and food effects (n = 13) cohorts. The most frequent study drug–related adverse events were gastrointestinal disorders (69.0%), with diarrhea being the most common (48.8%). The MTD was 12 and 8 mg for arm 1 and 2, respectively. The dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) consisted of grade III diarrhea (n = 3) and grade III elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST; n = 1). The pharmacokinetics profile was dose proportional, with no evidence of drug accumulation. PX-866–associated inhibition of platelet pAKTSER473 was observed at the arm 2 MTD. The best response per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) was stable disease in 22% of evaluable patients in arm 1, 53% in arm 2, and 11% in the food effects cohort. Eight patients were on study for 4 or more months. Conclusions: This first-in-human study shows that PX-866, an irreversible small-molecule inhibitor of phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K), was well tolerated and was associated with prolonged stable disease, particularly when using a continuous dosing schedule. Clin Cancer Res; 18(15); 4173–82. ©2012 AACR.

As more disease states have an increasing number of therapeutic options, pharmacy schools are continuously challenged to provide pharmacy students with a comprehensive education in a finite amount of time. It is particularly challenging to determine which diseases and associated therapeutic options should be included in the curriculum. The 2016 ACCP Pharmacotherapy Didactic Curriculum Toolkit seeks to provide clarity and guidance to schools and colleges of pharmacy to assist with curricular development.1 Oncologic disorders are a vital part of the pharmacy curricula and are taught in the majority of colleges of pharmacy in the United States in the didactic and experiential setting.2 This article is protected by copyright. All rights reserved.

To compare the pharmacokinetic (PK) parameters of a single dose of erlotinib in cancer patients with moderate hepatic impairment (MHI) to those of cancer patients with adequate hepatic function (AHF).Cancer patients with either AHF or MHI were treated with a single 150 mg dose of erlotinib on day 1 only followed by 96 h of plasma sampling for PK assessment. From day 5, patients were allowed to continue daily erlotinib in a maintenance phase. Non-smoking patients were stratified into an AHF cohort (total bilirubin ≤ upper limit of normal [ULN] and ALT/AST ≤ 1.5 X ULN) or a MHI cohort (Child-Pugh score of 7-9). The frequency of adverse events and laboratory changes were assessed.Thirty-six patients, 21 with AHF and 15 with MHI, received at least one dose of erlotinib. The PK of erlotinib was similar between the two cohorts with a median C (max) of 1.09 versus 0.828 μg/mL and corresponding median AUC(0-t ) 29.3 versus 30.5 μg h/mL for the AHF and MHI cohorts, respectively. Adverse events from erlotinib in cancer patients with MHI were consistent with the known safety profile.The PK and safety profiles of erlotinib in patients with MHI were similar to those with AHF. As a result, a reduced starting dose of erlotinib in patients with MHI is not required and treatment should be guided by patients' tolerability.

Background To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety and pharmacokinetics of trabectedin with capecitabine in patients with advanced malignancies. Design In this Phase I, open-label, dose-finding study, patients refractory to standard therapy received trabectedin (3-h intravenous infusion, 0.4–1.3 mg/m2, day 1) and capecitabine (2,000 or 1,600 mg/m2/day orally, days 2–15) every 3 weeks. Standard “3 + 3” dose escalation was used to define the MTD. Antitumor response was assessed every two cycles; adverse events (AEs) were recorded throughout. Results Forty patients received 149 cycles of treatment (median 2; range 1–11) at nine dose levels. Gastrointestinal dose-limiting toxicities in two patients at two dose levels with capecitabine at 2,000 mg/m2/day prompted dose reduction to 1,600 mg/m2/day and initiation of new trabectedin dose escalation at 0.6 mg/m2. The MTD was capecitabine 1,600 mg/m2/day + trabectedin 1.1 mg/m2. Common grade 3–4 drug-related AEs were neutropenia (20%), nausea (18%), diarrhea (15%) and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (15%). One patient with cholangiocarcinoma achieved a sustained partial response, and 18 patients maintained stable disease (six for ≥6 months). Conclusions The combination of trabectedin and capecitabine is generally well tolerated, without pharmacokinetic interactions, and shows some activity in patients with advanced cancers.

e15637Background: FOLFOX (5-fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin) is the most commonly used chemotherapy regimen for colorectal cancer. The scheduled administration of FOLFOX is every 14 days,...

436 Background: Metastatic pancreatic chemotherapy regimens are often used as neoadjuvant treatment in the LAPC setting. The University of Colorado has a treatment paradigm for BR-LAPC which consists of 2-4 months of chemotherapy followed by SBRT then reevaluated for surgical resection. Methods: Retrospective analysis of patients with pathologically confirmed BR-LAPC who received all neoadjuvant treatment (chemotherapy and SBRT) with intention of undergoing surgical resection at the University of Colorado Cancer Center from 2012 to 2017. Baseline data collected includes demographics, comorbidities, disease characteristics and chemotherapy regimen FOLFIRINOX or Gemcitabine/Nab-Paclitaxel (GNP). The objective of the study is to describe the correlation of neoadjuvant regimens and clinical outcomes. Results: A total of 100 patients were identified with 40 patients collected for the interim analysis. Of these patients 82.5% (N = 33) received FOLFIRINOX and 17.5% (N = 7) received GNP. Patients who received FOLFIRINOX, 78.8% went for surgical resection compared to 85.7% in the GNP group. The number of patients who had a reported College of American Pathology (CAP) grade ≤1, representing no or minimal residual disease, was 3 for the FOLFIRINOX group and no patients in the GNP group. The percent of patients in the FOLFIRINOX group who achieved R0 resections was 90% compared to 83% for the GNP group. Mean initial CA 19-9 was 38.5U/ml, 386.7U/ml, and 1799.8U/ml in CAP grade 1, 2, 3 respectively, while percent reduction in CA 19-9 level during neoadjuvant was 33.3%, 69.7%, and 72.4% respectively. Assessment of the impact of relative dose intensity for each neoadjuvant regimen on clinical outcomes is ongoing. Conclusions: FOLFIRINOX neoadjuvant treatment was associated with improved surgical outcomes including an increased rate of R0 and CAP grade ≤1 resections. Low initial CA 19-9 levels were associated with favorable surgical and pathologic outcomes whereas absolute or relative CA 19-9 reductions with neoadjuvant were not. Final analysis of all 100 patients will be reported.

Background: MLN0128 is an oral inhibitor of mTOR kinase and mTORC1/2 signaling. Alisertib is an oral inhibitor of Aurora A kinase. Senescence and upregulation of genes in the PI3K/AKT/mTor pathway have been observed in triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) patient-derived xenograft models treated with alisertib, with greater tumor growth inhibition demonstrated in combination with MLN0128 as compared to each agent alone. An investigator-initiated trial was developed to evaluate the combination of MLN0128 and alisertib in patients with advanced solid tumors, followed by an expansion cohort in metastatic TNBC and other selected cancers. The goals of this ongoing study are to evaluate safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics (PK) and preliminary efficacy of the combination. Results of dose escalation are presented here. Methods: Patients with advanced solid tumors refractory to standard therapy were treated orally at escalating doses with the combination of MLN0128 daily on a continuous schedule and alisertib twice daily (BID) on days 1-7 of a 21-day cycle. Dose escalation was conducted according to a standard 3+3 design. Key eligibility criteria included HgbA1c Citation Format: S. Lindsey Davis, Elaine T. Lam, Bradley R. Corr, Cindy L. O'Bryant, Ashley Glode, Nichole Adler, Todd M. Pitts, John J. Tentler, Anna Capasso, Kyrie Dailey, Natalie J. Serkova, Colin D. Weekes, Daniel L. Gustafson, Christopher H. Lieu, Wells A. Messersmith, Stephen Leong, S. Gail Eckhardt, Jennifer R. Diamond. A phase Ib study of the combination of MLN0128 (dual TORC1/2 inhibitor) and MLN8237 (Aurora A inhibitor, alisertib) in patients with advanced solid tumors [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the AACR-NCI-EORTC International Conference: Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics; 2017 Oct 26-30; Philadelphia, PA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Mol Cancer Ther 2018;17(1 Suppl):Abstract nr A083.

This phase I study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and toxicity profile of the combination of gefitinib, capecitabine, and celecoxib in patients with advanced solid tumors. Patients were treated with escalating doses of gefitinib once daily, capecitabine twice daily (14 of 28 days), and celecoxib twice daily. Plasma samples for biomarkers were obtained at baseline and weekly for the first 2 cycles. Pharmacokinetic variables were correlated with toxicity and presence of biological effect. Tumor biopsies from 5 patients were analyzed for changes in tumor metabolic activity by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy. [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography was done as a correlate in 6 patients at the MTD. Thirty-nine patients received 168 cycles of therapy. The dose-limiting toxicities observed included nausea, dehydration and nausea, diarrhea, and stomatitis. The MTD was 250 mg/d gefitinib (days 1-14) and 2,000 mg/m2/d capecitabine divided twice daily (days 8-21) every 28 days. Celecoxib was eliminated due to concerns of increased risk for cardiovascular toxicity, although no patients in this study had cardiac events. One patient with cholangiocarcinoma had a confirmed partial response. Fourteen of 39 (36%) patients maintained prolonged stable disease for a median of 4 months (range, 3-24 months). [18F]fluorodeoxyglucose positron emission tomography scan and metabolomic analyses revealed differences in metabolic response to gefitinib versus capecitabine. The combination of gefitinib and capecitabine is well tolerated and appears to have activity against certain advanced solid tumors, providing a rationale for further evaluation in advanced solid malignancies. [Mol Cancer Ther 2008;7(12):3685–94]

Bicalutamide is a nonsteroidal antiandrogen used extensively during the start of androgen deprivation therapy with a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone agonist to reduce occurrence of the symptoms of tumor flare in patients with metastatic prostate carcinoma. The most common adverse effects of bicalutamide are induced by its pharmacologic property of competitive androgen receptor blockade and include gynecomastia, hot flashes, fatigue, and decreased libido. Although not as common, increases in liver function test results are also seen with bicalutamide therapy. These elevations are typically transient, and patients remain asymptomatic. We describe a 59-year-old man with metastatic prostate carcinoma treated with bicalutamide as part of androgen deprivation therapy before starting chemotherapy. At baseline, his liver function test results and serum creatinine concentration were within normal limits, and an abdominal computed tomographic scan did not demonstrate liver metastasis. After 4 days of bicalutamide therapy, the patient came to the emergency department with complaints of abdominal pain, distension, and tenderness. His liver function tests were abnormal, and bicalutamide was discontinued. After 2 days of increasing liver function tests and symptoms of hepatotoxicity, the patient developed tachycardia and hypotension that was resistant to fluid resuscitation. Multiorgan damage was manifested by an alanine aminotransferase level greater than 40 times the upper limit of normal, serum creatinine concentration of 4.2 mg/dl, and troponin I level of 18 ng/ml. The patient died 8 days after bicalutamide therapy was begun secondary to multiorgan failure, most likely as a result of fulminant hepatotoxicity. The Naranjo adverse drug reaction probability scale showed a probable (score of 5) causal relationship between bicalutamide and fulminant hepatotoxicity. Fulminant hepatotoxicity is a rare but potentially fatal adverse effect of bicalutamide. Liver function tests should be monitored before and during bicalutamide therapy, even for patients who have previously completed a course of this therapy with no signs or symptoms of toxicity.

Objective. Breast cancer patients are at an increased risk of osteoporosis due to age, cancer, chemotherapy, and aromatase inhibitor therapy. This retrospective review determined if patients treated with aromatase inhibitors received appropriate screening and management for osteoporosis. Design. University of Colorado Cancer Center breast cancer patients treated with aromatase inhibitor therapy during July 2005 through July 2006 were studied. Data was collected for each patient from the time of breast cancer diagnosis up to April 2007. The study endpoints included (1) appropriate screening for osteoporosis, (2) incidence of osteoporosis diagnosis, and (3) initiation of appropriate drug therapy for bone loss. Appropriate management was defined as adherence to the 2003 American Society of Clinical Oncology guidelines for bone health issues in women with breast cancer. Results. Of the 54 patients included in this study, 12 (22.2%) had no DEXA scans documented, 22 (40.7%) patients received a baseline DEXA scan and 8 (14.8%) patients received baseline and yearly DEXA scans. During the study timeline, 26 (48%) patients were diagnosed with osteopenia and 4 (7%) patients were diagnosed with osteoporosis. Forty-one (75.9%) patients received calcium and vitamin D therapy. Bisphosphonate therapy was received by less than one-third of the osteopenic patients and three-fourths of the osteoporotic patients. Conclusions. The majority of patients were not adequately screened which may have falsely lowered the diagnosis of osteoporosis resulting in omission of drug therapy. All high-risk patients should receive calcium and vitamin D therapy and be evaluated for bisphosphonate therapy. Screening and medical management for osteoporosis in breast cancer patients on aromatase inhibitors is an important area for clinical intervention. J Oncol Pharm Practice (2008) 14: 139—145.

This study evaluated the safety, toxicity, pharmacological properties and biological activity of PI-88, a heparanase endoglycosidase enzyme inhibitor, with fixed weekly docetaxel in patients with advanced solid malignancies.This was a phase I study to determine the maximal-tolerated dose of escalating doses of PI-88 administered subcutaneously for 4 days per week, along with docetaxel 30 mg/m(2) given on days 1, 8, 15 of a 28-day schedule.Sixteen patients received a total of 42 courses of therapy. No dose-limiting toxicities were observed despite escalation to the highest planned dose level of PI-88 (250 mg/day). Frequent minor toxicities included fatigue (38%), dysgeusia (28.5%), thrombocytopenia (12%), diarrhea (14%), nausea (12%), and emesis (10%) in the 42 courses. No significant bleeding complications were observed. One patient developed a positive anti-heparin antibody test/serotonin releasing assay with positive anti-platelet factor 4/PI-88 antibodies and grade 1 thrombocytopenia in cycle 5, and was withdrawn from the study without any sequelae. PI-88 plasma concentrations (mirrored by APTT) and urinary elimination were linear and dose-proportional. Docetaxel did not alter the pharmacokinetic (PK) profile of PI-88, nor did PI-88 affect docetaxel PK. No significant relationship was determined between plasma or urine FGF-2, or plasma VEGF levels and PI-88 dose/response. Although no objective responses were observed; 9 of the 15 evaluable patients had stable disease for greater than two cycles of therapy.PI-88 administered at 250 mg/day for 4 days each week for 3 weeks with docetaxel 30 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8 and 15, every 28 days, was determined to be the recommended dose level for phase II evaluation. This combination was well tolerated without severe toxicities or PK interactions.

Cancer pain is common, occurring in up to 60% of patients and opioid conversion may be required for effective pain management. Conversion from one opioid to another can be problematic due to differences in equianalgesic ratios found in established resources. This study explores the implications of using various published equianalgesic ratios when converting to a common opioid unit. This secondary analysis includes 105 advanced cancer patients who reported use of transdermal fentanyl, long-acting oxycodone, or oral methadone. Common clinically used equianalgesic ratios were identified and utilized to calculate a parenteral morphine equivalent for each of the selected agents. When the equianalgesic ratios were applied to each drug, there were substantial differences in the calculated morphine equivalent for transdermal fentanyl (2-fold difference) and methadone (100-fold difference). The calculated difference for oxycodone was lower, with a 1.5-fold difference. This study demonstrates large variability in opioid conversions based on the use of common equianalgesic ratios for transdermal fentanyl, long-acting oxycodone, and methadone. These findings have important clinical and research implications. First, this study substantiates the use of these ratios as only guidelines for treatment. Second, it supports the need for well-designed, rigorous studies to evaluate opioid conversions. Third, this study demonstrates the need for a standard reporting system of opioid equianalgesic ratios employed in clinical trials.

This phase I study was conducted to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacological properties and biological activity of the combination of the lonafarnib, a farnesylproteintransferase (FTPase) inhibitor, with gemcitabine and cisplatin in patients with advanced solid malignancies.This was a single institution study to determine the maximal tolerated dose (MTD) of escalating lonafarnib (75-125 mg po BID) with gemcitabine (750-1,000 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, 15) and fixed cisplatin (75 mg/m(2) day 1) every 28 days. Due to dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in initial patients, these patients were considered "heavily pre-treated" and the protocol was amended to limit prior therapy and re-escalate lonafarnib in "less heavily pre-treated patients" on 28-day and 21-day schedules. Cycle 1 and 2 pharmacokinetics (PK), and farnesylation of the HDJ2 chaperone protein and FPTase activity were analyzed.Twenty-two patients received 53 courses of therapy. Nausea, vomiting, and fatigue were frequent in all patients. Severe toxicities were observed in 91% of patients: neutropenia (41%), nausea (36%), thrombocytopenia (32%), anemia (23%) and vomiting (23%). Nine patients withdrew from the study due to toxicity. DLTs of neutropenia, febrile neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, and fatigue limited dose-escalation on the 28-day schedule. The MTD was established as lonafarnib 75 mg BID, gemcitabine 750 mg/m(2) days 1, 8, 15, and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) in heavily pre-treated patients. The MTD in the less heavily pre-treated patients could not be established on the 28-day schedule as DLTs were observed at the lowest dose level, and dose escalation was not completed on the 21-day schedule due to early study termination by the Sponsor. No PK interactions were observed. FTPase inhibition was not observed at the MTD, however HDJ-2 gel shift was observed in one patient at the 100 mg BID lonafarnib dose. Anti-cancer activity was observed: four patients had stable disease lasting2 cycles, one subject had a complete response, and another had a partial response, both with metastatic breast cancer.Lonafarnib 75 mg BID, gemcitabine 750 mg/m(2) days 1, 8, 15, and cisplatin 75 mg/m(2) day 1 on a 28-day schedule was established as the MTD. Lonafarnib did not demonstrate FTPase inhibition at these doses. Despite the observed efficacy, substantial toxicity and questionable contribution of anti-tumor activity of lonafarnib to gemcitabine and cisplatin limits further exploration of this combination.

Background Cilengitide, an antiangiogenic agent that inhibits the binding of integrins alpha(nu)beta(3) and alpha(nu)beta(5) to the extracellular matrix, was studied at two dose levels in cancer patients to determine the optimal biological dose. Patients and methods The doses of cilengitide were 600 or 1200 mg/m(2) as a 1-h infusion twice weekly every 28 days. A novel dose escalation scheme was utilized that relied upon the biological activity rate. Results Twenty patients received 50 courses of cilengitide with no dose-limiting toxic effects. The pharmacokinetic (PK) profile revealed a short elimination half-life of 4 h, supporting twice weekly dosing. Of the six soluble angiogenic molecules assessed, only E-selectin increased significantly from baseline. Analysis of tumor microvessel density and gene expression was not informative due to intrapatient tumor heterogeneity. Although several patients with evaluable tumor biopsy pairs did reveal posttreatment increases in tumor and endothelial cell apoptosis, these results did not reach statistical significance due to the aforementioned heterogeneity. Conclusions Cilengitide is a well-tolerated antiangiogenic agent. The biomarkers chosen in this study underscore the difficulty in assessing the biological activity of antiangiogenic agents in the absence of validated biological assays.

To characterize the cardiovascular safety profile of regorafenib in patients with advanced cancer. Patients received regorafenib 160 mg/day for 21 days followed by a 7-day break. The primary endpoint was the change from baseline in QTcF at the regorafenib t max (Day 21, Cycle 1 or 2) and changes in left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) from baseline on Cycle 2, Day 21. Secondary objectives were pharmacokinetics, safety, anti-tumor activity and effects on electrocardiogram intervals. QT intervals were corrected using the methods of Fridericia (QTcF) and Bazett (QTcB). LVEF was assessed by multigated acquisition scanning. Fifty-three patients were enrolled, and all received at least one dose of regorafenib 160 mg. Twenty-five patients received regorafenib for 21 days without dose reduction. The mean change from baseline in QTcF at t max was (−)2 ms (90 % CI −8, 3). No patient experienced a change from baseline in QTcF > 60 ms, and two had QTcF changes between 30 and 60 ms. No patient had a QTcF or QTcB > 480 ms. In 27 patients who received at least 80 mg of regorafenib, the mean change from baseline in LVEF% ± SD was 1.7 ± 7.8. In 14 patients without a dose reduction, the mean change from baseline in LVEF% was (−)0.1 ± 8.6 at Cycle 2, Day 21. Four patients experienced a LVEF decrease between 10 and 20 %. The effects of regorafenib on the QT/QTc interval and LVEF were modest and unlikely to be of clinical significance in the setting of advanced cancer therapy.

BACKGROUND To evaluate the toxicity and pharmacological and biological properties of the farnesyl protein transferase (FPTase) inhibitor, tipifarnib (R115777, ZARNESTRAtrade mark) and capecitabine administered for 14 days every 3 weeks. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with advanced cancers received twice daily tipifarnib (100-500 mg) and capecitabine (1000-1125 mg/m(2)) for 14 days every 3 weeks. Pharmacokinetics of tipifarnib, capecitabine and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) were determined. Peripheral blood mononuclear cells were analyzed for farnesylation of the HDJ2 chaperone protein and FPTase activity. RESULTS Forty-one patients received 185 courses of treatment. Diarrhea and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia were dose limiting at 300 mg tipifarnib/1125 mg/m(2) capecitabine b.i.d. When the capecitabine dose was fixed at 1000 mg/m(2) b.i.d., neutropenia was dose limiting at 400 and 500 mg b.i.d. of tipifarnib. Capecitabine did not affect the pharmacology of tipifarnib at 100-300 mg b.i.d., although tipifarnib significantly increased the C(max) of 5-FU at 400 mg b.i.d. HDJ2 farnesylation and FPTase activity decreased between 200 and 400 mg b.i.d. doses of tipifarnib, without a dose-response relationship. Five patients demonstrated partial remissions and 11 patients maintained prolonged stable disease. CONCLUSIONS Tipifarnib and capecitabine are well tolerated at 300 mg/1000 mg/m(2) b.i.d., respectively, resulting in biologically relevant plasma concentrations and antitumor activity. The recommended dose for further disease-focused studies is 300 mg b.i.d. tipifarnib and 1000 mg/m(2) b.i.d. capecitabine, given for 14 days every 3 weeks.

Purpose: PI-88 is a mixture of highly sulfated oligosaccharides that inhibits heparanase, an extracellular matrix endoglycosidase, and the binding of angiogenic growth factors to heparan sulfate. This agent showed potent inhibition of placental blood vessel angiogenesis as well as growth inhibition in multiple xenograft models, thus forming the basis for this study. Experimental Design: This study evaluated the toxicity and pharmacokinetics of PI-88 (80-315 mg) when administered s.c. daily for 4 consecutive days bimonthly (part 1) or weekly (part 2). Results: Forty-two patients [median age, 53 years (range, 19-78 years); median performance status, 1] with a range of advanced solid tumors received a total of 232 courses. The maximum tolerated dose was 250 mg/d. Dose-limiting toxicity consisted of thrombocytopenia and pulmonary embolism. Other toxicity was generally mild and included prolongation of the activated partial thromboplastin time and injection site echymosis. The pharmacokinetics were linear with dose. Intrapatient variability was low and interpatient variability was moderate. Both AUC and Cmax correlated with the percent increase in activated partial thromboplastin time, showing that this pharmacodynamic end point can be used as a surrogate for drug exposure. No association between PI-88 administration and vascular endothelial growth factor or basic fibroblast growth factor levels was observed. One patient with melanoma had a partial response, which was maintained for >50 months, and 9 patients had stable disease for ≥6 months. Conclusion: The recommended dose of PI-88 administered for 4 consecutive days bimonthly or weekly is 250 mg/d. PI-88 was generally well tolerated. Evidence of efficacy in melanoma supports further evaluation of PI-88 in phase II trials.

Purpose: Exisulind (sulindac sulfone, FGN-1, Aptosyn) is a sulindac metabolite that induces apoptosis via inhibition of cyclic GMP-phosphodiesterase. This agent demonstrated tumor growth inhibition in rodent models of colon, breast, prostate, and lung carcinogenesis. In an orthotopic model of human non–small-cell lung cancer, the combination of exisulind and docetaxel prolonged survival in athymic nude rats, forming the basis of this phase I combination study. Experimental Design: This study evaluated the toxicity and pharmacokinetics of combining exisulind (150–250 mg) given orally twice daily and docetaxel (30–36 mg/m2) administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 4-week cycle. Results: Twenty patients with a range of advanced solid tumors (median age, 59 years; age range, 35–77 years; median performance status, 1) received a total of 70 courses. Observed adverse events were mild to moderate, and there was no dose-limiting toxicity at any level. Grade 3 gastrointestinal toxicities were present in 10 of the 70 cycles (10%) and included nausea, vomiting, dyspepsia, and elevated alkaline phosphatase. Neutropenia was present in four cycles in patients treated with a docetaxel dose of 36 mg/m2. Pharmacokinetic analysis did not demonstrate a clear effect of exisulind on docetaxel pharmacokinetics and vice versa. Relationships were evident between the plasma concentration of exisulind and the development of grade 2 or greater toxicities. One third of patients maintained stable disease for 3 to 12 cycles, but no objective responses were observed. Conclusions: The combination of docetaxel (36 mg/m2, weekly) and exisulind (500 mg/d) was reasonably well tolerated, and it is undergoing phase II testing in patients with non–small-cell lung cancer.

2552 Background: Crizotinib is a kinase inhibitor approved for treating ALK+ and ROS1+ advanced non-small cell lung cancer. Since crizotinib undergoes hepatic metabolism, this phase 1 study evaluated the pharmacokinetics (PK) and safety of crizotinib in pts with liver dysfunction. Methods: Crizotinib-naïve pts with different types of advanced cancer (ALK and ROS1 status unknown), ≥ 18 yr old, and ECOG PS 0–2 were enrolled. Pts were assigned to groups A1 – D based on liver function: normal (A1/A2) = both AST and TB ≤ the upper limit of normal (ULN); mild impairment (B) = AST > ULN and TB ≤ ULN, or TB > 1.0 – 1.5 × ULN; moderate (C1/C2) = TB > 1.5 – 3 × ULN; severe (D) = TB > 3 × ULN. Starting dose was based on HI. Pts in A1 and A2 were matched for weight, age, gender, race and ECOG PS to pts in B and C2, respectively. Study objectives included PK, safety and antitumor activity. Results: 88 pts were enrolled in A1 (n=11), A2 (n=15), B (n=20), C1 (n=10), C2 (n=16) and D (n=16). The geometric means of PK parameters at steady-state (Cycle 2 Day 1) are shown below. 75% of pts experienced treatment-related AEs (TRAEs), 9 (81.8%), 14 (93.3%), 15 (75.0%), 6 (60.0%), 11 (68.8%) and 11 (68.8%) in groups A1, A2, B, C1, C2 and D, respectively. 25% of pts experienced Grade 3/4 TRAEs, 3 (27.3%), 3 (20.0%), 3 (15.0%), 1 (10%), 7 (43.8%), 5 (31.3%) in groups A1, A2, B, C1, C2 and D, respectively. Three (3.4%) pts, all in A2, experienced treatment-related SAEs. Two pts (10%) in B and 1 (6.3%) in C2 required dose reductions for TRAEs. TRAEs associated with permanent discontinuation of treatment occurred in 1 pt in A1, A2, C2 and D. Overall, 3 pts had partial responses with durations of 96, 17 and 17 wks; 25 pts had stable disease. Conclusions: Systemic exposures of crizotinib in pts with mild HI receiving 250 BID and in pts with moderate HI receiving 200 mg BID are comparable with that of pts with normal hepatic function at 250 mg BID. All TRAEs were manageable across the various levels of hepatic function. Clinical trial information: NCT01576406. [Table: see text]

Objective: To review vismodegib, the first Food and Drug Administration (FDA)-approved Hedgehog (Hh) signaling pathway inhibitor, in the treatment of advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC). Data Sources: MEDLINE and PubMed were searched using the terms vismodegib, GDC-0449, RG3616, and basal cell carcinoma for relevant clinical trials through September 2013. The FDA Web site, the National Clinical Trials registry, and abstracts from the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) were also evaluated to identify unpublished data and future clinical trials. Study Selection/Data Extraction: All identified clinical and preclinical studies published in the English language were assessed, including selected references from the bibliographies of articles. Data Synthesis: Activation of the Hh signaling pathway is well documented in BCC. Vismodegib is a small-molecule inhibitor of Hh signaling that acts by antagonizing the protein Smoothened (SMO), thereby preventing downstream transcriptional activation of genes involved in cell proliferation and survival. Vismodegib was approved by the FDA in January 2012 for the treatment of recurrent, locally advanced BCC (laBCC), or metastatic BCC (mBCC) for which surgery or radiation cannot be utilized. A pivotal phase 2 trial evaluating 104 patients demonstrated that treatment with vismodegib, 150 mg orally once daily, resulted in a 30% and 43% objective response rate in patients with mBCC and laBCC, respectively. The most common adverse effects from vismodegib were mild to moderate and included muscle spasms, dysgeusia, decreased weight, fatigue, alopecia, and diarrhea. However, clinical studies noted a high incidence of discontinuation of therapy by patients for reasons other than disease progression. Conclusions: The approval of vismodegib represents the only targeted, prospectively studied treatment option for patients with advanced BCC. Further research assessing the utility of vismodegib in the treatment of other malignancies and the development of resistance patterns will more clearly define the role of Hedgehog inhibition in the broader scheme of oncological disorders.