The Designed Ankyrin Repeat Protein Antiviral Ensovibep for Nonhospitalized Patients With Coronavirus Disease 2019: Results From EMPATHY, a Randomized, Placebo-Controlled Phase 2 Study.

Background: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic was characterized by rapid evolution of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) variants, affecting viral transmissibility, virulence, and response to vaccines/therapeutics. EMPATHY (NCT04828161), a phase 2 study, investigated the safety/efficacy of ensovibep, a multispecific designed ankyrin repeat protein (DARPin) with multivariant in vitro activity, in ambulatory patients with mild to moderate COVID-19. Methods: Nonhospitalized, symptomatic patients (N = 407) with COVID-19 were randomized to receive single-dose intravenous ensovibep (75, 225, or 600 mg) or placebo and followed until day 91. The primary endpoint was time-weighted change from baseline in log10 SARS-CoV-2 viral load through day 8. Secondary endpoints included proportion of patients with COVID-19-related hospitalizations, emergency room (ER) visits, and/or all-cause mortality to day 29; time to sustained clinical recovery to day 29; and safety to day 91. Results: Ensovibep showed superiority versus placebo in reducing log10 SARS-CoV-2 viral load; treatment differences versus placebo in time-weighted change from baseline were -0.42 (P = .002), -0.33 (P = .014), and -0.59 (P < .001) for 75, 225, and 600 mg, respectively. Ensovibep-treated patients had fewer COVID-19-related hospitalizations, ER visits, and all-cause mortality (relative risk reduction: 78% [95% confidence interval, 16%-95%]) and a shorter median time to sustained clinical recovery than placebo. Treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in 44.3% versus 54.0% of patients in the ensovibep and placebo arms; grade 3 events were consistent with COVID-19 morbidity. Two deaths were reported with placebo and none with ensovibep. Conclusions: All 3 doses of ensovibep showed antiviral efficacy and clinical benefits versus placebo and an acceptable safety profile in nonhospitalized patients with COVID-19.

Ensovibep, a SARS-CoV-2 antiviral designed ankyrin repeat protein, is safe and well tolerated in healthy volunteers: Results of a first-in-human, ascending single-dose Phase 1 study.

AIMS: This study aimed to assess safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) effects of ensovibep, a designed ankyrin repeat protein antiviral being evaluated as a COVID-19 treatment, in healthy volunteers in a first-in-human ascending single-dose study. METHODS: Subjects were dosed intravenously, in a randomized double-blinded manner, with either ensovibep at 3, 9 or 20 mg/kg or with placebo, and followed until Day 100. PK and safety were assessed throughout the study duration. Immunogenicity and PD via viral neutralization in serum were also assessed. RESULTS: All adverse events were of mild to moderate severity, and no serious adverse events were observed. One subject who received the 20-mg/kg dose presented with moderate hypersensitivity vasculitis 3 weeks after infusion, which fully resolved using standard procedures. In most subjects ensovibep showed expected mono-exponential decline with a half-life of around 2 weeks. Anti-drug antibodies were detected in 15 of 17 subjects, with the earliest onset detected on Day 29. Viral neutralization assays on subject serum showed effective viral neutralization over the first 3 weeks following dosing with titre values in a dose dependent manner. CONCLUSION: Ensovibep proved safe in this first-in-human safety study and exhibited PK and PD parameters consistent with the expected treatment period required for acute COVID-19 infection.

Dabrafenib plus trametinib is effective in the treatment of BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma patients: analysis of patients from the dabrafenib plus trametinib Named Patient Program (DESCRIBE II).

In clinical trials, dabrafenib plus trametinib improved overall survival (OS) compared with single-agent BRAF inhibitors (BRAFi) in patients with BRAF V600-mutant unresectable or metastatic melanoma. We investigated dabrafenib plus trametinib therapy in a compassionate-use setting [Named Patient Program (NPP); DESCRIBE II]. A retrospective chart review of patients with BRAF V600-mutated unresectable stage III/IV melanoma receiving dabrafenib plus trametinib as compassionate use was conducted. Treatment patterns and duration, clinical outcomes, and tolerability were evaluated. Of 271 patients, 92.6% had stage IV melanoma, including 36.5% with brain metastases. Overall, 162 patients (59.8%) were BRAFi naive and 171 (63.1%) received first-line dabrafenib plus trametinib. Among BRAFi-naive patients, the overall response rate (ORR) was 67.3%, median OS (mOS) was 20.0 months, and median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 7.5 months. In BRAFi-naive patients with known brain metastases (n = 62), ORR was 61.3%, mOS was 15.5 months, and mPFS was 6.2 months. Eighty-four patients received BRAFi monotherapy for >30 days and switched to dabrafenib plus trametinib prior to progression. Of these 84 patients, 63 had known disease status at the time of switch, and 22 improved with the combination therapy. No new safety signals were identified, and dabrafenib plus trametinib was well tolerated. Dabrafenib plus trametinib showed substantial clinical activity in NPP patients with BRAF V600-mutated unresectable or metastatic melanoma. Analysis of treatment patterns demonstrated the effectiveness of the combination in patients with brain metastases and across lines of therapy with a well tolerated and manageable safety profile.

Effectiveness of dabrafenib in the treatment of patients with BRAF V600-mutated metastatic melanoma in a Named Patient Program.

Given the approval of dabrafenib in patients with BRAF-mutant metastatic melanoma, a better understanding of treatment patterns and clinical outcomes with dabrafenib in a clinical setting is warranted. We performed a retrospective chart review of patients who received dabrafenib in a compassionate use setting through the Named Patient Program (DESCRIBE I study) during December 2010-August 2013 in Europe, New Zealand and Australia. Of the 331 Named Patient Program patients included, the majority (95.8%) had stage IV disease at dabrafenib initiation and 39.9% had brain metastases (BMs). Dabrafenib was used first line in 67.7% of patients, and median treatment duration was 6.4 months. Dabrafenib was well tolerated. Common grade 2/3 adverse events were hyperkeratosis (7.6%), pyrexia/fever (6.6%), fatigue (5.1%), hand-foot syndrome (5.4%) and nausea (3.6%). Overall response rate was 45.9%, median progression-free survival was 5.2 months (95% confidence interval, 4.2-6.1 months), and median overall survival was 12.4 months (95% confidence interval, 10.2-15.0 months). In patients with known brain metastases (n = 132) versus patients without (n = 199), overall response rate was 42.4% versus 48.2%, progression-free survival was 3.9 months (95% confidence interval, 3.8-5.5 months) versus 5.9 months (95% confidence interval, 4.8-7.8 months) and overall survival was 9.5 months (95% confidence interval, 6.7-12.4 months) versus 15 months (95% confidence interval, 11.1-20.5 months), respectively. Safety and effectiveness of dabrafenib in patients with unresectable advanced BRAF V600-mutant melanoma treated in an Named Patient Program was similar to the clinical trial experience, demonstrating effectiveness of dabrafenib in a nontrial setting.

Factors predictive of response, disease progression, and overall survival after dabrafenib and trametinib combination treatment: a pooled analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Dabrafenib plus trametinib treatment provides significant benefits over BRAF-inhibitor monotherapy in patients with BRAFV600E-mutant or BRAFV600K-mutant advanced melanoma; however, in many patients the disease progresses, leading to death. With many treatment options available, understanding clinical factors that predict long-term response and survival for treatments is important for optimisation of patient management. We aimed to identify clinical factors associated with long-term response and survival using pooled data from randomised trials of dabrafenib plus trametinib in patients with metastatic BRAF-mutant melanoma. METHODS: We did a retrospective individual data analysis based on all published randomised trials that included treatment-naive patients with BRAFV600E-mutant or BRAFV600K-mutant metastatic melanoma who received the approved dose of dabrafenib 150 mg twice daily plus trametinib 2 mg once daily. Data were pooled from patients in the BRF113220 (part C; March 26, 2010, to Jan 15, 2015), COMBI-d (May 4, 2012, to Jan 12, 2015), and COMBI-v (June 4, 2012, to March 13, 2015) randomised trials. Patients with untreated brain metastases were not permitted to enrol in these trials. Baseline factors, identified a priori based on known melanoma clinical or prognostic characteristics, were analysed for association with progression-free survival and overall survival using univariate and multivariate analyses and assessed for hierarchical effect on outcomes using regression tree analyses. We also analysed factors identified after baseline, on treatment, and at progression, for associations with survival after progression. The trials included in this analysis are registered with ClinicalTrials.gov: BRF113220, number NCT01072175; COMBI-d, number NCT01584648; COMBI-v, number NCT01597908. FINDINGS: 617 patients were included in this analysis with a median follow-up of 20·0 months (range 0-48·0, IQR 10·1-24·8); 396 patients had progression events (ie, disease progression or death) and 290 patients had died. Median progression-free survival (11·1 months [95% CI 9·7-12·9]), median overall survival (25·6 months [23·1-34·3]), 1-year progression-free survival (48% [44-52]) and overall survival (74% [71-78]), and 2-year progression-free survival (30% [26-34]) and overall survival (53% [49-57]) were consistent with those in the individual trials. Patients with normal lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) concentration and fewer than three organ sites containing metastases (n=237) had the longest 1-year progression-free survival (68% [95% CI 62-74]) and overall survival (90% [87-94]) and 2-year progression-free survival (46% [40-54]) and overall survival (75% [70-81]), whereas patients with LDH concentration at least two times the upper limit of normal (n=70) had the shortest 1-year progression-free survival (8% [3-19]) and overall survival (40% [29-55]) and 2-year progression-free survival (2% [0-13]) and overall survival (7% [3-19]). Of patients with disease progression (n=379), survival after progression was longest in those with progression in baseline or new non-CNS lesions (n=205; median 10·0 months [95% CI 7·9-12·0]) and shortest in those with new CNS lesions or concurrent progression in baseline and new lesions (n=171; median 4·0 months [3·5-4·9]). INTERPRETATION: Several patient and clinical characteristics at and after baseline are associated with outcomes with dabrafenib plus trametinib, and durable benefit is possible with targeted treatment in defined patient subsets. FUNDING: Novartis.

Postoperative Adjuvant Lapatinib and Concurrent Chemoradiotherapy Followed by Maintenance Lapatinib Monotherapy in High-Risk Patients With Resected Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: A Phase III, Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study.

PURPOSE: This multicenter phase III study evaluated the efficacy and safety of lapatinib, an epidermal growth factor receptor/ErbB2 inhibitor, administered concomitantly with chemoradiotherapy and as maintenance monotherapy in patients with high-risk surgically treated squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with resected stage II to IVA SCCHN, with a surgical margin ≤ 5 mm and/or extracapsular extension, were randomly assigned to chemoradiotherapy (66 Gy total radiation dose and cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) per day administered on days 1, 22, and 43) plus placebo or lapatinib (1,500 mg per day) before and during chemoradiotherapy, followed by 12 months of maintenance monotherapy. RESULTS: Six hundred eighty-eight patients were enrolled (lapatinib, n = 346; placebo, n = 342). With a median follow-up time of 35.3 months, the study ended early because of the apparent plateauing of disease-free survival (DFS) events. Median DFS assessed by an independent review committee was 53.6 months and not reached for lapatinib and placebo, respectively (hazard ratio, 1.10; 95% CI, 0.85 to 1.43). Investigator-assessed results confirmed the independent review committee assessment. No significant differences in DFS by human papillomavirus status or overall survival were observed between treatment arms. Similar numbers of patients in both treatment arms experienced adverse events (AEs), with more patients in the lapatinib arm than the placebo arm experiencing serious AEs (48% v 40%, respectively). The most commonly observed treatment-related AEs were diarrhea and rash, both predominantly in the lapatinib arm. CONCLUSION: Addition of lapatinib to chemoradiotherapy and its use as long-term maintenance therapy does not offer any efficacy benefits and had additional toxicity compared with placebo in patients with surgically treated high-risk SCCHN.

Efficacy and safety of oral topotecan and bevacizumab combination as second-line treatment for relapsed small-cell lung cancer: an open-label multicenter single-arm phase II study.

BACKGROUND: Topotecan is currently the only US Federal Drug Administration (FDA)-approved drug for second-line treatment of relapsed small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). We investigated the efficacy and safety of a novel topotecan-bevacizumab combination in treating relapsed SCLC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Each 21-day treatment cycle consisted of bevacizumab (15 mg/kg) administration on day 1 and oral topotecan (2.3 mg/m(2)/d) administration on days 1 to 5. Treatment was continued for 8 cycles or until disease progression/toxicity. The primary objective was evaluation of 3-month progression-free survival (PFS). Overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, time to response (TTR), and overall survival (OS) were secondary objectives. RESULTS: The study enrolled 50 patients between July 2008 and May 2010. The 3-month PFS was 65% (95% confidence interval [CI], 49.3%-76.9%), which was promising compared with the historical control of 50% (P = .017) but did not meet the predefined criteria for clinically meaningful improvement. Median PFS was 6.24 months for the sensitive subgroup (progression time from end of previous chemotherapy > 90 days; n = 27) and 2.91 months for the resistant subgroup (progression time ≤ 90 days; n = 23). No patient achieved complete response (CR), and the ORR was 16%. Twenty (40%) patients had stable disease (SD) and 13 (26%) had progressive disease (PD). Median OS, TTR, and duration of response were 7.4, 1.3, and 4.7 months, respectively. The worst reported adverse events (AEs) were grade 1/2 in 11 (22%) patients and grade 3/4/5 in 39 (78%) patients. CONCLUSION: Improvement in the 3-month PFS after treatment with topotecan-bevacizumab was promising compared with the historical control and justifies additional studies with this regimen.

Randomised Phase II study of oral lapatinib combined with chemoradiotherapy in patients with advanced squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck: rationale for future randomised trials in human papilloma virus-negative disease.

BACKGROUND: This randomised Phase II study assessed the activity and safety of concurrent chemoradiotherapy (CRT) and lapatinib followed by maintenance treatment in locally advanced, unresected stage III/IVA/IVB head and neck cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were randomised 1:1 to concurrent CRT and placebo followed by placebo or concurrent CRT and lapatinib followed by lapatinib. Treatment continued until disease progression or study withdrawal. Primary end-point was complete response rate (CRR) by independent review 6 months post-CRT. RESULTS: Sixty-seven patients (median age 56 years; 97% Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1; 82% stage IV) were recruited. CRT dose intensities were unaffected by lapatinib: median radiation dose 70 Gy (lapatinib, placebo), duration 49 (lapatinib) and 50 days (placebo); median cisplatin dose 260 mg/m(2) (lapatinib) and 280 mg/m(2) (placebo). Lapatinib combined with CRT was well-tolerated. Grade 3/4 toxicities during CRT were balanced between arms, with the exception of an excess of grade 3 diarrhoea (6% versus 0%) and rash (9% versus 3%) and two grade 4 cardiac events in the lapatinib arm. CRR at 6 months post-CRT was 53% with lapatinib versus 36% with placebo in the intent-to-treat population. The progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival rates at 18 months were 55% versus 41% and 68% versus 57% for the lapatinib and placebo arms, respectively. The difference between study arms was greatest in p16-negative disease (median PFS >20.4 months [lapatinib] versus 10.9 [placebo]). CONCLUSION: Lapatinib combined with CRT is well-tolerated with numeric increases in CRR at 6 months post-CRT and median PFS in p16-negative disease.

An open-label, single-arm Phase II study of intravenous weekly (Days 1 and 8) topotecan in combination with carboplatin (Day 1) every 21 days as second-line therapy in patients with platinum-sensitive relapsed ovarian cancer.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate clinical activity of weekly topotecan plus carboplatin in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian, fallopian tube, or peritoneal carcinoma. METHODS: An open-label, single-arm, multicenter Phase I/II study. Phase II was the activity assessment phase, with overall response rate (ORR) as the primary endpoint. Eligible patients (females aged ≥18 years) received study treatment at the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) identified in Phase I: intravenous topotecan 2.5mg/m(2) (Days 1 and 8), followed by carboplatin AUC 5 (Day 1), every 21 days. A two-stage Green-Dahlberg design was used to assess efficacy of treatment. An ORR of ≤30% was required to conclude that treatment was ineffective. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients in Phase I permitted identification of the MTD. In Phase II, 55 patients (median age 64.0 years) were enrolled and included in the intent-to-treat population. There were six complete responses (10.9%) and 11 partial responses (20.0%), giving an ORR of 30.9% (17 patients; 95% CI: 18.7%, 43.1%). Median time to response and progression-free survival were 6.57 weeks (95% CI: 5.86, 12.57) and 44.29 weeks (95% CI: 36.14, 52.14), respectively. Grade 3/4 hematological toxicity caused dose reductions, treatment delays and study discontinuation. Neutropenia (Grade 3: 29%; Grade 4: 11%) was the most common hematological adverse event (AE). Fatigue (71%) and nausea (71%) were the most common drug-related non-hematologic AEs. CONCLUSIONS: This study showed an acceptable benefit-risk profile for topotecan plus carboplatin. Further studies using alternative dose levels could help define an optimal dosing schedule for this treatment combination in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent disease.