Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of bexarotene in combination with gefitinib in the third-line treatment of non-small-cell lung cancer: brief report.

Gefitinib (an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor) and bexarotene (a rexinoid) affect similar oncogenic pathways and are both metabolized through cytochrome P450 CYP3A4. We studied the combination of bexarotene and gefitinib in the third-line treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer to examine pharmacokinetic interactions and establish the maximum tolerated dose. This was a single-institution, nonrandomized, open-label, phase I clinical trial with a standard 3+3 dose escalation. Three patients were enrolled at each dose level on the basis of pharmacokinetic analysis with dose level 1 including gefitinib (Iressa) 250 mg oral daily and bexarotene (Targretin) 400 mg/m oral daily and dose level +1 including gefitinib 500 mg oral daily and bexarotene 400 mg/m oral daily. Patients received gefitinib alone for 2 weeks to allow for steady state and thereafter, bexarotene was added. In dose level 1, two of three patients had undetectable gefitinib levels at day 15 for unknown reasons. However, the peak levels on day 29 for all three patients receiving 250 mg of gefitinib with bexarotene are lower than published peak levels. Among the three patients in dose level +1, ∼40% lower gefitinib plasma concentrations were noted on day 29 compared with day 15 along with a mean 44% reduction in area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 24 h (AUC0-24). Bexarotene appears to lower the C max and AUC0-24 of gefitinib through cytochrome P450 CYP3A4. Our results have pharmacokinetic implications for ongoing trials that combine bexarotene with other small molecules in the era of personalized cancer therapy.

A phase I pharmacokinetic study of bexarotene with paclitaxel and carboplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PURPOSE: Preclinical data suggest that the synthetic retinoid bexarotene may be an effective chemopreventive agent and that it may act synergistically in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy. The primary objective of this study was to determine whether repeated doses of bexarotene capsules affect pharmacokinetic parameters of paclitaxel or carboplatin in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer. METHODS: Patients received treatment with paclitaxel (200 mg/m(2)) and carboplatin to provide a target AUC of 6 mg min/mL (day 1) every 3 weeks. Continuous oral bexarotene therapy (400 mg/m(2)/day) was initiated on Day 4, and patients started lipid-lowering therapy prior to beginning chemotherapy. Blood sampling to characterize the pharmacokinetic profiles of the chemotherapeutic agents with or without bexarotene was performed during cycle 1 (without concomitant bexarotene) and during cycle 2 (with concomitant bexarotene). RESULTS: An analysis of drug concentration data from 16 patients indicated that bexarotene did not affect the pharmacokinetics of paclitaxel, free carboplatin, or total carboplatin concentrations. However, both maximal plasma concentrations and total exposure of bexarotene increased by 80% in the presence of paclitaxel-carboplatin by an, as of yet, unexplained mechanism. The toxicities observed resembled those of either the chemotherapy regimen or bexarotene alone, and there was no evidence for an enhancement of any drug-related toxicity with the combined treatment. CONCLUSIONS: The administration of bexarotene, paclitaxel, and carboplatin is feasible and safe; however, the increased bexarotene plasma concentrations and exposure warrant further investigation if this combination is to be utilized clinically.

The effect of bexarotene on atorvastatin pharmacokinetics: results from a phase I trial of bexarotene plus chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

PURPOSE: Bexarotene (Targretin(®) capsules) is a retinoid-X-receptor agonist and an inducer of CYP3A4-mediated metabolism. This phase I trial evaluated the pharmacokinetic (PK) and drug-drug interactions of bexarotene with chemotherapy and a lipid-lowering agent (atorvastatin or fenofibrate). This trial was run in parallel with phase III trials of the combinations to determine whether repeated doses of bexarotene capsules affect the pharmacokinetics (PK) of the chemotherapeutic or the lipid-lowering agents. METHODS: Patients (n = 48) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer were treated with repetitive cycles of either paclitaxel/carboplatin or cisplatin/vinorelbine chemotherapy, bexarotene (400 mg/m(2)/day) administered continuously starting on day 4 of chemotherapy, and a lipid-lowering drug, either atorvastatin or fenofibrate, starting at least 5 days before chemotherapy due to hypertriglyceridemia induced by bexarotene. Extensive plasma sampling to characterize the PK profiles of the lipid-lowering drugs, relevant chemotherapy agents was performed on day 1 (without bexarotene) and during chemotherapy cycles 2 or 3 (with bexarotene). RESULTS: Here, we report the drug-drug interactions between the lipid-lowering agents and bexarotene. Mean atorvastatin clearance and dose-corrected AUC values were reduced by nearly 50% with the addition of concomitant bexarotene. As fenofibrate was less effective at controlling hypertriglyceridemia, too few patients received this agent to make any meaningful conclusions about drug-drug interactions. CONCLUSIONS: A drug-drug interaction was seen in this trial with bexarotene co-administration leading to a significant reduction in the AUC of atorvastatin. The likely mechanism for this interaction is through induction of CYP3A4 by bexarotene given the role of this enzyme in the metabolism of atorvastatin. Knowledge of this interaction is important for optimizing lipid management with atorvastatin for patients receiving bexarotene.

A phase I pharmacokinetic study of bexarotene with vinorelbine and cisplatin in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PURPOSE: This is a phase I study of the retinoid X receptor agonist bexarotene (Targretin(®)) in combination with the chemotherapeutic drugs cisplatin and vinorelbine and lipid-lowering therapy. This study looked for pharmacokinetic (PK) interactions between the agents in parallel with a phase III study of the combination. METHODS: Patients (n = 26) with advanced-stage non-small-cell lung cancer received intravenous cisplatin 100 mg/m(2) on day 1 and at 4-week intervals plus intravenous vinorelbine 25 mg/m(2) weekly. Continuous oral bexarotene therapy (400 mg/m(2)/day) was initiated at day 4. Lipid-lowering therapy was initiated in all patients due to hypertriglyceridemia associated with bexarotene use. PK profiles of the chemotherapeutic agents were obtained on day 1 (without bexarotene) and during cycles 2-4 (with bexarotene). Vinorelbine (n = 18) and free cisplatin (n = 17) PK parameters in evaluable patients were determined using non-compartmental methods. RESULTS: Mean vinorelbine and free cisplatin clearance and dose-corrected AUC values with bexarotene were within 20% of respective values without concomitant bexarotene. Bexarotene levels did not vary with or without co-administration of the chemotherapeutic agents. There was no evidence of increased toxicity when bexarotene was co-administered with the chemotherapeutic agents. CONCLUSIONS: Bexarotene does not substantially affect vinorelbine or cisplatin PK, and the combination is well tolerated. The results are consistent with the mechanisms of elimination of vinorelbine (high metabolic clearance) and cisplatin (non-enzymatic and renal elimination).

Mass balance study of [¹4C]eribulin in patients with advanced solid tumors.

This mass balance study investigated the metabolism and excretion of eribulin, a nontaxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor with a novel mechanism of action, in patients with advanced solid tumors. A single approximately 2 mg (approximately 80 µCi) dose of [¹4C]eribulin acetate was administered as a 2 to 5 min bolus injection to six patients on day 1. Blood, urine, and fecal samples were collected at specified time points on days 1 to 8 or until sample radioactivity was ≤1% of the administered dose. Mean plasma eribulin exposure (627 ng · h/ml) was comparable with that of total radioactivity (568 ng Eq · h/ml). Time-matched concentration ratios of eribulin to total radioactivity approached unity in blood and plasma, indicating that unchanged parent compound constituted almost all of the eribulin-derived radioactivity. Only minor metabolites were detected in plasma samples up to 60 min postdose, pooled across patients, each metabolite representing ≤0.6% of eribulin. Elimination half-lives for eribulin (45.6 h) and total radioactivity (42.3 h) were comparable. Eribulin-derived radioactivity excreted in feces was 81.5%, and that of unchanged eribulin was 61.9%. Renal clearance (0.301 l/h) was a minor component of total eribulin clearance (3.93 l/h). Eribulin-derived radioactivity excreted in urine (8.9%) was comparable with that of unchanged eribulin (8.1%), indicating minimal excretion of metabolite(s) in urine. Total recovery of the radioactive dose was 90.4% in urine and feces. Overall, no major metabolites of eribulin were detected in plasma. Eribulin is eliminated primarily unchanged in feces, whereas urine constitutes a minor route of elimination.

Pyran-containing sulfonamide hydroxamic acids: potent MMP inhibitors that spare MMP-1.

The SAR of a series of sterically hindered sulfonamide hydroxamic acids with relatively large P1' groups is described. The compounds typically spare MMP-1 while being potent inhibitors of MMP-13. The metabolically more stable compounds in the series contain either a monocyclic or bicyclic pyran ring adjacent to the hydroxamate group. Despite the sparing of MMP-1, pre-clinical and clinical studies revealed that fibrosis in rats and MSS in humans is still produced.

Strategies for dealing with reactive intermediates in drug discovery and development.

Idiosyncratic drug reactions (IDRs; a specific type of drug toxicity characterized by delayed onset) are a major complication of drug therapy that need to be addressed during drug discovery and development. Efforts to improve drug safety are hampered by the lack of an accepted approach to predict IDRs, which in turn is due to the low incidence of occurrence of IDRs and the various potential mechanisms involved in these reactions. The concept of the relative rarity and formation of reactive metabolite of IDRs is briefly described. Hypothetical chemical mechanisms for the formation of reactive metabolites are summarized, including a classification of adverse drug reactions and types of reactive metabolites. The relative merits of current and potential strategies for dealing with reactive intermediates in drug discovery and development are examined, and the significance of covalent binding in drug discovery/development in vitro and in vivo systems is considered. Also discussed are the merits of tools (screening methods to trap reactive intermediates, enzyme inhibition and covalent binding) and strategies for predicting which new drugs have the potential to produce reactive intermediates and IDRs; these approaches may be considered to have the potential to improve the overall safety profile of drug candidates at various stages of the drug discovery and development process.