Patritumab Deruxtecan (HER3-DXd), a Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 3-Directed Antibody-Drug Conjugate, in Patients With Previously Treated Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 3-Expressing Metastatic Breast Cancer: A Multicenter, Phase I/II Trial.

PURPOSE: Human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) is broadly expressed in breast cancer; high expression is associated with an adverse prognosis. Patritumab deruxtecan (HER3-DXd) is an investigational HER3-targeted antibody-drug conjugate that is being evaluated as a novel treatment in HER3-expressing advanced breast cancer in the U31402-A-J101 study. METHODS: Adults with disease progression on previous therapies were eligible. Patients in the dose-escalation, dose-finding, and dose-expansion parts received HER3-DXd 1.6-8.0 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks or one of two alternative dosing regimens. In the dose-escalation part, the primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose and recommended dose for expansion (RDE). The safety and efficacy of the RDE were assessed during dose expansion. RESULTS: One hundred eighty-two enrolled patients received ≥1 dose of HER3-DXd. Patients had a median of five previous therapies for advanced disease. Efficacy results are reported across clinical subtypes: hormone receptor-positive (HR+)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-negative) breast cancer (n = 113; objective response rate [ORR], 30.1%; median progression-free survival [mPFS], 7.4 months), triple-negative breast cancer (n = 53; ORR, 22.6%; mPFS, 5.5 months), and HER2-positive breast cancer (n = 14; ORR, 42.9%; mPFS, 11.0 months). Objective responses were observed in cancers with HER3-high and HER3-low membrane expression. Dose-limiting toxicities observed during dose selection were decreased platelet count and elevated aminotransferases. In dose expansion, GI and hematologic toxicities were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) observed. Grade ≥3 TEAEs were observed in 71.4% of patients, and 9.9% discontinued treatment because of TEAEs. Three grade 3 and one grade 5 treatment-related interstitial lung disease events occurred. CONCLUSION: HER3-DXd demonstrated a manageable safety profile and durable efficacy in heavily pretreated patients across clinical subtypes. These data warrant further evaluation of HER3-DXd in patients with HER3-expressing metastatic breast cancer.

HERTHENA-Lung01, a Phase II Trial of Patritumab Deruxtecan (HER3-DXd) in Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor-Mutated Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer After Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor Tyrosine Kinase Inhibitor Therapy and Platinum-Based Chemotherapy.

PURPOSE: Patritumab deruxtecan, or HER3-DXd, is an antibody-drug conjugate consisting of a fully human monoclonal antibody to human epidermal growth factor receptor 3 (HER3) attached to a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload via a stable tetrapeptide-based cleavable linker. We assessed the efficacy and safety of HER3-DXd in patients with epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: This phase II study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04619004) was designed to evaluate HER3-DXd in patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC previously treated with EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) therapy and platinum-based chemotherapy (PBC). Patients received HER3-DXd 5.6 mg/kg intravenously once every 3 weeks or an uptitration regimen (3.2 → 4.8 → 6.4 mg/kg). The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (ORR; RECIST 1.1) by blinded independent central review (BICR), with a null hypothesis of 26.4% on the basis of historical data. RESULTS: Enrollment into the uptitration arm closed early on the basis of a prespecified benefit-risk assessment of data from the phase I U31402-A-U102 trial. In total, 225 patients received HER3-DXd 5.6 mg/kg once every 3 weeks. As of May 18, 2023, median study duration was 18.9 (range, 14.9-27.5) months. Confirmed ORR by BICR was 29.8% (95% CI, 23.9 to 36.2); median duration of response, 6.4 months; median progression-free survival, 5.5 months; and median overall survival, 11.9 months. The subgroup of patients with previous osimertinib and PBC had similar outcomes. Efficacy was observed across a broad range of pretreatment tumor HER3 membrane expression levels and across diverse mechanisms of EGFR TKI resistance. In patients with nonirradiated brain metastases at baseline (n = 30), the confirmed CNS ORR by BICR per CNS RECIST was 33.3% (95% CI, 17.3 to 52.8). The safety profile (National Cancer Institute Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events v5.0) was manageable and tolerable, consistent with previous observations. CONCLUSION: After tumor progression with EGFR TKI therapy and PBC in patients with EGFR-mutated NSCLC, HER3-DXd once every 3 weeks demonstrated clinically meaningful efficacy with durable responses, including in CNS metastases. A phase III trial in EGFR-mutated NSCLC after progression on an EGFR TKI is ongoing (HERTHENA-Lung02; ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05338970).

A Phase II Randomized Study of Neoadjuvant Letrozole Plus Alpelisib for Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Breast Cancer (NEO-ORB).

PURPOSE: Addition of alpelisib to fulvestrant significantly extended progression-free survival in PIK3CA-mutant, hormone receptor-positive (HR+) advanced/metastatic breast cancer in the phase III SOLAR-1 study. The combination of alpelisib and letrozole also had promising activity in phase I studies of HR+ advanced/metastatic breast cancer. NEO-ORB aimed to determine whether addition of alpelisib to letrozole could increase response rates in the neoadjuvant setting.Patients and Methods: Postmenopausal women with HR+, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, T1c-T3 breast cancer were assigned to the PIK3CA-wild-type or PIK3CA-mutant cohort according to their tumor PIK3CA status, and randomized (1:1) to 2.5 mg/day letrozole with 300 mg/day alpelisib or placebo for 24 weeks. Primary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR) and pathologic complete response (pCR) rate for both PIK3CA cohorts. RESULTS: In total, 257 patients were assigned to letrozole plus alpelisib (131 patients) or placebo (126 patients). Grade ≥3 adverse events (≥5% of patients) in the alpelisib arm were hyperglycemia (27%), rash (12%), and maculo-papular rash (8%). The primary objective was not met; ORR in the alpelisib versus placebo arm was 43% versus 45% and 63% versus 61% in the PIK3CA-mutant and wild-type cohorts, respectively. pCR rates were low in all groups. Decreases in Ki-67 were similar across treatment arms and cohorts. In PIK3CA-mutant tumors, alpelisib plus letrozole treatment induced a greater decrease in phosphorylated AKT versus placebo plus letrozole. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to initial results in advanced/metastatic disease, addition of alpelisib to 24-week neoadjuvant letrozole treatment did not improve response in patients with HR+ early breast cancer.

Buparlisib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant for postmenopausal, hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, advanced breast cancer: Overall survival results from BELLE-2.

BACKGROUND: Buparlisib, a pan-phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) inhibitor, plus fulvestrant in the BELLE-2 study significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative advanced breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this phase III study, patients were randomised 1:1 to buparlisib (100 mg/day; continuously in 28-day cycles) or placebo, plus fulvestrant (500 mg on cycle 1 day 15, and day 1 of subsequent cycles). Overall survival (OS) was assessed in the overall population and patients with known PI3K pathway status (both had shown significant PFS improvements). OS by PIK3CA status in circulating tumour DNA (ctDNA) was an exploratory end-point. RESULTS: A total of 2025 patients were screened for eligibility between 7th September 2012 and 10th September 2014, and 1178 received fulvestrant (500 mg) during a run-in phase; 31 discontinued. Of 1147 patients (median age 62 years), 98% had the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status ≤1, and 59% had visceral disease. Median follow-up from randomisation to data cut-off (23rd December 2016) was 37.6 months. Median OS trended in favour of the buparlisib arm in the overall population (33.2 versus 30.4 months; P = 0.045) and among patients with known PI3K pathway status (30.9 versus 28.9 months; P = 0.144); neither outcome was statistically significant. Median OS also trended in favour of buparlisib among patients with PIK3CA-mutant ctDNA (26.0 versus 24.8 months). Grade III/IV adverse events with ≥10% difference between the buparlisib versus placebo arms were elevated alanine aminotransferase (26% versus 1%), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (18% versus 3%) and hyperglycemia (15% versus <1%). CONCLUSIONS: OS results were in favour of buparlisib plus fulvestrant versus placebo plus fulvestrant; however, there is no statistical significance and more frequent grade III/IV adverse events were reported. Use of more selective PI3K inhibitors might provide the greatest clinical benefit and tolerable safety profile in this setting. Further evaluation of the predictive benefit of PIK3CA-mutant ctDNA is warranted. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01610284.

A Phase Ib, open-label, dose-finding study of alpelisib in combination with paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors.

Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PI3K) pathway activation is associated with resistance to paclitaxel in solid tumors. We assessed the safety and activity of alpelisib, an oral, selective PI3K p110α inhibitor, plus paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors. This Phase Ib, multicenter, open-label, dose-finding study, with a planned dose-expansion phase of alpelisib once daily (QD) plus fixed-dose paclitaxel, recruited patients with advanced solid tumors. For the dose-finding phase, the primary objective was determination of maximum tolerated and/or recommended Phase II dose of alpelisib plus paclitaxel, and the secondary objectives included the assessment of safety for this combination. From March 2014 to August 2016, 19 patients with advanced solid tumors were treated with alpelisib QD (300 mg, n=6; 250 mg, n=4; 150 mg, n=9) plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2, per standard of care). During dose finding, five of 12 (41.7%) evaluable patients for MTD determination experienced dose-limiting toxicities: alpelisib 300 mg, Grade 2 hyperglycemia (n=1); alpelisib 250 mg, Grade 2 hyperglycemia (n=1), Grade 4 hyperglycemia and Grade 3 acute kidney injury (n=1); and alpelisib 150 mg, Grade 2 hyperglycemia (n=1) and Grade 4 leukopenia (n=1). The MTD of alpelisib when administered with paclitaxel was 150 mg QD. Most frequent all-grade AEs were diarrhea (73.7%; Grade 3/4 10.5%) and hyperglycemia (57.9%; Grade 3/4 31.6%). The planned dose-expansion phase was not initiated. Alpelisib plus paclitaxel has a challenging safety profile in patients with advanced solid tumors. This study was closed following the completion of the dose-finding phase. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02051751.

Molecular Alterations and Buparlisib Efficacy in Patients with Squamous Cell Carcinoma of the Head and Neck: Biomarker Analysis from BERIL-1.

Purpose: The preplanned exploratory analysis of the BERIL-1 trial presented here aimed to identify biomarkers of response to the combination of buparlisib and paclitaxel.Patients and Methods: BERIL-1 was a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase II study. Patients with recurrent or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (SCCHN) progressing on/after one previous platinum-based chemotherapy regimen in the recurrent or metastatic setting were treated with either buparlisib plus paclitaxel or placebo plus paclitaxel. Archival tumor tissue and ctDNA samples were analyzed for molecular alterations and immune infiltration using next-generation sequencing or immunohistochemistry.Results: Biomarker analyses were performed in randomized patients (n = 158) with available biomarker data. The most frequently (>5%) mutated genes were TP53, FAT1, TET2, KMT2D, PIK3CA, NOTCH1, NFE2L2, NOTCH2, CCND1, and CDKN2A Patients with SCCHN tumors (from various primary sites) having HPV-negative status (HR = 0.51), TP53 alterations (HR = 0.55) or low mutational load (HR = 0.57) derived overall survival (OS) benefit with the combination of buparlisib and paclitaxel. OS benefit with this combination was also increased in patients with presence of intratumoral TILs ≥10% (HR = 0.51), stromal TILs ≥15% (HR = 0.53), intratumoral CD8-positive cells ≥5% (HR = 0.45), stromal CD8-positive cells ≥10% (HR = 0.47), or CD8-positive cells in invasive margins >25% (HR = 0.37). A trend for improved progression-free survival with the combination of buparlisib and paclitaxel was also observed in these patients.Conclusions: The BERIL-1 biomarker analyses showed that patients with TP53 alterations, HPV-negative status, low mutational load, or high infiltration of TILs or CD8-positive cells derived survival benefit with the combination of buparlisib and paclitaxel. Clin Cancer Res; 24(11); 2505-16. ©2018 AACR.

Buparlisib plus fulvestrant in postmenopausal women with hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer progressing on or after mTOR inhibition (BELLE-3): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial.

BACKGROUND: Activation of the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway occurs frequently in breast cancer that is resistant to endocrine therapy. Approved mTOR inhibitors effectively inhibit cell growth and proliferation but elicit AKT phosphorylation via a feedback activation pathway, potentially leading to resistance to mTOR inhibitors. We evaluated the efficacy and safety of buparlisib plus fulvestrant in patients with advanced breast cancer who were pretreated with endocrine therapy and mTOR inhibitors. METHODS: BELLE-3 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase 3 study. Postmenopausal women aged 18 years or older with histologically or cytologically confirmed hormone-receptor-positive, HER2-negative, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer, who had relapsed on or after endocrine therapy and mTOR inhibitors, were recruited from 200 trial centres in 22 countries. Eligible patients were randomly assigned (2:1) via interactive response technology (block size of six) to receive oral buparlisib (100 mg per day) or matching placebo starting on day 1 of cycle 1, plus intramuscular fulvestrant (500 mg) on days 1 and 15 of cycle 1 and on day 1 of subsequent 28-day cycles. Randomisation was stratified by visceral disease status. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival by local investigator assessment as per the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST) version 1.1 in the full analysis population (all randomised patients, by intention-to-treat). Safety was analysed in all patients who received at least one dose of treatment and at least one post-baseline safety assessment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01633060, and is ongoing but no longer enrolling patients. FINDINGS: Between Jan 15, 2013, and March 31, 2016, 432 patients were randomly assigned to the buparlisib (n=289) or placebo (n=143) groups. Median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the buparlisib versus placebo group (3·9 months [95% CI 2·8-4·2] vs 1·8 months [1·5-2·8]; hazard ratio [HR] 0·67, 95% CI 0·53-0·84, one-sided p=0·00030). The most frequent grade 3-4 adverse events in the buparlisib versus placebo group were elevated alanine aminotransferase (63 [22%] of 288 patients vs four [3%] of 140), elevated aspartate aminotransferase (51 [18%] vs four [3%]), hyperglycaemia (35 [12%] vs none), hypertension (16 [6%] vs six [4%]), and fatigue (ten [3%] vs two [1%]). Serious adverse events were reported in 64 (22%) of 288 patients in the buparlisib group versus 23 (16%) of 140 in the placebo group; the most frequent serious adverse events (affecting ≥2% of patients) were elevated aspartate aminotransferase (six [2%] vs none), dyspnoea (six [2%] vs one [1%]), and pleural effusion (six [2%] vs none). On-treatment deaths occurred in ten (3%) of 288 patients in the buparlisib group and in six (4%) of 140 in the placebo group; most deaths were due to metastatic breast cancer, and two were considered treatment-related (cardiac failure [n=1] in the buparlisib group and unknown reason [n=1] in the placebo group). INTERPRETATION: The safety profile of buparlisib plus fulvestrant does not support its further development in this setting. Nonetheless, the efficacy of buparlisib supports the rationale for the use of PI3K inhibitors plus endocrine therapy in patients with PIK3CA mutations. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Effects of Mild to Severe Hepatic Impairment on the Pharmacokinetics of Sonidegib: A Multicenter, Open-Label, Parallel-Group Study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Sonidegib is a potent, selective and orally bioavailable inhibitor of the Hedgehog signaling pathway, primarily metabolized by the liver. In order to make dose recommendations for patients with hepatic impairment, we have assessed here the pharmacokinetics (PKs) and safety of sonidegib in subjects with varying degrees of hepatic function. METHODS: The primary objective of this phase I, multicenter, open-label study was to evaluate the PKs of a single oral 800 mg dose of sonidegib in subjects with impaired hepatic function compared with healthy subjects. PK parameters (e.g. area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to infinity [AUCinf], area under the concentration-time curve from time zero to the last measurable concentration [AUClast], maximum concentration [C max], apparent clearance [CL/F], and terminal half-life [t ½]) for parent drug and the metabolite were compared with the normal group, as the reference. Metabolite ratio, unbound PK parameters, and the relationship between specific PK parameters and liver function parameters were assessed. RESULTS: In total, 33 subjects entered the study and received sonidegib. Plasma concentrations peaked at approximately 2-3 h in all groups after dosing. Compared with the normal group, AUClast decreased by 35 and 23% and increased by 14% in the mild, severe, and moderate hepatic impairment groups, respectively. The C max values were lower in all groups with respect to the normal group (decreases of 20, 21 and 60% in the mild, moderate and severe hepatic impairment groups, respectively). Protein binding was independent of hepatic function, and similar trends in the PK parameters were observed for unbound sonidegib and the metabolite. Protein binding was similar across all groups. Weak to no correlation between specific PK and hepatic function parameters was found. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, sonidegib exposures were similar or decreased in the hepatic impairment groups compared with the normal group, and sonidegib was generally well-tolerated in all subjects. Dose adjustment is not considered necessary for subjects with mild, moderate, or severe hepatic impairment.

A Matching-Adjusted Indirect Comparison of Sonidegib and Vismodegib in Advanced Basal Cell Carcinoma.

OBJECTIVES: Based on single-arm trial data (BOLT), sonidegib was approved in the US and EU to treat locally advanced basal cell carcinomas (BCCs) ineligible for curative surgery or radiotherapy. Vismodegib, the other approved targeted therapy, also was assessed in a single-arm trial (ERIVANCE). We examined the comparative effectiveness of the two drugs using a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) versus an unadjusted indirect comparison. METHODS: After comparing trials and identifying potential prognostic factors, an MAIC was conducted to adjust for differences in key patient baseline characteristics. Due to BOLT's small sample size, the number of matching variables was restricted to two. Efficacy results for sonidegib were generated so that selected baseline characteristics matched those from ERIVANCE and were compared with published ERIVANCE results. RESULTS: Matching variables were baseline percentages of patients receiving prior radiotherapy and surgery. After weighting, sonidegib objective response rate (ORR) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were effectively unchanged (prematched versus postmatched ORR and PFS, 56.1% versus 56.7% and 22.1 versus 22.1 months, resp.). Vismodegib's ORR and PFS were 47.6% and 9.5 months. CONCLUSIONS: Comparative effectiveness of sonidegib versus vismodegib remains unchanged after adjusting BOLT patient-level data to match published ERIVANCE baseline percentages of patients receiving prior surgery and radiotherapy.

Exposure-QT analysis for sonidegib (LDE225), an oral inhibitor of the hedgehog signaling pathway, for measures of the QT prolongation potential in healthy subjects and in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Sonidegib prevents activation of the Hedgehog signal transduction pathway. This PK-QT analysis has been performed to test for potential prolongation of the QT/QTc interval during extended use, and to understand the exposure-QT relationship for sonidegib in patients and in healthy volunteers (HV). METHODS: A pooled analysis of the change in QT interval corrected for heart rate according to Fridericia's formula was conducted across four patient studies from a total of 341 patients (n = 211, 102, 21, and 7 from the phase II pivotal study A2201, study X2101, study X1101, and study B2209, respectively), and across four healthy volunteer studies from a total of 204 healthy volunteers (n = 146, 36, 16, and 6 from study A2114, study A1102, study A2108, and study A2110, respectively). A PK/ECG subgroup of 62 patients from the pivotal study A2201 was also analyzed to assess the QT prolongation risk at steady-state exposures. Sonidigib PK and ECG data were matched to determine the change from baseline in QTcF using a linear mixed-effect model. RESULTS: Clinical data indicate sonidegib does not cause QTc prolongation. ΔQTcF at steady-state concentrations for both 200 and 800-mg doses were all below 5 ms. The highest mean ΔQTcF at steady state was -3.9 ms at week 17 pre-dose in the sonidegib 200-mg group and 2.7 ms at 2-h post-dose in the sonidegib 800-mg group. The upper one-sided 95 % confidence interval of the estimated ΔQTcF at steady-state concentrations from the linear mixed-effect models were all <10 ms. No cases of ventricular arrhythmia or torsades de pointes and no deaths associated with QT prolongation have been reported in the sonidegib clinical development program. CONCLUSIONS: Based on these analyses, there is no evidence of QT prolongation associated with sonidegib 200 or 800 mg in solid tumor patients and HV.

Effect of esomeprazole, a proton pump inhibitor on the pharmacokinetics of sonidegib in healthy volunteers.

AIMS: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of esomeprazole on the pharmacokinetics of sonidegib. METHODS: This Phase I study evaluated the impact of the proton pump inhibitor (PPI) esomeprazole on the oral absorption and pharmacokinetics (PKs) of a single dose of sonidegib under fasted conditions. A total of 42 healthy subjects were enrolled to receive either sonidegib alone (200 mg single dose) or sonidegib in combination with esomeprazole (40 mg pre-treatment 5 days and combination were given on day 6). Primary PK parameters assessed in the study were area under the concentration-time curve (AUC) from 0-14 days and 0-7 days and maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax ). RESULTS: The plasma exposure (AUC0-14d, AUC0-7d and Cmax ) of a single 200 mg oral dose of sonidegib was decreased by 32-38% when sonidegib was co-administered with esomeprazole compared with sonidegib alone, with no apparent change in elimination slope and tmax . Baseline gastric pH was similar between the two arms. CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest a modest reduction in the extent of sonidegib absorption by esomeprazole. There was no obvious metabolic drug-drug interaction between the two agents. Both sonidegib and esomeprazole were well tolerated in the study population.

The 12-month analysis from Basal Cell Carcinoma Outcomes with LDE225 Treatment (BOLT): A phase II, randomized, double-blind study of sonidegib in patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The hedgehog pathway inhibitor sonidegib demonstrated meaningful tumor shrinkage in more than 90% of patients with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma (BCC) or metastatic BCC in the BCC Outcomes with LDE225 Treatment study. OBJECTIVE: This report provides long-term follow-up data collected up to 12 months after the last patient was randomized. METHODS: In this multicenter, randomized, double-blind phase II study, patients were randomized 1:2 to sonidegib 200 or 800 mg. The primary end point was objective response rate assessed by central review. RESULTS: Objective response rates in the 200- and 800-mg arms were 57.6% and 43.8% in locally advanced BCC and 7.7% and 17.4% in metastatic BCC, respectively. Among the 94 patients with locally advanced BCC who responded, only 18 progressed or died and more than 50% had responses lasting longer than 6 months. In addition, 4 of 5 responders with metastatic BCC maintained an objective response. Grade 3/4 adverse events and those leading to discontinuation were less frequent with sonidegib 200 versus 800 mg (38.0% vs 59.3%; 27.8% vs 37.3%, respectively). LIMITATIONS: No placebo or comparator arms were used because sonidegib demonstrated efficacy in advanced BCC in a phase I study, and the hedgehog pathway inhibitor vismodegib was not yet approved. CONCLUSION: With longer follow-up, sonidegib demonstrated sustained tumor responses in patients with advanced BCC.

Exposure-Response Analysis of Sonidegib (LDE225), an Oral Inhibitor of the Hedgehog Signaling Pathway, for Effectiveness and Safety in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors.

Sonidegib selectively inhibits smoothened protein, suppresses the growth of Hedgehog pathway-dependent tumors, and has recently been approved in the indication of locally advanced basal cell carcinoma. A comprehensive exposure-response analysis was conducted to further characterize the relationship of sonidegib exposure to efficacy and safety. Minimum observed plasma concentration at predose (Cmin ), peak concentration (Cmax ), and area under the curve were used as exposure endpoints. Exposure-efficacy analyses included data from 190 patients who received sonidegib 200 mg or 800 mg once daily in the primary efficacy study. Objective response rate (ORR) (complete response [CR] or partial response [PR]), progression-free survival (PFS), and time to tumor response (TTR) were assessed by logistic regression, Cox regression, and Kaplan-Meier analyses. Exposure-safety (creatine phosphokinase [CK] elevation) analyses included data from 336 patients pooled from 4 clinical trials and included doses across ranges of 100 to 3000 mg once daily and 250 to 750 mg twice daily. Similar plasma exposure was observed between responders and nonresponders. The logistic regression model of week 5 Cmin vs ORR indicated no relationship between sonidegib exposure resulting from 200 mg or 800 mg doses and the probability of CR or PR. A similar conclusion of no exposure-efficacy relationship was drawn from the PFS and TTR analyses. Increased exposure was associated with a greater risk of grade 3 or 4 CK elevation, with lower risk in females than in males when Cmin was used in the model. These analyses support the sonidegib dose recommendation for registration and are consistent with clinical observations.

Population pharmacokinetics of sonidegib (LDE225), an oral inhibitor of hedgehog pathway signaling, in healthy subjects and in patients with advanced solid tumors.

PURPOSE: Sonidegib (Odomzo) selectively inhibits smoothened and suppresses the growth of hedgehog pathway-dependent tumors. A population pharmacokinetic (PK) analysis of sonidegib in healthy subjects and patients with advanced solid tumors was conducted to characterize PK, determine variability, and estimate covariate effects. METHODS: PK data from five phase 1 or 2 studies (N = 436) in the dose range from 100 to 3000 mg were analyzed using NONMEM. A two-compartment base model with first-order absorption, lag time, linear elimination, and bioavailability that decreased with dose was updated to describe the PK of sonidegib. Covariate analyses were performed and were incorporated into the population PK full model. RESULTS: The base and full models were robust with a good fit to the study data. Population-predicted geometric means (inter-individual variability, CV%) of apparent oral clearance, apparent volume of distribution at steady state, accumulation ratio, and elimination half-life were 9.5 L/h (71.4 %), 9163 L (74.9 %), 21 (131 %) and 29.6 days (109 %). Clinically relevant covariate effects were: A high-fat meal increased sonidegib bioavailability fivefold, healthy volunteers had threefold higher clearance, sonidegib bioavailability decreased with increasing dose levels, and PPI coadministration reduced sonidegib bioavailability by 30 %. Sonidegib PK was not significantly impacted by baseline age, weight, total bilirubin, alanine aminotransferase, albumin, creatinine clearance, gender, and ethnicity (Western countries versus Japanese). CONCLUSION: No dose adjustment is needed for mild hepatic impairment, mild and moderate renal impairment, age, weight, gender, or ethnicity. This population PK model adequately characterizes sonidegib PK characteristics and can be used for various simulations and applications.

Treatment with two different doses of sonidegib in patients with locally advanced or metastatic basal cell carcinoma (BOLT): a multicentre, randomised, double-blind phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma have limited treatment options. Hedgehog pathway signalling is aberrantly activated in around 95% of tumours. We assessed the antitumour activity of sonidegib, a Hedgehog signalling inhibitor, in patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma. METHODS: BOLT is an ongoing multicentre, randomised, double-blind, phase 2 trial. Eligible patients had locally advanced basal cell carcinoma not amenable to curative surgery or radiation or metastatic basal cell carcinoma. Patients were randomised via an automated system in a 1:2 ratio to receive 200 mg or 800 mg oral sonidegib daily, stratified by disease, histological subtype, and geographical region. The primary endpoint was the proportion of patients who achieved an objective response, assessed in the primary efficacy analysis population (patients with fully assessable locally advanced disease and all those with metastatic disease) with data collected up to 6 months after randomisation of the last patient. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01327053. FINDINGS: Between July 20, 2011, and Jan 10, 2013, we enrolled 230 patients, 79 in the 200 mg sonidegib group, and 151 in the 800 mg sonidegib group. Median follow-up was 13·9 months (IQR 10·1-17·3). In the primary efficacy analysis population, 20 (36%, 95% CI 24-50) of 55 patients receiving 200 mg sonidegib and 39 (34%, 25-43) of 116 receiving 800 mg sonidegib achieved an objective response. In the 200 mg sonidegib group, 18 (43%, 95% CI 28-59) patients who achieved an objective response, as assessed by central review, were noted among the 42 with locally advanced basal cell carcinoma and two (15%, 2-45) among the 13 with metastatic disease. In the 800 mg group, 35 (38%, 95% CI 28-48) of 93 patients with locally advanced disease had an objective response, as assessed by central review, as did four (17%, 5-39) of 23 with metastatic disease. Fewer adverse events leading to dose interruptions or reductions (25 [32%] of 79 patients vs 90 [60%] of 150) or treatment discontinuation (17 [22%] vs 54 [36%]) occurred in patients in the 200 mg group than in the 800 mg group. The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were raised creatine kinase (five [6%] in the 200 mg group vs 19 [13%] in the 800 mg group) and lipase concentration (four [5%] vs eight [5%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 11 (14%) of 79 patients in the 200 mg group and 45 (30%) of 150 patients in the 800 mg group. INTERPRETATION: The benefit-to-risk profile of 200 mg sonidegib might offer a new treatment option for patients with advanced basal cell carcinoma, a population that is difficult to treat. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Loss of Tuberous Sclerosis Complex 2 (TSC2) Is Frequent in Hepatocellular Carcinoma and Predicts Response to mTORC1 Inhibitor Everolimus.

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is the third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide and hyperactivation of mTOR signaling plays a pivotal role in HCC tumorigenesis. Tuberous sclerosis complex (TSC), a heterodimer of TSC1 and TSC2, functions as a negative regulator of mTOR signaling. In the current study, we discovered that TSC2 loss-of-function is common in HCC. TSC2 loss was found in 4 of 8 HCC cell lines and 8 of 28 (28.6%) patient-derived HCC xenografts. TSC2 mutations and deletions are likely to be the underlying cause of TSC2 loss in HCC cell lines, xenografts, and primary tumors for most cases. We further demonstrated that TSC2-null HCC cell lines and xenografts had elevated mTOR signaling and, more importantly, were significantly more sensitive to RAD001/everolimus, an mTORC1 inhibitor. These preclinical findings led to the analysis of TSC2 status in HCC samples collected in the EVOLVE-1 clinical trial of everolimus using an optimized immunohistochemistry assay and identified 15 of 139 (10.8%) samples with low to undetectable levels of TSC2. Although the sample size is too small for formal statistical analysis, TSC2-null/low tumor patients who received everolimus tended to have longer overall survival than those who received placebo. Finally, we performed an epidemiology survey of more than 239 Asian HCC tumors and found the frequency of TSC2 loss to be approximately 20% in Asian HBV(+) HCC. Taken together, our data strongly argue that TSC2 loss is a predictive biomarker for the response to everolimus in HCC patients.

Phase II randomized trial comparing sequential first-line everolimus and second-line sunitinib versus first-line sunitinib and second-line everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

PURPOSE: A multicenter, randomized phase II trial, RECORD-3, was conducted to compare first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib at progression with the standard sequence of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. PATIENTS AND METHODS: RECORD-3 used a crossover treatment design. The primary objective was to assess progression-free survival (PFS) noninferiority of first-line everolimus compared with first-line sunitinib. Secondary end points included combined PFS for each sequence, overall survival (OS), and safety. RESULTS: Of 471 enrolled patients, 238 were randomly assigned to first-line everolimus followed by sunitinib, and 233 were randomly assigned to first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus. The primary end point was not met; the median PFS was 7.9 months for first-line everolimus and 10.7 months for first-line sunitinib (hazard ratio [HR], 1.4; 95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8). Among patients who discontinued first-line, 108 (45%) crossed over from everolimus to second-line sunitinib, and 99 (43%) crossed over from sunitinib to second-line everolimus. The median combined PFS was 21.1 months for sequential everolimus then sunitinib and was 25.8 months for sequential sunitinib then everolimus (HR, 1.3; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.7). The median OS was 22.4 months for sequential everolimus and then sunitinib and 32.0 months for sequential sunitinib and then everolimus (HR, 1.2; 95% CI, 0.9 to 1.6). Common treatment-emergent adverse events during first-line everolimus or sunitinib were stomatitis (53% and 57%, respectively), fatigue (45% and 51%, respectively), and diarrhea (38% and 57%, respectively). CONCLUSION: Everolimus did not demonstrate noninferiority compared with sunitinib as a first-line therapy. The trial results support the standard treatment paradigm of first-line sunitinib followed by everolimus at progression.

Effect of everolimus on survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma after failure of sorafenib: the EVOLVE-1 randomized clinical trial.

IMPORTANCE: Aside from the multikinase inhibitor sorafenib, there are no effective systemic therapies for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of everolimus in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma for whom sorafenib treatment failed. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: EVOLVE-1 was a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study conducted among 546 adults with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B or C hepatocellular carcinoma and Child-Pugh A liver function whose disease progressed during or after sorafenib or who were intolerant of sorafenib. Patients were enrolled from 17 countries between May 2010 and March 2012. Randomization was stratified by region (Asia vs rest of world) and macrovascular invasion (present vs absent). INTERVENTIONS: Everolimus, 7.5 mg/d, or matching placebo, both given in combination with best supportive care and continued until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Per the 2:1 randomization scheme, 362 patients were randomized to the everolimus group and 184 patients to the placebo group. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points included time to progression and the disease control rate (the percentage of patients with a best overall response of complete or partial response or stable disease). RESULTS: No significant difference in overall survival was seen between treatment groups, with 303 deaths (83.7%) in the everolimus group and 151 deaths (82.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio [HR], 1.05; 95% CI, 0.86-1.27; P = .68; median overall survival, 7.6 months with everolimus, 7.3 months with placebo). Median time to progression with everolimus and placebo was 3.0 months and 2.6 months, respectively (HR, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.75-1.15), and disease control rate was 56.1% and 45.1%, respectively (P = .01). The most common grade 3/4 adverse events for everolimus vs placebo were anemia (7.8% vs 3.3%, respectively), asthenia (7.8% vs 5.5%, respectively), and decreased appetite (6.1% vs 0.5%, respectively). No patients experienced hepatitis C viral flare. Based on central laboratory results, hepatitis B viral reactivation was experienced by 39 patients (29 everolimus, 10 placebo); all cases were asymptomatic, but 3 everolimus recipients discontinued therapy. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Everolimus did not improve overall survival in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma whose disease progressed during or after receiving sorafenib or who were intolerant of sorafenib. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01035229.

Relationship between everolimus exposure and safety and efficacy: meta-analysis of clinical trials in oncology.

BACKGROUND: In patients with solid tumours, daily everolimus dosing demonstrated dose proportionality and linear pharmacokinetics. A meta-analysis was conducted to characterise the relationship between everolimus Cmin and efficacy and safety and the effect of CYP3A4 and P-glycoprotein (PgP) substrate/inhibitor/inducer coadministration on everolimus trough concentration (Cmin). METHODS: Individual patient data from five phase 2/3 studies, in which steady state, predose pharmacokinetic samples were taken from patients with solid tumours administered everolimus 10mg/day, were pooled. FINDINGS: Efficacy and safety were evaluable for 945 and 938 patients, respectively. A 2-fold increase in everolimus Cmin increased the likelihood of tumour size reduction (odds ratio 1.40, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.23-1.60), was associated with a trend for reduced risk of progression-free survival events (risk ratio [RR] 0.90, 95% CI 0.69-1.18) and increased the risk of grade ⩾3 pulmonary (RR 1.93, 95% CI 1.12-3.34), stomatitis (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.05-2.10) and metabolic (RR 1.30, 95% CI 1.02-1.65) events. Coadministering everolimus with strong CYP3A4 and PgP inhibitors increased everolimus Cmin by 10% and 20%, respectively; coadministration with CYP3A4 inducers reduced Cmin by 7%. INTERPRETATION: A 2-fold increase in everolimus Cmin was associated with improved tumour size reduction and increased risk of high-grade pulmonary, metabolic and stomatitis events. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation.

Phase I study investigating everolimus combined with sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Sorafenib is the only therapy shown to improve overall survival in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Combination therapy targeting multiple signaling pathways may improve outcomes. This phase I study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of everolimus given with sorafenib 400mg twice daily in patients with advanced HCC of Child-Pugh class A liver function who were naive to systemic therapy. METHODS: Everolimus was initiated at 2.5mg once daily and increased per a Bayesian sequential dose-escalation scheme based on the dose-limiting toxicities experienced within the first 28 days of treatment. Adverse events were assessed continuously. Efficacy was evaluated using the best overall response rate per RECIST. RESULTS: Thirty patients were enrolled; 25 were evaluable for MTD determination. One out of 12 patients treated with everolimus 2.5mg once daily and 6 out of 13 patients treated with everolimus 5.0mg once daily experienced a dose-limiting toxicity, most commonly thrombocytopenia (n=5). All patients experienced 1 adverse event, most commonly diarrhea (66.7%), hand-foot skin reaction (66.7%), and thrombocytopenia (50.0%). Best overall response was stable disease (62.5% and 42.9% in the 2.5-mg and 5.0-mg cohorts, respectively). Median time to progression and overall survival in the 2.5-mg cohort were 4.5 months and 7.4 months, respectively, and 1.8 months and 11.7 months, respectively, in the 5.0-mg cohort. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with advanced HCC, the everolimus MTD in combination with standard-dose sorafenib was 2.5mg once daily. The inability to achieve a biologically effective everolimus concentration at the MTD precluded phase II study of this combination.