Intravenous Oncolytic Vaccinia Virus Therapy Results in a Differential Immune Response between Cancer Patients.

Pexa-Vec is an engineered Wyeth-strain vaccinia oncolytic virus (OV), which has been tested extensively in clinical trials, demonstrating enhanced cytotoxic T cell infiltration into tumours following treatment. Favourable immune consequences to Pexa-Vec include the induction of an interferon (IFN) response, followed by inflammatory cytokine/chemokine secretion. This promotes tumour immune infiltration, innate and adaptive immune cell activation and T cell priming, culminating in targeted tumour cell killing, i.e., an immunologically 'cold' tumour microenvironment is transformed into a 'hot' tumour. However, as with all immunotherapies, not all patients respond in a uniformly favourable manner. Our study herein, shows a differential immune response by patients to intravenous Pexa-Vec therapy, whereby some patients responded to the virus in a typical and expected manner, demonstrating a significant IFN induction and subsequent peripheral immune activation. However, other patients experienced a markedly subdued immune response and appeared to exhibit an exhausted phenotype at baseline, characterised by higher baseline immune checkpoint expression and regulatory T cell (Treg) levels. This differential baseline immunological profile accurately predicted the subsequent response to Pexa-Vec and may, therefore, enable the development of predictive biomarkers for Pexa-Vec and OV therapies more widely. If confirmed in larger clinical trials, these immunological biomarkers may enable a personalised approach, whereby patients with an exhausted baseline immune profile are treated with immune checkpoint blockade, with the aim of reversing immune exhaustion, prior to or alongside OV therapy.

Dual Erb B Inhibition in Oesophago-gastric Cancer (DEBIOC): A phase I dose escalating safety study and randomised dose expansion of AZD8931 in combination with oxaliplatin and capecitabine chemotherapy in patients with oesophagogastric adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: AZD8931 has equipotent activity against epidermal growth factor receptor, erbB2, and erbB3. Primary objectives were to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of AZD8931 + chemotherapy, and subsequently assess safety/preliminary clinical activity in patients with operable oesophagogastric cancer (OGC). METHODS: AZD8931 (20 mg, 40 mg or 60 mg bd) was given with Xelox (oxaliplatin + capecitabine) for eight 21-day cycles, continuously or with intermittent schedule (4 days on/3 off every week; 14 days on/7 off, per cycle) in a rolling-six design. Subsequently, patients with OGC were randomised 2:1 to AZD8931 + Xelox at RP2D or Xelox only for two cycles, followed by radical oesophagogastric surgery. Secondary outcomes were safety, complete resection (R0) rate, six-month progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival. RESULTS: During escalation, four dose-limiting toxicities were observed among 24 patients: skin rash (1) and failure to deliver 100% of Xelox because of treatment-associated grade III-IV adverse events (AEs) (3: diarrhoea and vomiting; vomiting; fatigue). Serious adverse events (SAE) occurred in 15 of 24 (63%) patients. RP2D was 20-mg bd with the 4/3 schedule. In the expansion phase, 2 of 20 (10%) patients in the Xelox + AZD8931 group and 5/10 (50%) patients in the Xelox group had grade III-IV AEs. Six-month PFS was 85% (90% CI: 66%-94%) in Xelox + AZD8931 and 100% in Xelox alone. Seven deaths (35%) occurred with Xelox + AZD8931 and one (10%) with Xelox. R0 rate was 45% (9/20) with Xelox + AZD8931 and 90% (9/10) with Xelox-alone (P = 0.024). CONCLUSION: Xelox + AZD8931 (20 mg bd 4/3 days) has an acceptable safety profile administered as neoadjuvant therapy in operable patients with OGC. (Trial registration: EudraCT 2011-003169-13, ISRCTN-68093791).

A phase I trial of the γ-secretase inhibitor MK-0752 in combination with gemcitabine in patients with pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: The Notch pathway is frequently activated in cancer. Pathway inhibition by γ-secretase inhibitors has been shown to be effective in pre-clinical models of pancreatic cancer, in combination with gemcitabine. METHODS: A multi-centre, non-randomised Bayesian adaptive design study of MK-0752, administered per os weekly, in combination with gemcitabine administered intravenously on days 1, 8 and 15 (28 day cycle) at 800 or 1000 mg m-2, was performed to determine the safety of combination treatment and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D). Secondary and tertiary objectives included tumour response, plasma and tumour MK-0752 concentration, and inhibition of the Notch pathway in hair follicles and tumour. RESULTS: Overall, 44 eligible patients (performance status 0 or 1 with adequate organ function) received gemcitabine and MK-0752 as first or second line treatment for pancreatic cancer. RP2Ds of MK-0752 and gemcitabine as single agents could be combined safely. The Bayesian algorithm allowed further dose escalation, but pharmacokinetic analysis showed no increase in MK-0752 AUC (area under the curve) beyond 1800 mg once weekly. Tumour response evaluation was available in 19 patients; 13 achieved stable disease and 1 patient achieved a confirmed partial response. CONCLUSIONS: Gemcitabine and a γ-secretase inhibitor (MK-0752) can be combined at their full, single-agent RP2Ds.

Phase II study of TP300 in patients with advanced gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction adenocarcinoma.

BACKGROUND: TP300, a recently developed synthetic camptothecin analogue, is a highly selective topoisomerase I inhibitor. A phase I study showed good safety and tolerability. As camptothecins have proven active in oesophago-gastric adenocarcinomas, in this phase II study we assessed the efficacy and safety of TP300 in patients with gastric or gastro-oesophageal junction (GOJ) adenocarcinomas. METHODS: Eligible patients had metastatic or locally advanced gastric or Siewert Types II or III GOJ inoperable adenocarcinoma. Patients were chemotherapy naïve unless this had been administered in the perioperative setting. TP300 was administered as a 1-h intravenous infusion every 3 weeks (a cycle) for up to 6 cycles at a starting dose of 8 mg/m2 with intra-patient escalation to 10 mg/m2 from cycle 2 in the absence of dose-limiting toxicity. Tumour responses (RECIST 1.1) were assessed every 6 weeks. Toxicity was recorded by NCI-CTCAE version 3.0. Using a modified two-stage Simon design (Stage I and II), a total of 43 patients were to be included providing there were 3 of 18 patients with objective response in Stage I of the study. RESULTS: In Stage I of the study 20 patients (14 males, 6 females), median age 67 years (range 40 - 82), performance status ECOG 0/1, with GC [14] or GOJ carcinoma [6] were enrolled. Of the 16 evaluable patients, 11 received the planned dose increase to 10 mg/m2 at cycle 2, 2 decreased to 6 mg/m2, and 3 continued on 8 mg/m2. There were no objective responses after 2 cycles of treatment. Twelve patients had stable disease for 1 - 5 months and 4 had progressive disease. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 4.1 months (CI [1.6 - 4.9]), median time to progression (TTP) was 2.9 months (CI [1.4 - 4.2]). Grade 3/4 toxicities (worst grade all cycles) included 7 patients (35 %) with neutropenia, 4 patients (20 %) with anaemia, 2 patients (10 %) with thrombocytopenia, and 3 patients (15 %) with fatigue. This study was terminated at the end of Stage I due to a lack of the required (3/18) responders. CONCLUSIONS: This study of TP300 showed good drug tolerability but it failed to demonstrate sufficient efficacy as measured by radiological response. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU-CTR 2009-012097-12 2009-09-03.

Cediranib or placebo in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (ABC-03): a randomised phase 2 trial.

BACKGROUND: Cisplatin and gemcitabine is the standard first-line chemotherapy regimen for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer; expression of VEGF and its receptors is associated with adverse outcomes. We aimed to assess the effect of the addition of cediranib (an oral inhibitor of VEGF receptor 1, 2, and 3) to cisplatin and gemcitabine on progression-free survival. METHODS: In this multicentre, placebo-controlled, randomised phase 2 study, we recruited patients aged 18 years or older with histologically confirmed or cytologically confirmed advanced biliary tract cancer from hepatobiliary oncology referral centres in the UK. Patients were eligible if they had an ECOG performance status of 0-1 and an estimated life expectancy of longer than 3 months. Patients were given first-line cisplatin and gemcitabine chemotherapy (25 mg/m(2) cisplatin and 1000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine [on days 1 and 8 every 21 days, for up to eight cycles]) with either 20 mg oral cediranib or placebo once a day until disease progression. We randomly assigned patients (1:1) with a minimisation algorithm, incorporating the stratification factors: extent of disease, primary disease site, previous treatment, ECOG performance status, and centre. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00939848, and was closed on Sept 30, 2014; results of the final analysis for the primary endpoint are presented. FINDINGS: Between April 5, 2011, and Sept 28, 2012, we enrolled 124 patients (62 in each group). With a median follow-up of 12·2 months (IQR 7·3-18·5), median progression-free survival was 8·0 months (95% CI 6·5-9·3) in the cediranib group and 7·4 months (5·7-8·5) in the placebo group (HR 0·93, 80% CI 0·74-1·19, 95% CI 0·65-1·35; p=0·72). Patients who received cediranib had more grade 3-4 toxic effects than did patients who received placebo: hypertension (23 [37%] vs 13 [21%]; p=0·05), diarrhoea (eight [13%] vs two [3%]; p=0·05); platelet count decreased (ten [16%] vs four [6%]; p=0·09), white blood cell decreased (15 [24%] vs seven [11%]; p=0·06) and fatigue (16 [24%] vs seven [11%]; p=0·04). INTERPRETATION: Cediranib did not improve the progression-free survival of patients with advanced biliary tract cancer in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine, which remains the standard of care. Although patients in the cediranib group had more adverse events, we recorded no unexpected toxic effects. The role of VEGF inhibition in addition to chemotherapy for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer remains investigational. FUNDING: Cancer Research UK and AstraZeneca Pharmaceuticals.

Phase I study of TP300 in patients with advanced solid tumors with pharmacokinetic, pharmacogenetic and pharmacodynamic analyses.

BACKGROUND: A Phase I dose escalation first in man study assessed maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and recommended Phase II dose of TP300, a water soluble prodrug of the Topo-1 inhibitor TP3076, and active metabolite, TP3011. METHODS: Eligible patients with refractory advanced solid tumors, adequate performance status, haematologic, renal, and hepatic function. TP300 was given as a 1-hour i.v. infusion 3-weekly and pharmacokinetic (PK) profiles of TP300, TP3076 and TP3011 were analysed. Polymorphisms in CYP2D6, AOX1 and UGT1A1 were studied and DNA strand-breaks measured in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). RESULTS: 32 patients received TP300 at 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12 mg/m(2). MTD was 10 mg/m(2); DLTs at 12 (2/4 patients) and 10 mg/m(2) (3/12) included thrombocytopenia and febrile neutropenia; diarrhoea was uncommon. Six patients (five had received irinotecan), had stable disease for 1.5-5 months. TP3076 showed dose proportionality in AUC and Cmax from 1-10 mg/m(2). Genetic polymorphisms had no apparent influence on exposure. DNA strand-breaks were detected after TP300 infusion. CONCLUSIONS: TP300 had predictable hematologic toxicity, and diarrhoea was uncommon. AUC at MTD is substantially greater than for SN38. TP3076 and TP3011 are equi-potent with SN38, suggesting a PK advantage. TRIAL REGISTRATION: EU-CTR2006-001345-33.

A first in man, phase I dose-escalation study of PHA-793887, an inhibitor of multiple cyclin-dependent kinases (CDK2, 1 and 4) reveals unexpected hepatotoxicity in patients with solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: PHA-793887 is an inhibitor of multiple cyclin dependent kinases (CDK) with activity against CDK2, CDK1 and CDK4. The primary objectives of this first in man study were to determine the dose limiting toxicities (DLTs), maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose of PHA-793887. RESULTS: Although toxicity was acceptable at initial dose levels, PHA-793887 was poorly tolerated at doses ≥44 mg/m2. The most frequent events across all dose levels were gastrointestinal or nervous system events. DLTs were experienced by two of three patients at the dose level of 66 mg/m2, and by three of nine patients at the dose level of 44 mg/m2. In all but one patient the DLT was hepatotoxicity; fatal hepatorenal failure was seen in one patient treated at the 44 mg/ m2 dose level. There were no objective responses, but disease stabilization was observed in five patients. Over the dose range investigated, pharmacokinetic studies showed that systemic exposure to PHA-793887 increased with the dose and was time-independent. The study terminated after the enrolment of 19 patients due to the severe hepatic toxicity. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Cohorts of three to six patients were treated at doses of 11, 22, 44 and 66 mg/m2 of PHA-793887 administered as 1-hour intravenous infusion on days 1, 8 and 15 in a 4-week cycle. Safety and pharmacokinetics were investigated. CONCLUSION: PHA-793887 induces severe, dose-related hepatic toxicity, which was not predicted by pre-clinical models and currently precludes its further clinical development.

Comparative preclinical pharmacokinetic and metabolic studies of the combretastatin prodrugs combretastatin A4 phosphate and A1 phosphate.

PURPOSE: Combretastatin A4 phosphate (CA4P) and its structural analog, combretastatin A1 phosphate (CA1P), are soluble prodrugs capable of interacting with tubulin and causing rapid vascular shutdown within tumors. CA4P has completed Phase I clinical trials, but recent preclinical studies have shown that CA1P displays a greater antitumor effect than the combretastatin A4 (CA4) analog at equal doses. The aim of this study, therefore, is to compare pharmacokinetics and metabolism of the two compounds to determine whether pharmacokinetics plays a role in their differential activity. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: NMRI mice bearing MAC29 tumors received injection with either CA4P or CA1P at a therapeutic dose of 150 mg x kg(-1), and profiles of both compounds and their metabolites analyzed by a sensitive and specific liquid chromatography/mass spectroscopy method. RESULTS: The metabolic profile of both compounds is complex, with up to 14 metabolites being detected for combretastatin A1 (CA1) in the plasma. Many of these metabolites have been identified by liquid chromatography/mass spectroscopy. Initial studies, however, focused on the active components CA4 and CA1, where plasma and tumor areas under the curve were 18.4 and 60.1 microg x h x ml(-1) for CA4, and 10.4 and 13.1 microg x h x ml(-1) for CA1, respectively. In vitro metabolic comparisons of the two compounds strongly suggest that CA1 is metabolized to a more reactive species than the CA4. CONCLUSIONS: Although in vitro studies suggest that variable rates of tumor-specific prodrug dephosphorylation may explain these differences in pharmacokinetics profiles, the improved antitumor activity and altered pharmacokinetic profile of CA1 may be due to the formation of a more reactive metabolite.