Everolimus for patients with mantle cell lymphoma refractory to or intolerant of bortezomib: multicentre, single-arm, phase 2 study.

The multicentre, open-label, two-stage, single-arm, phase 2, PILLAR (PIvotaL Lymphoma triAls of RAD001)-1 study (NCT00702052) assessed the efficacy and safety of everolimus 10 mg/d in adults with confirmed mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) refractory to or intolerant of bortezomib who received ≥1 other antineoplastic agent, either separately or in combination with bortezomib. Primary endpoint was overall response rate (ORR) per investigator review according to the response criteria for malignant lymphoma. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Fifty-eight patients were enrolled from August 2008-January 2011. Five partial responses were observed (ORR 8·6%; 90% confidence interval [CI] 3·5-17·3%); the study did not meet the prespecified objective of ≥8 objective responses among 57 patients. Median PFS and OS were 4·4 months (95% CI 3·5-6·1) and 16·9 months (95% CI 14·4-29·9), respectively. Grade 3/4 non-haematological toxicities occurred in 70·7% of patients. Based on laboratory values, grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia, neutropenia and anaemia occurred in 13·8%, 13·8% and 8·6% of patients, respectively. Everolimus demonstrated modest activity and acceptable tolerability in heavily pretreated patients with MCL refractory to or intolerant of bortezomib. Future studies evaluating everolimus in a less refractory population or in combination with other targeted therapies in refractory MCL are warranted.

Everolimus and sunitinib for advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors: a matching-adjusted indirect comparison.

BACKGROUND: Everolimus and sunitinib have been approved for the treatment advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, but have not been compared to each other in a randomized trial and have not demonstrated prolonged overall survival compared to placebo. This study aimed to indirectly compare overall and progression-free among everolimus, sunitinib and placebo across separate randomized trials. METHODS: A matching adjusted indirect comparison was conducted in which individual patient data from the pivotal trial of everolimus (n = 410) were adjusted to match the inclusion criteria and average baseline characteristics reported for the pivotal trial of sunitinib (n = 171). Prior to matching, trial populations differed in baseline performance status and prior treatments. After matching, these and all other available baseline characteristics were balanced between trials. RESULTS: Compared to the placebo arm in the sunitinib trial, everolimus was associated with significantly prolonged overall survival (HR = 0.61, 95% CI = 0.38-0.98, p = 0.042).Compared to sunitinib, everolimus was associated with similar progression-free (hazard ratio for death (HR) = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.46-1.53, p = 0.578) and overall survival (HR = 0.81, 95% CI = 0.49-1.31, p = 0.383). CONCLUSION: After adjusting for observed cross-trial differences, everolimus treatment was associated with longer overall survival than the placebo arm in the sunitinib trial for advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors.

Development of everolimus, a novel oral mTOR inhibitor, across a spectrum of diseases.

Everolimus is a potent, oral inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) that has been investigated in multiple clinical development programs since 1996. A unique collaboration between academic and pharmaceutical experts fostered research that progressed rapidly, with simultaneous indication findings across numerous tumor types. Initially developed for the prophylaxis of organ transplant rejection, everolimus has demonstrated efficacy and safety for the treatment of patients with various types of cancer (renal cell carcinoma, neuroendocrine tumors of pancreatic origin, and breast cancer) and for adult and pediatric patients with tuberous sclerosis complex. The FDA approval of everolimus for these diseases has addressed several unmet medical needs and is widely accepted by the medical community where treatment options may be limited. An extensive clinical development program is ongoing to establish the role of everolimus as monotherapy, or in combination with other agents, in the treatment of a broad spectrum of malignancies.

Everolimus plus octreotide long-acting repeatable in patients with advanced lung neuroendocrine tumors: analysis of the phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled RADIANT-2 study.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of neuroendocrine tumors (NETs) has increased approximately fivefold since the 1980s. A similar increase in the incidence of lung NETs has been reported, but therapy has not been optimized. METHODS: This exploratory subanalysis evaluated the efficacy and safety of everolimus plus octreotide long-acting repeatable (LAR) in a cohort of patients with low- to intermediate-grade advanced lung NET from the phase 3, randomized, placebo-controlled RADIANT-2 (RAD001 in Advanced Neuroendocrine Tumors) study. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included objective response rate, overall survival, change from baseline in biomarker levels, and safety outcomes. RESULTS: Patients were randomly assigned to everolimus plus octreotide LAR (n 5 33) or placebo plus octreotide LAR (n 5 11). Median PFS was 13.63 months in the everolimus plus octreotide LAR arm compared with 5.59 months in the placebo plus octreotide LAR arm (relative risk for progression: HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.31­1.68; P 5 .228). More patients receiving everolimus plus octreotide LAR (67%) experienced minor tumor shrinkage (not partial response as per RECIST [Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors]) than those receiving placebo plus octreotide LAR (27%). Most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) included stomatitis, rash, diarrhea, and asthenia. This was consistent with the overall RADIANT-2 trial and the safety profile of everolimus. CONCLUSIONS: This exploratory subgroup analysis of the RADIANT-2 trial indicates that in patients with advanced lung NET, the addition of everolimus to octreotide LAR improves median PFS by 2.4-fold compared with placebo plus octreotide LAR. These clinically significant observations support the continued evaluation of everolimus treatment regimens in this patient population. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00412061

Everolimus and erlotinib as second- or third-line therapy in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

INTRODUCTION: The epidermal growth factor receptor inhibitor erlotinib is an approved treatment for chemotherapy-refractory advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Because activated epidermal growth factor receptor signals through the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt/mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) pathway, adding the oral mTOR inhibitor everolimus to erlotinib may improve efficacy by blocking multiple components of the same pathway. We conducted a phase I study to determine feasible dosages of combination therapy with erlotinib and everolimus for previously treated metastatic or unresectable NSCLC. METHODS: Participants had advanced NSCLC progressing after two or less previous chemotherapy regimens. Feasibility of daily/weekly everolimus plus daily erlotinib was determined using a 6 + 6 dose-escalation design based on the rate of dose-limiting toxicities. Antitumor activity was assessed by the Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors study. RESULTS: Of the 94 patients enrolled, 90% had stage IV NSCLC, 19% never smoked, and 15% were current smokers. Eighty-nine patients experienced one or more adverse events possibly related to any study medication. The most common dose-limiting toxicities were stomatitis (n = 5), rash (n = 4), and diarrhea (n = 3). Maximum tolerated doses were everolimus 5 mg per day or 50 mg per week plus erlotinib 150 mg per day. In daily everolimus cohorts (n = 74), nine patients achieved a complete/partial response and 28 had stable disease (median duration disease control, 9.3 months). In weekly everolimus cohorts (n = 20), no tumor response was observed; seven patients had stable disease (median duration, 9.6 months). CONCLUSIONS: Combination therapy with everolimus 5 mg per day or 50 mg per week and erlotinib 150 mg per day provided acceptable tolerability and disease control. A randomized phase II study evaluating this combination in comparison with erlotinib alone is complete and is being analyzed.

Everolimus plus octreotide long-acting repeatable for the treatment of advanced neuroendocrine tumours associated with carcinoid syndrome (RADIANT-2): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study.

BACKGROUND: Everolimus, an oral inhibitor of the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), has shown antitumour activity in patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumours. We aimed to assess the combination of everolimus plus octreotide long-acting repeatable (LAR) in patients with low-grade or intermediate-grade neuroendocrine tumours (carcinoid). METHODS: We did a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study comparing 10 mg per day oral everolimus with placebo, both in conjunction with 30 mg intramuscular octreotide LAR every 28 days. Randomisation was by interactive voice response systems. Participants were aged 18 years or older, with low-grade or intermediate-grade advanced (unresectable locally advanced or distant metastatic) neuroendocrine tumours, and disease progression established by radiological assessment within the past 12 months. Our primary endpoint was progression-free survival. Adjusted for two interim analyses, the prespecified boundary at final analysis was p≤0·0246. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00412061. FINDINGS: 429 individuals were randomly assigned to study groups; 357 participants discontinued study treatment and one was lost to follow-up. Median progression-free survival by central review was 16·4 (95% CI 13·7-21·2) months in the everolimus plus octreotide LAR group and 11·3 (8·4-14·6) months in the placebo plus octreotide LAR group (hazard ratio 0·77, 95% CI 0·59-1·00; one-sided log-rank test p=0·026). Drug-related adverse events (everolimus plus octreotide LAR vs placebo plus octreotide LAR) were mostly grade 1 or 2, and adverse events of all grades included stomatitis (62%vs 14%), rash (37%vs 12%), fatigue (31%vs 23%), and diarrhoea (27%vs 16%). INTERPRETATION: Everolimus plus octreotide LAR, compared with placebo plus octreotide LAR, improved progression-free survival in patients with advanced neuroendocrine tumours associated with carcinoid syndrome. FUNDING: Novartis Pharmaceuticals.

Phase I/II study of ixabepilone plus capecitabine in anthracycline-pretreated/resistant and taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to determine the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase II dose, and efficacy of the epothilone B analogue ixabepilone plus capecitabine in anthracycline-pretreated/ resistant and taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer (MBC). PATIENTS AND METHODS: A total of 106 patients were enrolled. The study consisted of a dose-escalation phase (phase I) and a tumor response rate evaluation phase (phase II). Seventy-four patients were treated in phase I with schedule A (ixabepilone 40 mg/m2 intravenously on day 1 plus capecitabine 1650-2000 mg/m2 on days 1-14 of a 21-day cycle) or schedule B (ixabepilone 8-10 mg/m2 on days 1-3 plus capecitabine 1650 mg/m2 on days 1-14 of a 21- day cycle). RESULTS: No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed in the 8/1650 mg/m2 and 10/1650 mg/m2 cohorts; 1 of 30 patients in the 40/1650 mg/m2 cohort and 2 of 30 patients in the 40/2000 mg/m2 cohort had a DLT consisting of grade 3 plantar-palmar erythrodysesthesia (PPE). The 40/2000 mg/m2 dose was defined as the MTD for schedule A, and a total of 62 patients were treated for the phase II portion of the trial, which examined tumor response. The objective response rate was 30%, median time-to-response was 6 weeks, median duration of response was 6.9 months, and median progression-free survival was 3.8 months. Grade 3/4 treatment-related events in phase II included fatigue (34%), PPE (34%), myalgia (23%), nausea (16%), peripheral neuropathy (19%), and diarrhea/vomiting (10%). Grades 3/4 neutropenia (69%) and leukopenia (55%) were managed primarily by dose reduction/treatment interruption. CONCLUSION: Ixabepilone plus capecitabine demonstrated clinical activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with anthracycline-pretreated/resistant and taxane-resistant MBC. Ixabepilone was recently approved in the United States for the treatment of resistant/refractory locally advanced or MBC.

Phase I clinical and pharmacokinetic study of 3-weekly, 3-h infusion of ixabepilone (BMS-247550), an epothilone B analog, in Japanese patients with refractory solid tumors.

BACKGROUND: Ixabepilone (BMS-247550) is the first in a new class of anti-neoplastic agents, the epothilone analogs, and is a highly active non-taxane anti-microtubule agent. This phase I study aimed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs), safety profile, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of ixabepilone in Japanese patients. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with solid tumors previously treated with up to four chemotherapy regimens received a 3-h intravenous infusion of ixabepilone every 3 weeks. RESULTS: Fourteen patients received 43 cycles (median 3, range 1-8). The most common adverse events were neutropenia, mild-to-moderate fatigue, anemia, and peripheral neuropathy. DLTs occurred in one patient receiving 40 mg/m2 (grade 4 neutropenia for 9 days) and in two patients receiving 50 mg/m2 (grade 3 mucositis, ileus and febrile neutropenia; grade 4 neutropenia for 10 days). One paclitaxel- and docetaxel-pretreated patient with non-small cell lung cancer achieved a partial response lasting for 3 months; six additional patients (43%) achieved disease stabilization with tumor shrinkage of 3-35%. The plasma concentration-time profiles of ixabepilone during cycle 1 were similar across all doses evaluated. CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of ixabepilone is 50 mg/m2 given over 3 h every 3 weeks. The recommended phase II dose is 40 mg/m2, which is well tolerated and active. Data from Japanese patients are consistent with published phase I data from non-Japanese patients.

Ixabepilone plus capecitabine for metastatic breast cancer progressing after anthracycline and taxane treatment.

PURPOSE: Effective treatment options for patients with metastatic breast cancer resistant to anthracyclines and taxanes are limited. Ixabepilone has single-agent activity in these patients and has demonstrated synergy with capecitabine in this setting. This study was designed to compare ixabepilone plus capecitabine versus capecitabine alone in anthracycline-pretreated or -resistant and taxane-resistant locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Seven hundred fifty-two patients were randomly assigned to ixabepilone 40 mg/m(2) intravenously on day 1 of a 21-day cycle plus capecitabine 2,000 mg/m(2) orally on days 1 through 14 of a 21-day cycle, or capecitabine alone 2,500 mg/m(2) on the same schedule, in this international phase III study. The primary end point was progression-free survival evaluated by blinded independent review. RESULTS: Ixabepilone plus capecitabine prolonged progression-free survival relative to capecitabine (median, 5.8 v 4.2 months), with a 25% reduction in the estimated risk of disease progression (hazard ratio, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.88; P = .0003). Objective response rate was also increased (35% v 14%; P < .0001). Grade 3/4 treatment-related sensory neuropathy (21% v 0%), fatigue (9% v 3%), and neutropenia (68% v 11%) were more frequent with combination therapy, as was the rate of death as a result of toxicity (3% v 1%, with patients with liver dysfunction [>/= grade 2 liver function tests] at greater risk). Capecitabine-related toxicities were similar for both treatment groups. CONCLUSION: Ixabepilone plus capecitabine demonstrates superior efficacy to capecitabine alone in patients with metastatic breast cancer pretreated or resistant to anthracyclines and resistant to taxanes.

Phase II clinical trial of ixabepilone (BMS-247550), an epothilone B analog, in patients with taxane-resistant metastatic breast cancer.

PURPOSE: Ixabepilone (BMS-247550) is an epothilone analog that optimizes the properties of naturally occurring epothilone B. Natural epothilones and their analogs promote tumor cell death by binding to tubulin and stabilizing microtubules, causing apoptosis. This international phase II trial assessed the activity of ixabepilone in patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC) that was resistant to taxane therapy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: MBC patients, who had experienced disease progression while receiving or within 4 months of taxane therapy (6 months if adjuvant taxane only), and who had a taxane as their last regimen, received ixabepilone (1- or 3-hour infusion of 50 mg/m(2) or 3-hour infusion of 40 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks). RESULTS: Of 49 patients treated with 40 mg/m(2) ixabepilone during 3 hours, 35 (73%) had experienced disease progression within 1 month of their last taxane dose. The response rate was 12% (95% CI, 4.7% to 26.5%). All responses (n = 6) were partial; five of six patients had not responded to prior taxane therapy. In responders, the median response duration was 10.4 months. In 20 patients (41%), stable disease was the best outcome. Median time to progression was 2.2 months (95% CI, 1.4 to 3.2 months); median survival was 7.9 months. For treated patients across all cohorts (intent-to-treat population), the response rate was also 12% (eight of 66). Treatment-related adverse events in the study were manageable and primarily grade 1/2. Treatment-related neuropathy was mostly sensory and mild to moderate. CONCLUSION: Ixabepilone (40 mg/m(2) as a 3-hour infusion every 3 weeks) demonstrates promising antitumor activity and an acceptable safety profile in patients with taxane-resistant MBC.