Safety and Clinical Activity of a New Anti-PD-L1 Antibody as Monotherapy or Combined with Targeted Therapy in Advanced Solid Tumors: The PACT Phase Ia/Ib Trial.

PURPOSE: This phase Ia/Ib PACT study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics, and antitumor activity of a new programmed cell death ligand 1 (PD-L1) inhibitor, LY3300054, as monotherapy or in combination with ramucirumab, abemaciclib, or merestinib (a type II MET kinase inhibitor) in patients with advanced, refractory solid tumors (NCT02791334). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients were enrolled into cohorts of escalating LY3300054 dose (phase Ia) as monotherapy (N = 15) or combined with ramucirumab (N = 10), abemaciclib (N = 24), or merestinib (N = 12). The phase Ib dose expansion enrolled 8 patients with melanoma in the monotherapy arm and 12 patients with pancreatic cancer in the merestinib combination arm. Combination treatments were administered concurrently from day 1 of each cycle. A 14-day lead-in abemaciclib arm was also explored. Primary endpoints were dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) and safety. RESULTS: Treatment-related adverse events included fatigue and nausea in the monotherapy arm (13% for each), hypothyroidism (30%) in the ramucirumab arm, diarrhea (54%) in the abemaciclib arm, and nausea (25%) in the merestinib arm. DLTs associated with hepatoxicity were observed in 3 of 4 patients in the abemaciclib lead-in cohorts. No DLTs or grade 3 or 4 hepatoxicity were reported in the concurrent abemaciclib arm. Pharmacokinetic characteristics were comparable with other PD-L1 inhibitors. One patient in each arm experienced a partial response per RECIST v1.1 lasting ≥7 months. CONCLUSIONS: LY3300054 was well tolerated without unexpected safety concerns when administered alone or concurrently with ramucirumab, abemaciclib, or merestinib. Lead-in abemaciclib before combining with LY3300054 was not feasible due to hepatotoxicity. Durable clinical benefits were seen in all regimens.

Safety and Pharmacokinetics of CXCR4 Peptide Antagonist, LY2510924, in Combination with Durvalumab in Advanced Refractory Solid Tumors.

Purpose: This was an open-label phase 1a study assessing the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and tolerability of CXCR4 peptide antagonist, LY2510924, administered in combination with durvalumab in patients with advanced refractory solid tumors. Methods: Patients received LY2510924 at 20, 30, or 40 mg subcutaneous (SC) once daily in combination with durvalumab at 1500 mg intravenously (IV) on day 1 of each 28-day cycle. The primary objective was to assess the MTD and safety of LY2510924 SC daily in combination with durvalumab in patients with advanced (metastatic and/or unresectable) solid tumors. Secondary objectives included pharmacokinetics (PK) and the antitumor activity of LY2510924 in combination with durvalumab. Exploratory objectives were biomarker analysis, including pharmacodynamic markers, relevant to LY2510924 and durvalumab, including immune functioning, drug targets, cancer-related pathways, and the disease state. Results: Nine patients (three each at 20, 30, and 40 mg) were enrolled in the study (eight patients with pancreatic cancer and one patient with rectal cancer). The majority of patients completed one or two cycles (100.0% ≥ 1 cycle; 88.9% ≥ 2 cycles) of LY2510924 and durvalumab. No dose limiting toxicities were reported. Most common (>10%) treatment-emergent adverse events were injection-site reaction (44.4%), fatigue (33.3%), and increased white blood cell count (33.3%). PK parameters for combination were similar to those reported in previous studies when given as monotherapy. Best overall response of stable disease was observed in four (44.4%) patients and one patient had unconfirmed partial response. Conclusion: The recommended phase 2 dose is 40 mg SC once-daily LY2510924 in combination with durvalumab 1500 mg IV and showed acceptable safety and tolerability in patients with advanced refractory tumors.

Clinical characteristics, patterns of lipid-lowering medication use, and health care resource utilization and costs among patients with atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease.

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to investigate real-world patient characteristics, medication use, and health care resource utilization (HCRU) and costs among patients with clinical atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) as defined by 2013 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association (ACC/AHA) guidelines, to examine burden of disease and unmet needs, such as potential undertreatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This retrospective cohort study utilized a nationally representative managed care database to identify newly diagnosed ASCVD patients between January 1, 2007, and November 30, 2012 (index = first ASCVD diagnosis date) in the USA. Patients had ≥12-month pre-index (baseline) and ≥12-month post-index (follow-up) health plan enrollment and no baseline lipid-lowering medication (LLM). Patient characteristics, LLM utilization patterns, HCRU, and costs were examined for all patients and by subgroups based on LLM use pattern and/or follow-up low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels. RESULTS: A total of 128,017 ASCVD patients were identified with a mean (SD) age of 59 (13) years, 43.1% female, and 48.8% with ≥36-month follow-up. Within 12-month follow-up, 10.6% had high-intensity statins and 56.9% had no LLM fills. Baseline mean (SD) all-cause costs were $8,852 ($25,608). At 12-month follow-up, mean (SD) all-cause and ASCVD-related costs were $31,443 ($54,040) and $20,289 ($45,159), respectively. The 36-month analyses showed similar distributions. Multivariable analyses showed that age, gender, region, health insurance type, baseline comorbidities, baseline use of specific medications, baseline lipid profiles, and index ASCVD type were significantly associated with all-cause and ASCVD-related health care costs. CONCLUSION: Patients have nonoptimal treatment for ASCVD and substantial HCRU and costs associated with residual risk. Unmet needs and cost burdens of ASCVD patients merit additional investigation.

Evacetrapib and Cardiovascular Outcomes in High-Risk Vascular Disease.

BACKGROUND: The cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor evacetrapib substantially raises the high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol level, reduces the low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol level, and enhances cellular cholesterol efflux capacity. We sought to determine the effect of evacetrapib on major adverse cardiovascular outcomes in patients with high-risk vascular disease. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 trial, we enrolled 12,092 patients who had at least one of the following conditions: an acute coronary syndrome within the previous 30 to 365 days, cerebrovascular atherosclerotic disease, peripheral vascular arterial disease, or diabetes mellitus with coronary artery disease. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either evacetrapib at a dose of 130 mg or matching placebo, administered daily, in addition to standard medical therapy. The primary efficacy end point was the first occurrence of any component of the composite of death from cardiovascular causes, myocardial infarction, stroke, coronary revascularization, or hospitalization for unstable angina. RESULTS: At 3 months, a 31.1% decrease in the mean LDL cholesterol level was observed with evacetrapib versus a 6.0% increase with placebo, and a 133.2% increase in the mean HDL cholesterol level was seen with evacetrapib versus a 1.6% increase with placebo. After 1363 of the planned 1670 primary end-point events had occurred, the data and safety monitoring board recommended that the trial be terminated early because of a lack of efficacy. After a median of 26 months of evacetrapib or placebo, a primary end-point event occurred in 12.9% of the patients in the evacetrapib group and in 12.8% of those in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 1.01; 95% confidence interval, 0.91 to 1.11; P=0.91). CONCLUSIONS: Although the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibitor evacetrapib had favorable effects on established lipid biomarkers, treatment with evacetrapib did not result in a lower rate of cardiovascular events than placebo among patients with high-risk vascular disease. (Funded by Eli Lilly; ACCELERATE ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01687998 .).

Assessment of the clinical effects of cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibition with evacetrapib in patients at high-risk for vascular outcomes: Rationale and design of the ACCELERATE trial.

BACKGROUND: Potent pharmacologic inhibition of cholesteryl ester transferase protein by the investigational agent evacetrapib increases high-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 54% to 129%, reduces low-density lipoprotein cholesterol by 14% to 36%, and enhances cellular cholesterol efflux capacity. The ACCELERATE trial examines whether the addition of evacetrapib to standard medical therapy reduces the risk of cardiovascular (CV) morbidity and mortality in patients with high-risk vascular disease. STUDY DESIGN: ACCELERATE is a phase 3, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Patients qualified for enrollment if they have experienced an acute coronary syndrome within the prior 30 to 365 days, cerebrovascular accident, or transient ischemic attack; if they have peripheral vascular disease; or they have diabetes with coronary artery disease. A total of 12,092 patients were randomized to evacetrapib 130 mg or placebo daily in addition to standard medical therapy. The primary efficacy end point is time to first event of CV death, myocardial infarction, stroke, hospitalization for unstable angina, or coronary revascularization. Treatment will continue until 1,670 patients reached the primary end point; at least 700 patients reach the key secondary efficacy end point of CV death, myocardial infarction, and stroke, and the last patient randomized has been followed up for at least 1.5 years. CONCLUSIONS: ACCELERATE will establish whether the cholesteryl ester transfer protein inhibition by evacetrapib improves CV outcomes in patients with high-risk vascular disease.

Drotrecogin alfa (activated) in adults with septic shock.

BACKGROUND: There have been conflicting reports on the efficacy of recombinant human activated protein C, or drotrecogin alfa (activated) (DrotAA), for the treatment of patients with septic shock. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicenter trial, we assigned 1697 patients with infection, systemic inflammation, and shock who were receiving fluids and vasopressors above a threshold dose for 4 hours to receive either DrotAA (at a dose of 24 µg per kilogram of body weight per hour) or placebo for 96 hours. The primary outcome was death from any cause 28 days after randomization. RESULTS: At 28 days, 223 of 846 patients (26.4%) in the DrotAA group and 202 of 834 (24.2%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk in the DrotAA group, 1.09; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.92 to 1.28; P=0.31). At 90 days, 287 of 842 patients (34.1%) in the DrotAA group and 269 of 822 (32.7%) in the placebo group had died (relative risk, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.90 to 1.19; P=0.56). Among patients with severe protein C deficiency at baseline, 98 of 342 (28.7%) in the DrotAA group had died at 28 days, as compared with 102 of 331 (30.8%) in the placebo group (risk ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.74 to 1.17; P=0.54). Similarly, rates of death at 28 and 90 days were not significantly different in other predefined subgroups, including patients at increased risk for death. Serious bleeding during the treatment period occurred in 10 patients in the DrotAA group and 8 in the placebo group (P=0.81). CONCLUSIONS: DrotAA did not significantly reduce mortality at 28 or 90 days, as compared with placebo, in patients with septic shock. (Funded by Eli Lilly; PROWESS-SHOCK ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00604214.).

Randomized trial evaluating serial protein C levels in severe sepsis patients treated with variable doses of drotrecogin alfa (activated).

INTRODUCTION: Serial alterations in protein C levels appear to correlate with disease severity in patients with severe sepsis, and it may be possible to tailor severe sepsis therapy with the use of this biomarker. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the dose and duration of drotrecogin alfa (activated) treatment using serial measurements of protein C compared to standard therapy in patients with severe sepsis. METHODS: This was a phase 2 multicenter, randomized, double-blind, controlled study. Adult patients with two or more sepsis-induced organ dysfunctions were enrolled. Protein C deficient patients were randomized to standard therapy (24 µg/kg/hr infusion for 96 hours) or alternative therapy (higher dose and/or variable duration; 24/30/36 µg/kg/hr for 48 to 168 hours). The primary outcome was a change in protein C level in the alternative therapy group, between study Day 1 and Day 7, compared to standard therapy. RESULTS: Of 557 patients enrolled, 433 patients received randomized therapy; 206 alternative, and 227 standard. Baseline characteristics of the groups were largely similar. The difference in absolute change in protein C from Day 1 to Day 7 between the two therapy groups was 7% (P = 0.011). Higher doses and longer infusions were associated with a more pronounced increase in protein C level, with no serious bleeding events. The same doses and longer infusions were associated with a larger increase in protein C level; higher rates of serious bleeding when groups received the same treatment; but no clear increased risk of bleeding during the longer infusion. This group also experienced a higher mortality rate; however, there was no clear link to infusion duration. CONCLUSIONS: The study met its primary objective of increased protein C levels in patients receiving alternative therapy demonstrating that variable doses and/or duration of drotrecogin alfa (activated) can improve protein C levels, and also provides valuable information for incorporation into potential future studies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00386425.

The protein C pathway: implications for the design of the RESPOND study.

The predictive value of plasma protein C level in sepsis has been demonstrated in a number of studies in which depressed protein C levels were associated with increased likelihood of negative outcome. Data from the PROWESS (Recombinant Human Activated Protein C Worldwide Evaluation in Severe Sepsis) trial indicate that administration of drotrecogin alfa (activated; DrotAA) leads to an increase in endogenous protein C levels in severe sepsis patients. In a group as heterogeneous as sepsis patients, the currently approved dose and duration of administration (24 mug/kg per hour for 96 hours) might not be optimal in some individuals. The RESPOND (Research Evaluating Serial Protein C levels in severe sepsis patients ON Drotrecogin alfa [activated]) trial is a phase II study being conducted to explore the use of endogenous protein C level as both a biomarker and a steering parameter for administration of DrotAA. Eligible patients will receive DrotAA either at the normal, currently approved dose and duration of administration ('standard therapy') or at a higher dose with variable infusion duration or variable infusion duration only ('alternative therapy'). The duration of DrotAA infusion in the alternative therapy arm depends on the individual response in terms of sustained increase in endogenous protein C. The ultimate aims of this and potential following studies are as follows: to establish serial plasma protein C measurement as a biomarker that will aid in the identification of severe sepsis patients who are most likely to benefit from DrotAA therapy, to enable adjustment of DrotAA therapy in individual patients (specifically, the possibility to use a higher dose and to adjust the infusion duration), and to provide guidance to the clinician regarding whether the patient is responding to DrotAA.

C1-inhibitor for prophylaxis of xenograft rejection after pig to cynomolgus monkey kidney transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Early rejection of discordant porcine xenografts in primate recipients is initiated by the intragraft binding of either preformed (hyperacute xenograft rejection) or induced (acute vascular rejection) antiporcine recipient antibodies with subsequent complement activation via the classical pathway. We have investigated the efficacy of the supplemental administration of C1-inhibitor (C1-INH), a specific inhibitor of the classical complement activation pathway, for prophylaxis of xenograft rejection in a pig to primate kidney xenotransplantation setting. METHODS: Based on the results of pharmacokinetic studies performed in two nontransplanted monkeys, supplemental C1-INH therapy was administered daily to three Cynomolgus monkeys receiving a life-supporting porcine kidney transplant together with cyclophosphamide-induction/cyclosporine A/mycophenolat-mofetil/steroid immunosuppressive therapy. RESULTS: In the three monkeys receiving porcine kidney xenografts and continuous C1-INH treatment none of the grafts underwent hyperacute rejection; all xenografts showed initial function. Recipient survival was 13, 15, and 5 days. No graft was lost due to acute vascular rejection. All animals died with a functioning graft (latest creatinine 96, 112, and 96 micromol/liter) due to bacterial septicemia. CONCLUSION: We conclude that, in our model, supplemental C1-INH therapy together with a standard immunosuppressive regimen can be helpful for prevention of xenograft rejection in a pig to primate kidney xenotransplantation setting. The optimal dose and duration of C1-INH treatment, however, has yet to be determined.