Physiologically-based pharmacokinetic model for alectinib, ruxolitinib, and panobinostat in the presence of cancer, renal impairment, and hepatic impairment.

Renal (RIP) and hepatic (HIP) impairments are prevalent conditions in cancer patients. They can cause changes in gastric emptying time, albumin levels, hematocrit, glomerular filtration rate, hepatic functional volume, blood flow rates, and metabolic activity that can modify drug pharmacokinetics. Performing clinical studies in such populations has ethical and practical issues. Using predictive physiologically-based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) models in the evaluation of the PK of alectinib, ruxolitinib, and panobinostat exposures in the presence of cancer, RIP, and HIP can help in using optimal doses with lower toxicity in these populations. Verified PBPK models were customized under scrutiny to account for the pathophysiological changes induced in these diseases. The PBPK model-predicted plasma exposures in patients with different health conditions within average 2-fold error. The PBPK model predicted an area under the curve ratio (AUCR) of 1, and 1.8, for ruxolitinib and panobinostat, respectively, in the presence of severe RIP. On the other hand, the severe HIP was associated with AUCR of 1.4, 2.9, and 1.8 for alectinib, ruxolitinib, and panobinostat, respectively, in agreement with the observed AUCR. Moreover, the PBPK model predicted that alectinib therapeutic cerebrospinal fluid levels are achieved in patients with non-small cell lung cancer, moderate HIP, and severe HIP at 1-, 1.5-, and 1.8-fold that of healthy subjects. The customized PBPK models showed promising ethical alternatives for simulating clinical studies in patients with cancer, RIP, and HIP. More work is needed to quantify other pathophysiological changes induced by simultaneous affliction by cancer and RIP or HIP.

A phase I study of panobinostat in pediatric patients with refractory solid tumors, including CNS tumors.

PURPOSE: This was an open label, phase I (3 + 3 design), multi-centre study evaluating panobinostat in pediatric patients with refractory solid tumors. METHODS: Primary endpoints were to establish MTD, define and describe associated toxicities, including dose limiting toxicities (DLT) and to characterize its pharmacokinetics (PK). Secondary endpoints included assessing the anti-tumour activity of panobinostat, and its biologic activity, by measuring acetylation of histones in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. RESULTS: Nine patients were enrolled and treated with intravenous panobinostat at a dosing level of 15 mg/m2 which was tolerated. Six were evaluable for adverse events. Two (33%) patients experienced Grade 3-4 thrombocytopenia, 1 (17%) experienced Grade 3 anemia, and 2 (33%) experienced Grade 3 neutropenia. Grade 4 drug related pain occurred in 2 (33%) of the patients studied. Two (33%) patients experienced a Grade 2 QTcF change (0.478 ± 0.006 ms). One cardiac DLT (T wave changes) was reported. PK values for 15 mg/m2 (n = 9) dosing were: Tmax 0.8 h, Cmax 235.2 ng/mL, AUC0-t 346.8 h ng/mL and t1/2 7.3 h. Panobinostat significantly induced acetylation of histone H3 and H4 at all time points measured when compared to pre-treatment samples (p < 0.05). Pooled quantitative Western blot data confirmed that panobinostat significantly induced acetylation of histone H4 at 6 h (p < 0.01), 24 h (p < 0.01) and 28-70 h (p < 0.01) post dose. CONCLUSION: A significant biological effect of panobinostat, measured by acetylation status of histone H3 and H4, was achieved at a dose of 15 mg/m2. PK data and drug tolerability at 15 mg/m2 was similar to that previously published.