Search

Background: The antibody–drug conjugate sacituzumab govitecan is approved for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer and has shown promising results in various other types of cancer. Its costs may limit patient access to this novel effective treatment modality. Objective: The purpose of this study was to develop an evidence-based rational dosing regimen that results in targeted drug exposure within the therapeutic range while minimizing financial toxicity, to improve treatment access. Patients and Methods: Exposure equivalent dosing strategies were developed based on pharmacokinetic modeling and simulation by using the published pharmacokinetic model developed by the license holder. The alternative dose was based on the principle of using complete vials to prevent spillage and on the established non-linear relationship between body weight and systemic exposure. Equivalent exposure compared to the approved dosing regimen of 10 mg/kg was aimed for. Equivalent exposure was conservatively defined as calculated geometric mean ratios within the 0.9–1.11 boundaries for area under the concentration–time curve (AUC), trough concentration (Ctrough) and maximum concentration (Cmax) of the alternative dosing regimen compared to the approved dosing regimen. Since different vial sizes are available for the European Union (EU) and United States (US) market, because body weight distributions differ between these populations, we performed our analysis for both scenarios. Results: Dosing regimens of sacituzumab govitecan for the EU (< 50 kg: 400 mg, 50–80 kg: 600 mg, and > 80 kg: 800 mg) and US population (< 40 kg: 360 mg, 40–65 kg: 540 mg, 65–90 kg: 720 mg, and > 90 kg: 900 mg) were developed, based on weight bands. The geometric mean ratios for all pharmacokinetic outcomes were within the predefined equivalence boundaries, while the quantity of drug used was 21.5% and 19.0% lower for the EU and US scenarios, respectively. Conclusions: With the alternative dosing proposal, an approximately 20% reduction in drug expenses for sacituzumab govitecan can be realized while maintaining an equivalent and more evenly distributed exposure throughout the body weight range, without notable increases in pharmacokinetic variability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Small-molecule inhibitors (SMIs) have revolutionised the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). However, SMI-induced drug–drug interactions (DDIs) with frequently co-administered direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs), increase thromboembolic and bleeding risks. This study investigated and proactively managed the consequences of DOAC-SMI DDIs. Methods: This prospective, observational study enrolled patients with NSCLC concomitantly using a DOAC and SMI. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients with DOAC plasma trough (Ctrough) and peak (Cpeak) concentrations outside expected ranges. Secondary outcomes included DOAC treatment modifications, incidence of bleeding and thromboembolic events and feasibility evaluation of pharmacokinetically guided DOAC dosing. Results: Thirty-three patients were analysed. Thirty-nine percent (13/33) had DOAC Ctrough and/or Cpeak were outside the expected ranges in 39% (13/33). In 71% (5/7) of patients with DOAC concentrations quantified before and during concurrent SMI use, DOAC Ctrough and/or Cpeak increased or decreased >50% upon SMI initiation. In all patients in whom treatment modifications were deemed necessary, DOAC concentrations were adjusted to within the expected ranges. Conclusion: Proactive monitoring showed that a substantial proportion of patients had DOAC concentrations outside the expected ranges. DOAC concentrations were successfully normalised after treatment modifications. These results highlight the importance of proactive monitoring of DOAC-SMI DDIs to improve treatment in patients with NSCLC. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression is currently used in the clinic to assess eligibility for immune-checkpoint inhibitors via the tumor proportion score (TPS), but its efficacy is limited by high interobserver variability. Multiple papers have presented systems for the automatic quantification of TPS, but none report on the task of determining cell-level PD-L1 expression and often reserve their evaluation to a single PD-L1 monoclonal antibody or clinical center. In this paper, we report on a deep learning algorithm for detecting PD-L1 negative and positive tumor cells at a cellular level and evaluate it on a cell-level reference standard established by six readers on a multi-centric, multi PD-L1 assay dataset. This reference standard also provides for the first time a benchmark for computer vision algorithms. In addition, in line with other papers, we also evaluate our algorithm at slide-level by measuring the agreement between the algorithm and six pathologists on TPS quantification. We find a moderately low interobserver agreement at cell-level level (mean reader-reader F1 score = 0.68) which our algorithm sits slightly under (mean reader-AI F1 score = 0.55), especially for cases from the clinical center not included in the training set. Despite this, we find good AI-pathologist agreement on quantifying TPS compared to the interobserver agreement (mean reader-reader Cohen's kappa = 0.54, 95% CI 0.26–0.81, mean reader-AI kappa = 0.49, 95% CI 0.27—0.72). In conclusion, our deep learning algorithm demonstrates promise in detecting PD-L1 expression at a cellular level and exhibits favorable agreement with pathologists in quantifying the tumor proportion score (TPS). We publicly release our models for use via the Grand-Challenge platform. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Immune checkpoint inhibitors improved survival of advanced stage non-small cell lung cancer patients, but the overall response rate remains low. A biomarker that identifies non-responders would be helpful to allow treatment decisions. Clearance of immune checkpoint inhibitors is related to treatment response, but its prognostic potential early in treatment remains unknown. Our primary aim was to investigate the prognostic potential of nivolumab clearance for overall survival early in treatment. Our secondary aim was to evaluate the performance of nivolumab clearance as prognostic biomarker. Patients and Methods: Individual estimates of nivolumab clearances at first dose, 6 and 12 weeks after treatment initiation were obtained via nonlinear mixed-effects modelling. Prognostic value of nivolumab clearance was estimated using univariate Cox regression at first dose and for the ratios between 6 and 12 weeks to first dose. The performance of nivolumab clearance as biomarker was assessed by calculating sensitivity and specificity. Results: During follow-up of 75 months, 69 patients were included and 865 died. Patients with a nivolumab clearance ≥ 7.3 mL/h at first dose were more likely to die compared to patients with a nivolumab clearance < 7.3 mL/h at first dose (hazard ratio [HR] = 3.55, 955 CI 1.75–7.20). The HRs of dose nivolumab clearance ratios showed similar results with a HR of 3.93 (955 CI 1.66–9.32) for 6 weeks to first-dose clearance ratio at a 0.953 cut-point and a HR of 2.96 (955 CI 1.32–6.64) for 12 weeks to first-dose clearance ratio at a cut-point of 0.814. For nivolumab clearance at all early time points, sensitivity was high (≥ 0.95) but specificity was low (0.11–0.29). Conclusion: Nivolumab clearance is indicative of survival early in treatment. Our results encourage to further assess the prognostic potential of immunotherapy clearance. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Expensive novel anticancer drugs put a serious strain on healthcare budgets, and the associated drug expenses limit access to life-saving treatments worldwide. Objective: We aimed to develop alternative dosing regimens to reduce drug expenses. Methods: We developed alternative dosing regimens for the following monoclonal antibodies used for the treatment of lung cancer: amivantamab, atezolizumab, bevacizumab, durvalumab, ipilimumab, nivolumab, pembrolizumab, and ramucirumab; and for the antibody-drug conjugate trastuzumab deruxtecan. The alternative dosing regimens were developed by means of modeling and simulation based on the population pharmacokinetic models developed by the license holders. They were based on weight bands and the administration of complete vials to limit drug wastage. The resulting dosing regimens were developed to comply with criteria used by regulatory authorities for in silico dose development. Results: We found that alternative dosing regimens could result in cost savings that range from 11 to 28%, and lead to equivalent pharmacokinetic exposure with no relevant increases in variability in exposure. Conclusions: Dosing regimens based on weight bands and the use of complete vials to reduce drug wastage result in less expenses while maintaining equivalent exposure. The level of evidence of our proposal is the same as accepted by regulatory authorities for the approval of alternative dosing regimens of other monoclonal antibodies in oncology. The proposed alternative dosing regimens can, therefore, be directly implemented in clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Pemetrexed is a chemotherapeutic drug in the treatment of non-small cell lung cancer and mesothelioma. Optimized dosing of pemetrexed based on renal function instead of body surface area (BSA) is hypothesized to reduce pharmacokinetic variability in systemic exposure and could therefore improve treatment outcomes. The aim of this study is to compare optimized dosing to standard BSA-based dosing. Methods: A multicenter randomized (1:1) controlled trial was performed to assess superiority of optimized dosing versus BSA-based dosing in patients who were eligible for pemetrexed-based chemotherapy. The individual exposure to pemetrexed in terms of area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) was determined. The fraction of patients attaining to a predefined typical target AUC (164 mg × h/L ± 25%) was calculated. Results: A total of 81 patients were included. Target attainment was not statistically significant different between both arms (89% vs. 84% (p = 0.505)). The AUC of pemetrexed was similar between the optimized dosing arm (n = 37) and the standard of care arm (n = 44) (155 mg × h/L vs 160 mg × h/L (p = 0.436). Conclusion: We could not show superiority of optimized dosing of pemetrexed in patients with an adequate renal function does not show added value on the attainment of a pharmacokinetic endpoint, safety, nor QoL compared to standard of care dosing. Clinical trial number: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03655821 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pemetrexed is a cytostatic antifolate drug and a cornerstone in the treatment of lung cancer. Although generally well tolerated, a substantial part of the patient population experiences dose-limiting or even treatment-limiting toxicities. These include mucositis, skin problems, fatigue, renal toxicity, and neutropenia. Several studies confirmed that pemetrexed pharmacokinetics can serve as a prognostic factor for the development of toxicity, especially for neutropenia. Preventing and managing toxicity of pemetrexed can help to ensure durable treatment. Several evidence-based strategies are already implemented in clinical care. With the introduction of standard vitamin supplementation and dexamethasone, the incidence of hematological toxicity and skin reactions substantially decreased. In the case of high risk for toxicity, granulocyte colony-stimulating factor can be used to prevent severe hematological toxicity. Moreover, high-dose folinic acid can resolve severe pemetrexed-induced toxicity. There are several experimental options to prevent or manage pemetrexed-related toxicity, such as the use of standard folinic acid, hemodialysis, antidotes such as thymidine, hypoxanthine, and glucarpidase, and the use of therapeutic drug monitoring. These strategies still need clinical evaluation before implementation, but could enable treatment with pemetrexed for patients who are at risk for toxicity, such as in renal impairment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Pemetrexed is used for the treatment for non-small cell lung cancer and mesothelioma. Patients with renal impairment are withheld treatment with this drug as it is unknown what dose is well tolerated in this population. Objective: The purpose of our study was to investigate the pharmacokinetics (PK) of pemetrexed in patients with renal impairment. Methods: A population PK analysis of pemetrexed was performed using non-linear mixed-effects modelling with phase I data obtained from the manufacturer. Additionally, the impact of renal function on pemetrexed PK was assessed with a simulation study using the developed PK model and a previously developed PK model lacking the phase I data. Results: The dataset included 548 paired observations of 47 patients, with a wide range of estimated glomerular filtration rates (eGFR; 14.4–145.6 mL/min). Pemetrexed PK were best described by a three-compartment model with eGFR (calculated using the Chronic Kidney Disease–Epidemiology Collaboration [CKD-EPI] formula) as a linear covariate on renal pemetrexed clearance. Using the developed model, we found that renal clearance accounts for up to 84% (95% confidence interval 69–98%) of total pemetrexed clearance, whereas the manufacturer previously reported a 50% contribution of renal clearance. Conclusion: Renal function is more important for the clearance of pemetrexed than previously thought and this should be taken into account in patients with renal impairment. Furthermore, a third compartment may contribute to prolonged exposure to pemetrexed during drug washout. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Pemetrexed is a widely used cytostatic agent with an established exposure-response relationship. Although dosing is based on body surface area (BSA), large interindividual variability in pemetrexed plasma concentrations is observed. Therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) can be a feasible strategy to reduce variability in specific cases leading to potentially optimized pemetrexed treatment. The aim of this study was to develop a limited sampling schedule (LSS) for the assessment of pemetrexed pharmacokinetics.Methods: Based on two real-life datasets, several limited sampling designs were evaluated on predicting clearance, using NONMEM, based on mean prediction error (MPE %) and normalized root mean squared error (NRMSE %). The predefined criteria for an acceptable LSS were: a maximum of four sampling time points within 8 h with an MPE and NRMSE ≤ 20%.Results: For an accurate estimation of clearance, only four samples in a convenient window of 8 h were required for accurate and precise prediction (MPE and NRMSE of 3.6% and 5.7% for dataset 1 and of 15.5% and 16.5% for dataset 2). A single sample at t = 24 h performed also within the criteria with MPE and NRMSE of 5.8% and 8.7% for dataset 1 and of 11.5% and 16.4% for dataset 2. Bias increased when patients had lower creatinine clearance.Conclusions: We presented two limited sampling designs for estimation of pemetrexed pharmacokinetics. Either one can be used based on preference and feasibility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]