Search

PURPOSE There is an increasing need to evaluate innovative drugs for childhood cancer using combination strategies. Strong biological rationale and clinical experience suggest that multiple agents will be more efficacious than monotherapy for most diseases and may overcome resistance mechanisms and increase synergy. The process to evaluate these combination trials needs to maximize efficiency and should be agreed by all stakeholders. METHODS After a review of existing combination trial methodologies, regulatory requirements, and current results, a consensus among stakeholders was achieved. RESULTS Combinations of anticancer therapies should be developed on the basis of mechanism of action and robust preclinical evaluation, and may include data from adult clinical trials. The general principle for combination early-phase studies is that, when possible, clinical trials should be dose- and schedule-confirmatory rather than dose-exploratory, and every effort should be made to optimize doses early. Efficient early-phase combination trials should be seamless, including dose confirmation and randomized expansion. Dose evaluation designs for combinations depend on the extent of previous knowledge. If not previously evaluated, limited evaluation of monotherapy should be included in the same clinical trial as the combination. Randomized evaluation of a new agent plus standard therapy versus standard therapy is the most effective approach to isolate the effect and toxicity of the novel agent. Platform trials may be valuable in the evaluation of combination studies. Patient advocates and regulators should be engaged with investigators early in a proposed clinical development pathway and trial design must consider regulatory requirements. CONCLUSION An optimized, agreed approach to the design and evaluation of early-phase pediatric combination trials will accelerate drug development and benefit all stakeholders, most importantly children and adolescents with cancer.

CCR Translation for This Article from A Phase I Trial and Pharmacokinetic Study of Aflibercept (VEGF Trap) in Children with Refractory Solid Tumors: A Children's Oncology Group Phase I Consortium Report

Supplemental Figure 1. Graph of IMC-A12 trough serum concentrations versus time.

Cho and coworkers show that Ewing's sarcoma cells are highly sensitive to expanded allogeneic natural killer (NK) cells, partially through a NKG2D– and DNAM-1–dependent mechanism. Using an orthotopic murine model, they also show that irradiation significantly enhances the NK-cell killing of these tumors. Clin Cancer Res; 16(15); 3819–21. ©2010 AACR.

Purpose: To determine the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of sorafenib in children with refractory extracranial solid tumors and evaluate the tolerability of the solid tumor MTD in children with refractory leukemias.Experimental Design: Sorafenib was administered orally every 12 hours for consecutive 28-day cycles. Pharmacokinetics (day 1 and steady-state) and pharmacodynamics were conducted during cycle 1.Results: Of 65 patients enrolled, 60 were eligible. In the solid tumor cohort (n = 49), 4 of 6 patients experienced a DLT [hypertension, pain, rash/urticaria, thrombocytopenia, alanine aminotransferase (ALT)/aspartate aminotransferase (AST)] at the starting dose (150 mg/m2/dose) which resulted in de-escalation to 105 mg/m2/dose. After eligibility criteria modification and dose re-escalation, the MTD was 200 mg/m2/dose for solid tumors and 150 mg/m2/dose for leukemias. Sorafenib exposure was highly variable between patients but was within the ranges reported in adults. The apparent sorafenib clearance increased with patient age. Diarrhea, rash, fatigue, and increased ALT/AST were the most common sorafenib-related toxicities. Stable disease for 4 or more cycles was observed in 14 solid tumor patients, and 2 patients with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) and FLT3 internal tandem duplication (FLT3ITD) experienced a decrease in bone marrow blasts to less than 5%.Conclusions: The recommended phase II dose of sorafenib administered every 12 hours continuously for children with solid tumors is 200 mg/m2/dose and 150 mg/m2/dose for children with leukemias. Sorafenib toxicities and distribution in children are similar to adults. The activity of sorafenib in children with AML and FLT3ITD is currently being evaluated, and a phase II study for select solid tumors is ongoing. Clin Cancer Res; 18(21); 6011–22. ©2012 AACR.

Purpose: Aflibercept is a novel decoy receptor that efficiently neutralizes circulating VEGF. A pediatric phase I trial was conducted to define the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and pharmacokinetics (PK) of aflibercept.Experimental Design: Cohorts of three to six children with refractory solid tumors received aflibercept intravenously over 60 minutes every 14 days, at 2.0, 2.5, or 3.0 mg/kg/dose. PK sampling and analysis of peripheral blood biomarkers were conducted with the initial dose.Results: Twenty-one eligible patients were enrolled; 18 were fully evaluable for toxicity. One of six patients receiving 2.0 mg/kg/dose developed dose-limiting intratumoral hemorrhage and two of six receiving 3.0 mg/kg/dose developed either dose-limiting tumor pain or tissue necrosis. None of the six patients receiving 2.5 mg/kg/dose developed DLTs, defining this as the MTD. The most common non-DLTs were hypertension and fatigue. Three patients with hepatocellular carcinoma, hepatoblastoma and clear cell sarcoma had stable disease for >13 weeks. At the MTD, the ratio of free-to-bound aflibercept serum concentration was 2.10 on day 8 but only 0.44 by day 15. A rapid decrease in VEGF (P < 0.05) and increase in placental growth factor (PlGF; P < 0.05) from baseline was observed in response to aflibercept by day 2.Conclusions: The aflibercept MTD in children of 2.5 mg/kg/dose every 14 days is lower than the adult recommended dose of 4.0 mg/kg. This dose achieves, but does not sustain, free aflibercept concentrations in excess of bound. Tumor pain and hemorrhage may be evidence of antitumor activity but were dose-limiting. Clin Cancer Res; 18(18); 5081–9. ©2012 AACR.

Supplemental Table 1. IMC-A12 trough serum concentrations during cycle 1 and cycle 2

PDF file, 39K, Plasma soluble VEGFR2 (A) and Placental Growth Factor (B) concentrations prior to therapy (baseline) and at the end of cycle 1 (steady state).

Purpose: To determine the MTD, dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), pharmacokinetics, and biologic effects of cixutumumab administered in combination with temsirolimus to children with refractory solid tumors.Experimental Design: Cixutumumab and temsirolimus were administered intravenously once every 7 days in 28-day cycles. Pharmacokinetic and biology studies, including assessment of mTOR downstream targets in peripheral blood mononuclear cells, were performed during the first cycle.Results: Thirty-nine patients, median age 11.8 years (range, 1–21.5), with recurrent solid or central nervous system tumors were enrolled, of whom 33 were fully assessable for toxicity. There were four dose levels, which included two dose reductions and a subsequent intermediated dose escalation: (i) IMC-A12 6 mg/kg, temsirolimus 15 mg/m2; (ii) IMC-A12 6 mg/kg, temsirolimus 10 mg/m2; (iii) IMC-A12 4 mg/kg, temsirolimus 8 mg/m2; and (iv) IMC-A12 6 mg/kg, temsirolimus 8 mg/m2. Mucositis was the predominant DLT. Other DLTs included hypercholesterolemia, fatigue, thrombocytopenia, and increased alanine aminotransferase. Target inhibition (decreased S6K1 and PAkt) in peripheral blood mononuclear cells was noted at all dose levels. Marked interpatient variability in temsirolimus pharmacokinetic parameters was noted. At 8 mg/m2, the median temsirolimus AUC was 2,946 ng • h/mL (range, 937–5,536) with a median sirolimus AUC of 767 ng • h/mL (range, 245–3,675).Conclusions: The recommended pediatric phase II doses for the combination of cixutumumab and temsirolimus are 6 mg/kg and 8 mg/m2, respectively. Clin Cancer Res; 21(7); 1558–65. ©2014 AACR.

Related Article from Killing the Killer: Natural Killer Cells to Treat Ewing's Sarcoma

Background Cyclin D has been shown to play an essential role in acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) initiation and progression, providing rationale for targeting the CDK4/6-cyclin D complex that regulates cell cycle progression. Procedure The Children’s Oncology Group AINV18P1 phase 1 trial evaluated the CDK4/6 inhibitor, palbociclib, in combination with standard four-drug reinduction chemotherapy in children and young adults with relapsed/refractory B- and T-cell lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) and lymphoma. Palbociclib (50 mg/m /dose) was administered orally once daily for 21 consecutive days, first as a single agent (days 1-3) and subsequently combined with reinduction chemotherapy. This two-part study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) followed by an expansion pharmacokinetic (PK) cohort. Results Twelve heavily pretreated patients enrolled, all of whom were evaluable for toxicity. One dose-limiting hematologic toxicity (DLT) occurred at the starting dose of 50 mg/m /dose orally for 21 days. No additional DLTs were observed in the dose determination or PK expansion cohorts and overall rates of grade 3/4 non-hematologic toxicities were comparable to those observed with the chemotherapy platform alone. Five complete responses were observed, two among four patients with T-ALL and three among seven patients with B-ALL. Pharmacokinetic studies showed similar profiles with both liquid and capsule formulations of palbociclib. Conclusions Palbociclib in combination with reinduction chemotherapy was well tolerated with a RP2D of 50 mg/m /day for 21 days. Complete responses were observed among heavily pretreated patients.

Capillary malformation-arteriovenous malformation (CM-AVM) syndrome is an autosomal dominant condition characterized by multifocal, noncontiguous pink patches on the skin that often have a surrounding pale halo. In some cases, an association with a fast flow, arteriovenous malformation (AVM) can be identified. Here, we describe a case report of a 16-year-old woman with CM-AVM syndrome and significant cardiac compromise successfully treated with trametinib, a mitogen-activated protein kinase (MEK) inhibitor.

Background Since pediatric cancer drug development is a global enterprise, we sought to provide an overview of the landscape of intercontinental clinical trials in pediatric oncology opened over the last decade. Methods ClinicalTrials.gov was systematically searched to identify all clinical therapeutic trials which opened between 2010 and 2020 and recruited pediatric patients (, Intercontinental collaboration is alarmingly rare in childhood cancer trials, despite the rare disease setting and despite pediatric clinical research being inevitably a global enterprise. Barriers to collaboration should be identified and met with specific solutions to accelerate urgently needed drug development for children and adolescents with cancer.

Rapid evaluation and subsequent regulatory approval of new drugs are critical to improving survival and reducing long-term side-effects for children and adolescents with cancer. The international multi-stakeholder organisation ACCELERATE was created to advance the timely investigation of new anti-cancer drugs. ACCELERATE has enhanced communication and understanding between academia, industry, patient advocates and regulators. It has promoted a mechanism-of-action driven drug development approach and developed Paediatric Strategy Forums. These initiatives have facilitated prioritisation of medicinal products and a focused and sequential strategy for drug development where there are multiple potential agents. ACCELERATE has championed the early assessment of promising drugs in adolescents through their inclusion in adult early phase trials. ACCELERATE has strongly supported alignment between the European Medicines Agency and the US Food and Drug Administration and identification of unmet medical needs through multi-stakeholder collaboration. Early engagement between all stakeholders in the development of new drugs is critical. Innovative clinical trial designs are required, necessitating early discussion with sponsors and regulators. Amplifying the patient advocate voice through inclusion across the drug development continuum will lead to better, patient-centric trials. By these means, children and adolescents with cancer can maximally and rapidly benefit from innovative products to improve outcomes and reduce burdensome sequelae.(c) 2022 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

The seventh multi-stakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forum focused on chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cells for children and adolescents with cancer. The development of CAR T-cells for patients with haematological malignancies, especially B-cell precursor acute lymphoblastic leukaemia (BCP-ALL), has been spectacular. However, currently, there are scientific, clinical and logistical challenges for use of CAR T-cells in BCP-ALL and other paediatric malignancies, particularly in acute myeloid leukaemia (AML), lymphomas and solid tumours. The aims of the Forum were to summarise the current landscape of CAR T-cell therapy development in paediatrics, too identify current challenges and future directions, with consideration of other immune effector modalities and ascertain the best strategies to accelerate their development and availability to children. Although the effect is of limited duration in about half of the patients, anti-CD19 CAR T cells produce high response rates in relapsed/refractory BCP-ALL and this has highlighted previously unknown mechanisms of relapse. CAR T-cell treatment as first-or second-line therapy could also potentially benefit patients whose disease has high-risk features associated with relapse and failure of conventional therapies. Identifying patients with very early and early relapse in whom CAR T-cell therapy may replace haematopoietic stem cell transplanta-tion and be definitive therapy versus those in whom it provides a more effective bridge to hae-matopoietic stem cell transplantation is a very high priority. Development of approaches to improve persistence, either by improving T cell fitness or using more humanised/fully huma-nised products and co-targeting of multiple antigens to prevent antigen escape, could potentially further optimise therapy. Many differences exist between paediatric B-cell non-Hodgkin lymphomas (B-NHL) and BCP-ALL. In view of the very small patient numbers with relapsed lymphoma, careful prior-itisation is needed to evaluate CAR T-cells in children with Burkitt lymphoma, primary medi-astinal B cell lymphoma and other NHL subtypes. Combination trials of alternative targets to CD19 (CD20 or CD22) should also be explored as a priority to improve efficacy in this pop-ulation. Development of CD30 CAR T-cell immunotherapy strategies in patients with relapsed/refractory Hodgkin lymphoma will likely be most efficiently accomplished by joint paediatric and adult trials.CAR T-cell approaches are early in development for AML and T-ALL, given the unique challenges of successful immunotherapy actualisation in these diseases. At this time, CD33 and CD123 appear to be the most universal targets in AML and CD7 in T-ALL. The results of ongoing or planned first-in-human studies are required to facilitate further understanding. There are promising early results in solid tumours, particularly with GD2 targeting cell ther-apies in neuroblastoma and central nervous system gliomas that represent significant unmet clinical needs. Further understanding of biology is critical to success.The comparative benefits of autologous versus allogeneic CAR T-cells, T-cells engineered with T cell receptors T-cells engineered with T cell receptor fusion constructs, CAR Natural Killer (NK)-cell products, bispecific T-cell engager antibodies and antibody-drug conjugates require evaluation in paediatric malignancies.Early and proactive academia and multi-company engagement are mandatory to advance cellular immunotherapies in paediatric oncology. Regulatory advice should be sought very early in the design and preparation of clinical trials of innovative medicines, for which regu-latory approval may ultimately be sought. Aligning strategic, scientific, regulatory, health technology and funding requirements from the inception of a clinical trial is especially impor-tant as these are very expensive therapies.The model for drug development for cell therapy in paediatric oncology could also involve a 'later stage handoff' to industry after early development in academic hands. Finally, and very importantly, strategies must evolve to ensure appropriate ease of access for children who need and could potentially benefit from these therapies. 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).

10022 Background: nab-Sirolimus (formerly know ABI-009 and nab-rapamycin) is a novel human albumin-bound preparation of sirolimus, a potent mTOR inhibitor. We report results of a Phase I study of ABI-009 alone and in combination with irinotecan and temozolomide in children with relapsed/refractory solid or CNS tumors. Methods: Patients (age 1-21 years) with relapsed/refractory solid or CNS tumors were eligible. Using a rolling 6 design, ABI-009 was administered intravenously as a single agent on Days 1 and 8 of cycle 1 (cycle = 21d), then subsequent cycles ABI-009 was administered in combination with temozolomide (125 mg/m2/dose, maximum 250 mg/dose) orally once daily x 5 on Days 1-5 and irinotecan 90 mg/m2/dose orally once daily x 5 on Days 1-5. Three dose levels (DL) of ABI-009 were investigated (DL1: 35mg/m2/dose, DL-1: 20mg/m2/dose, and DL-2: 15mg/m2/dose). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) or Recommended Phase 2 Dose (RP2D) was established based on dose limiting toxicity (DLT) observed during Cycle 1 and 2. At the RP2D, additional patients were enrolled for pharmacokinetics (PK). Results: 33 patients were enrolled (32 eligible and 1 ineligible); 11 did not experience DLT but were not evaluable for toxicity due to progressive disease or physician decision to discontinue protocol therapy prior to completion of cycle 2; 17 [median age 13 (2-20) years] were evaluable for determination of MTD during dose escalation, 6 were enrolled on the PK cohort, of which 3 were evaluable to toxicity. At DL1, 2/5 patients experienced DLT (thrombocytopenia during cycle 1 (n = 1) and cycle 2 (n = 1)); at DL-1, 2/6 patients experienced DLT (thrombocytopenia in cycle 1); at DL-2, 1/6 patients experienced DLT (thrombocytopenia in cycle 1). PK expansion enrolled at DL-2 and 1/3 participants evaluable for toxicity had a DLT (mucositis). Overall, at DL-2, 2/9 patients (22%) had DLT. One patient with Ewing Sarcoma had a partial response and remained on study for 35 cycles; Patients (one each) with Ewing Sarcoma, Wilms Tumor, and Pineoblastoma had stable disease, ranging from 3-6 cycles. Conclusions: Thrombocytopenia was dose limiting for ABI-009 alone and in combination with temozolomide and irinotecan. The MTD for ABI-009 is 15mg/m2/dose days 1 and 8 in combination with 5 daily doses of temozolomide 125 mg/m2/dose and oral irinotecan 90 mg/m2/dose. One patient had a partial response, 3 patients had prolonged stable disease. Pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics are pending and will inform future trials. Clinical trial information: NCT02975882.

The first (2017) and sixth (2021) multistakeholder Paediatric Strategy Forums focused on anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) inhibition in paediatric malignancies. ALK is an important oncogene and target in several paediatric tumours (anaplastic large cell lymphoma [ALCL], inflammatory myofibroblastic tumour [IMT], neuroblastoma and hemispheric gliomas in infants and young children) with unmet therapeutic needs. ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors have been demonstrated to be active both in ALK fusion-kinase positive ALCL and IMT. ALK alterations differ, with fusions occurring in ALCL, IMT and gliomas, and activating mutations and amplification in neuroblastoma. While there are many ALK inhibitors in development, the number of children diagnosed with ALK driven malignancies is very small. The objectives of this ALK Forum were to (i) Describe current knowledge of ALK biology in childhood cancers; (ii) Provide an overview of the development of ALK inhibitors for children; (iii) Identify the unmet needs taking into account planned or current ongoing trials; (iv) Conclude how second/third-generation inhibitors could be evaluated and prioritised; (v) Identify lessons learnt from the experience with ALK inhibitors to accelerate the paediatric development of other anti-cancer targeted agents in the new regulatory environments. There has been progress over the last four years, with more trials of ALK inhibitors opened in paediatrics and more regulatory submissions. In January 2021, the US Food and Drug Administration approved crizotinib for the treatment of paediatric and young adult patients with relapsed or refractory ALCL and there are paediatric investigation plans (PIPs) for brigatinib and for crizotinib in ALCL and IMT. In ALCL, the current goal is to investigate the inclusion of ALK inhibitors in front-line therapy with the aim of decreasing toxicity with higher/similar efficacy compared to present first-line therapies. For IMT, the focus is to develop a joint prospective trial with one product in children, adolescents and adults, taking advantage of the common biology across the age spectrum. As approximately 50% of IMTs are ALK-positive, molecular analysis is required to identify patients to be treated with an ALK inhibitor. For neuroblastoma, crizotinib has not shown robust anti-tumour activity. A focused and sequential development of ALK inhibitors with very good central nervous system (CNS) penetration in CNS tumours with ALK fusions should be undertaken. The Forum reinforced the strong need for global academic collaboration, very early involvement of regulators with studies seeking possible registration and early academia-multicompany engagement. Innovations in study design and conduct and the use of 'real-world data' supporting development in these rare sub-groups of patients for whom randomised clinical trials are not feasible are important initiatives. A focused and sequenced development strategy, where one product is evaluated first with other products being assessed sequentially, is applicable for ALK inhibitors and other medicinal products in children. (C) 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.

Pre-clinical studies suggest that anti-angiogenic agents may be toxic to the developing growth plate. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the incidence of growth plate abnormalities in children with refractory cancer undergoing anti-angiogenic therapy.Targeted radiographic studies from 53 subjects enrolled on six separate Children's Oncology Group Phase 1 and Pilot Consortium clinical trials evaluating new anti-cancer agents interfering with angiogenesis were reviewed. Subjects received tyrosine kinase inhibitors with anti-angiogenic effects (n = 35), monoclonal antibodies targeting vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) (n = 13), or angiopoietin (n = 5). Radiographs of their distal femur/proximal tibia were obtained at baseline. Follow-up radiographs were obtained after odd-numbered treatment cycles in patients with open growth plates who did not experience disease progression prior to cycle 3.Baseline and follow-up growth plate radiographs were acquired in 48/53 (90%) of patients. Five patients (9.4%), all of whom received a specific VEGF/VEGFR blocking agent (sunitinib [n = 1] or pazopanib [n = 4]), had growth plate abnormalities. Four patients had growth plate widening that was apparent on at least two successive radiographs, but was not confirmed by MRI. The fifth patient had progressive growth plate widening and evidence of physeal cartilage hypertrophy on MRI. Subsequent off treatment radiographs showed that the growth plate changes were reversible.Growth plate abnormalities occur in a small, but relevant number of patients undergoing anti-angiogenic therapy. These results support the need for growth plate monitoring in children with open growth plates who are receiving anti-angiogenic therapy, and for improved methods to assess toxicity of anti-angiogenic agents to the developing skeleton.

The combined inhibition of insulin-growth factor type 1 receptor (IGF-1R) and the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) has shown activity in preclinical models of pediatric sarcoma and in adult sarcoma patients. We evaluated the activity of the anti-IGF-1R antibody cixutumumab with the mTOR inhibitor temsirolimus in patients with relapsed or refractory Ewing sarcoma, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, and other soft tissue sarcoma, using the recommended dosages from a pediatric phase I trial.Cixutumumab 6 mg/kg and temsirolimus 8 mg/m(2) were administered intravenously once weekly in 4-week cycles to patients30 years. Temsirolimus was escalated to 10 mg/m(2) for subsequent cycles in patients who did not experience unacceptable first-cycle toxicity. A two-stage design was used to identify a response rate10 or35% for each tumor-specific cohort. Tumor tissue was analyzed by immunohistochemistry for potential biomarkers of response.Forty-three evaluable patients received a median of 2 cycles (range 1-7). No objective responses were observed, and 16% of patients were progression-free at 12 weeks. Dose-limiting toxicity was observed in 15 (16%) of 92 cycles. The most common toxicities were mucositis, electrolyte disturbances, and myelosuppression. The majority of patients receiving a second cycle were not eligible for temsirolimus escalation due to first-cycle toxicity. The lack of objective responses precluded correlation with tissue biomarkers.Despite encouraging preclinical data, the combination of cixutumumab and temsirolimus did not result in objective responses in this phase II trial of pediatric and young adults with recurrent or refractory sarcoma.

We report results of a phase I trial designed to estimate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), describe dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), and characterize the pharmacokinetic profile of MK-2206, an AKT inhibitor, in children with refractory or recurrent malignancies.MK-2206 was administered either every other day (Schedule 1), or once a week (Schedule 2) in a 28-day cycle. Dose escalations in increments of ∼30% were independently made in each part using the rolling-six design. Serial pharmacokinetic (PK) studies were obtained. Biological studies include analysis of PI3K/PTEN/AKT-cell signaling pathway in pre and post-therapy in PBMC and in tumors at diagnosis or recurrence.Fifty patients (26 males, median age 12.6 years [range, 3.1-21.9]) with malignant glioma (16), ependymoma (4), hepatocellular carcinoma (3), gliomatosis cereberi (2), or other tumors (22) were enrolled; 40 were fully evaluable for toxicity (Schedule 1, n = 23; Schedule 2, n = 17). Schedule 1 DLTs included: grade 3 dehydration in 1/6 patients at 28 mg/m(2) ; grade 4 hyperglycemia and neutropenia in 1/6 patients at 45 mg/m(2) ; and grade 3 rash in 3/6 patients at dose level 4 (58 mg/m(2) ). Schedule 2 DLTs included: grade 3 alkaline phosphatase in 1/6 patients at 90 mg/m(2) ; grade 3 rash in 1/6 patients at 120 mg/m(2) ; and grade 3 rash in 2/6 patients at 155 mg/m(2) .The recommended pediatric phase 2 dose of MK-2206 is 45 mg/m(2) /dose every other day or 120 mg/m(2) /dose weekly. PK appeared linear over the dose range studied.

We conducted a pediatric phase I study to estimate the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), and pharmacokinetic properties of vorinostat, a histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitor, when given in combination with temozolomide in children with refractory or recurrent CNS malignancies.Vorinostat, followed by temozolomide approximately 1 hour later, was orally administered, once daily, for 5 consecutive days every 28 days at three dose levels using the rolling six design. Studies of histone accumulation in peripheral blood mononuclear cells were performed on Day 1 at 0, 6, and 24 hours after vorinostat dosing. Vorinostat pharmacokinetics (PK) and serum MGMT promoter status were also assessed.Nineteen eligible patients were enrolled and 18 patients were evaluable for toxicity. There were no DLTs observed at dose level 1 or 2. DLTs occurred in four patients at dose level 3: thrombocytopenia (4), neutropenia (3), and leucopenia (1). Non-dose limiting grade 3 or 4 toxicities related to protocol therapy were also hematologic and included neutropenia, lymphopenia, thrombocytopenia, anemia, and leucopenia. Three patients exhibited stable disease and one patient had a partial response. There was no clear relationship between vorinostat dosage and drug exposure over the dose range studied. Accumulation of acetylated H3 histone in PBMC was observed after administration of vorinostat.Five-day cycles of vorinostat in combination with temozolomide are well tolerated in children with recurrent CNS malignancies with myelosuppression as the DLT. The recommended phase II combination doses are vorinostat, 300 mg/m(2) /day and temozolomide, 150 mg/m(2) /day.

Allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant (HCT) with best available donor for children with Philadelphia positive (Ph+) acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) has previously been considered standard practice. Since the introduction of imatinib into the treatment of this disease, the role of allogeneic HCT is more uncertain.We investigated the impact of remission status, graft source, and imatinib use on transplant outcomes for 37 children with Ph+ ALL who received an allogeneic HCT at the University of Minnesota between 1990 and 2006. The median age at HCT was 7.47 (range; 1.4-16.4) years. Thirteen patients received imatinib therapy pre- and/or post-HCT (imatinib group) and 24 patients, received either no imatinib (n = 23) or only post-HCT relapse (n = 1) (non-imatinib group).There was no difference in disease-free survival (DFS) or relapse between the imatinib and non-imatinib groups at 3 years (62%/15% vs. 53%/26%; P = 0.99; 0.81, respectively). There was no significant difference in transplant outcomes between matched related donor or unrelated donor (umbilical cord blood or matched unrelated marrow) recipients whereas patients receiving allogeneic HCT in first remission (CR1) had superior DFS and less relapse compared to patients transplanted inor=CR2 (71%/16% vs. 29%/36%; P = 0.01; P = 0.05).Based on this retrospective analysis at a single institution, the use of imatinib either pre- and/or post-transplant does not appear to significantly impact outcomes for children with Ph+ ALL and allogeneic HCT with the best available donor should be encouraged in CR1.