Search

Faced with an unusual complication, these nurses used their assessment skills to clearly identify what not to do. Instead, they found ways to improve their patient's condition and help him through the physician's intervention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The purpose of this study is to establish the recommended phase 2 dose for regorafenib in combination with sildenafil for patients with advanced solid tumors. Secondary outcomes included identification of antitumor effects of regorafenib and sildenafil, toxicity of the combination, determination of PDE5 expression in tumor samples, and the impact of sildenafil on the pharmacokinetics of regorafenib. This study was a phase 1, open-label single-arm dose-escalation trial using a 3 + 3 design. Additional patients were enrolled at the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) until a total of 12 patients were treated at the MTD. A total of 29 patients were treated in this study. The median duration of treatment was 8 weeks. The recommended phase 2 doses determined in this study are regorafenib 160 mg daily with sildenafil 100 mg daily. The most common toxicities included palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (20 patients, 69%) and hypophosphatemia (18 patients, 62%). Two patients (7%) experienced grade 4 lipase increase. Objective responses were not observed; however, 14 patients (48%) had a period of stable disease during the study. Stable disease for up to 12 months was observed in patients with ovarian cancer as well as up to 20 months for a patient with cervical cancer. The combination of regorafenib and sildenafil at the recommended phase 2 dose is safe and generally well tolerated. Disease control in patients with gynecologic malignancies was especially encouraging. Further evaluation of the combination of regorafenib and sildenafil in gynecologic malignancies is warranted. Clinical Trial Registration Number: NCT02466802., (Copyright © 2024 The Author(s). Published by Wolters Kluwer Health, Inc.)

Purpose: Belinostat is an intravenous histone deacetylase inhibitor with approval for T-cell lymphomas. Adavosertib is a first in class oral Wee1 inhibitor. Preclinical studies of the combination demonstrated synergy in various human acute myeloid leukemia (AML) lines as well as AML xenograft mouse models., Experimental Design: This was a phase 1 dose-escalation study of belinostat and adavosertib in patients with relapsed/refractory AML and myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). Patients received both drugs on days 1-5 and 8-12 of a 21-day cycle. Safety and toxicity were monitored throughout the study. Plasma levels of both drugs were measured for pharmacokinetic analysis. Response was determined by standard criteria including bone marrow biopsy., Results: Twenty patients were enrolled and treated at 4 dose levels. A grade 4 cytokine release syndrome at dose level 4 (adavosertib 225 mg/day; belinostat 1000 mg/m 2 ) qualified as a dose-limiting toxicity event. The most common non-hematologic treatment-related adverse events were nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, dysgeusia, and fatigue. No responses were seen. The study was terminated prior to maximum tolerated dose/recommended phase 2 dose determination., Conclusions: The combination of belinostat and adavosertib at the tested dose levels was feasible but without efficacy signals in the relapsed/refractory MDS/AML population., (© 2023. This is a U.S. Government work and not under copyright protection in the US; foreign copyright protection may apply.)

We report the results of a phase 1 dose-escalation study of belinostat and bortezomib in adult patients with acute leukemia or MDS or CML with blast crisis. Thirty-eight patients received IV belinostat days 1-5 and 8-12 with IV bortezomib days 1, 4, 8, and 11 every 21 days. QTc prolongation was the only identified DLT. The RP2Ds were 1.3 mg/m 2 bortezomib and 1000 mg/m 2 belinostat. One patient with highly refractory MLL-ENL rearranged biphenotypic AML with multiple karyotypic aberrations had a complete pathologic and karyotypic response. One patient with post-MPN AML remained on study with stable disease (SD) for 32 cycles. Whole-exome sequencing revealed no aberrations in the first patient and a hyper-mutator genotype in the second. Eighteen patients had a best response of SD. We conclude that this treatment strategy is feasible but has limited activity in this population. Nevertheless, the factors that predict exceptional responses to this strategy warrant further investigation.

Background: Dimethyl fumarate (DMF), an oral agent approved for the treatment of relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS), has promising preclinical activity against glioblastoma (GBM). This phase I study sought to determine the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of DMF and evaluate its safety and toxicity when combined with standard concurrent radiotherapy (RT) and temozolomide (TMZ) followed by maintenance TMZ in patients with newly diagnosed GBM., Methods: Using a standard 3 + 3 dose-escalation design with 3 dose levels, patients received daily DMF with 60 Gy RT and concurrent TMZ 75 mg/m 2 daily, followed by maintenance DMF (continuously) and TMZ 150-200 mg/m 2 on days 1-5 of each 28-day cycle for up to 6 cycles. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined by evaluation of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) during the first 6 weeks of therapy., Results: Twelve patients were treated at the 3 dose levels, and no DLTs were observed. There were no unexpected toxicities. The most common grade 3/4 treatment related adverse events (AEs) were lymphopenia (58%), decreased CD4 count (17%), and thrombocytopenia (17%). Four patients completed all planned treatment; seven patients had progression on treatment. One patient chose to withdraw from the study during maintenance. The median progression-free survival (PFS) for all patients was 8.7 months with no difference in PFS between those with stable disease or a partial response; median overall survival was 13.8 months., Conclusions: DMF may be safely combined with RT and TMZ in patients with newly diagnosed GBM. The RP2D for DMF is 240 mg three times daily., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press, the Society for Neuro-Oncology and the European Association of Neuro-Oncology.)

Objectives: Preclinical data suggest histone deacetylase inhibitors improve the therapeutic index of sorafenib. A phase I study was initiated to establish the recommended phase 2 dose of sorafenib combined with vorinostat in patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma., Materials and Methods: Patients received vorinostat (200 to 400 mg by mouth once daily, 5 of 7 d) and sorafenib at standard or reduced doses (400 mg [cohort A] or 200 mg [cohort B] by mouth twice daily). Patients who received 14 days of vorinostat in cycle 1 were evaluable for dose-limiting toxicity (DLT)., Results: Sixteen patients were treated. Thirteen patients were evaluable for response. Three patients experienced DLTs, 2 in cohort A (grade [gr] 3 hypokalemia; gr 3 maculopapular rash) and 1 in cohort B (gr 3 hepatic failure; gr 3 hypophosphatemia; gr 4 thrombocytopenia). Eleven patients required dose reductions or omissions for non-DLTtoxicity. Ten patients (77%) had stable disease (SD). The median treatment duration was 4.7 months for response-evaluable patients. One patient with SD was on treatment for 29.9 months, and another patient, also with SD, was on treatment for 18.7 months. Another patient electively stopped therapy after 15 months and remains without evidence of progression 3 years later., Conclusions: Although some patients had durable disease control, the addition of vorinostat to sorafenib led to toxicities in most patients, requiring dose modifications that prevented determination of the recommended phase 2 dose. The combination is not recommended for further exploration with this vorinostat schedule in this patient population.

Background: The proteasome inhibitor bortezomib has demonstrated marked preclinical activity when combined with the histone deacetylase inhibitor vorinostat in leukemia, multiple myeloma, and mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) cells. The present study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the combination in patients with relapsed or refractory MCL and diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL)., Patients and Methods: The present multicenter, nonrandomized phase II trial used a Simon 2-stage design with 3 cohorts: cohort A, MCL with no previous bortezomib (including untreated MCL); cohort B, MCL with previous bortezomib; and cohort C, relapsed or refractory DLBCL with no previous bortezomib. Vorinostat (400 mg) was administered orally on days 1 to 5 and 8 to 12 before bortezomib (1.3 mg/m 2 ), which was administered intravenously on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of each 21-day cycle., Results: For the 65 treated patients (22 in cohort A, 4 in cohort B, and 39 in cohort C), the overall response rate was 31.8%, 0%, and 7.7%, respectively. The median progression-free survival was 7.6 months for cohort A and 1.8 months for cohort C. In cohort A, 7 patients had a partial response (PRs), 5 had stable disease (SD), 7 had progressive disease (PD), 1 was not assessed, and 2 were not evaluable. In cohort B, 2 had SD and 2 had PD. In cohort C, 3 had a PR, 8 had SD, 23 had PD, and 5 were not assessed. Baseline NF-κB activation, measured as nuclear RelA by immunohistochemistry, did not correlate with clinical response., Conclusion: The combination of bortezomib and vorinostat is safe and has modest activity in MCL and limited activity in DLBCL., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

A phase 1 study was conducted to determine the dose-limiting toxicities and maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) for bortezomib followed by romidepsin on days 1, 8, and 15 in patients with relapsed/refractory CLL/SLL or B- or T-cell lymphoma. Eighteen treated patients were evaluable for response. The MTD was 1.3 mg/m 2 bortezomib and 10 mg/m 2 romidepsin; median treatment duration was 3 cycles at this dose. The dose-limiting toxicities were grade 3 fatigue, vomiting, and chills. Two patients had partial responses, one lasting >2 years, 8 had stable disease, and 8 had progressive disease. The median duration of stable disease was 3.5 cycles. Correlative studies examining expression of NF-кB, XIAP, Bcl-xL, and Bim yielded variable results. The safety profile was consistent with that reported for single-agent bortezomib and romidepsin. This regimen has modest activity in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory CLL or B- or T-cell lymphoma. NCT00963274.

Purpose: To determine if combination treatment with pemetrexed and sorafenib is safe and tolerable in patients with advanced solid tumors., Results: Thirty-seven patients were enrolled and 36 patients were treated (24 in cohort A; 12 in cohort B). The cohort A dose schedule resulted in problematic cumulative toxicity, while the cohort B dose schedule was found to be more tolerable. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was pemetrexed 750 mg/m2 every 14 days with oral sorafenib 400 mg given twice daily on days 1-5. Because dosing delays and modifications were associated with the MTD, the recommended phase II dose was declared to be pemetrexed 500 mg/m2 every 14 days with oral sorafenib 400 mg given twice daily on days 1-5. Thirty-three patients were evaluated for antitumor activity. One complete response and 4 partial responses were observed (15% overall response rate). Stable disease was seen in 15 patients (45%). Four patients had a continued response at 6 months, including 2 of 5 patients with triple-negative breast cancer., Experimental Design: A phase I trial employing a standard 3 + 3 design was conducted in patients with advanced solid tumors. Cohort A involved a novel dose escalation schema exploring doses of pemetrexed every 14 days with continuous sorafenib. Cohort B involved a modified schedule of sorafenib dosing on days 1-5 of each 14-day pemetrexed cycle. Radiographic assessments were conducted every 8 weeks., Conclusions: Pemetrexed and intermittent sorafenib therapy is a safe and tolerable combination for patients, with promising activity seen in patients with breast cancer., Competing Interests: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Purpose: AZD6244 is a MEK1/2 inhibitor with significant preclinical activity in multiple myeloma cells. This phase II study used a two-stage Simon design to determine the AZD6244 response rate in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma., Experimental Design: AZD6244 (75 mg) was administered orally, twice a day, continuously for 28-day cycles. Response was evaluated after three cycles., Results: Thirty-six patients received therapy. The median age was 65 years (range: 43-81) and the median number of prior therapies was 5 (range: 2-11). The most common grade 3 and 4 toxicities included anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, diarrhea, and fatigue. Three deaths occurred possibly related to AZD6244 (2 due to sepsis, 1 due to acute kidney injury). After AZD6244 discontinuation, three additional deaths occurred due to disease progression. The response rate (CR + PR) was 5.6% with a mean duration of response of 4.95 months and median progression-free survival time of 3.52 months. One patient had a very good partial response (VGPR), 1 patient had a partial response, 17 patients had stable disease, 13 patients had progressive disease, and 4 patients could not be assessed for response. Pharmacodynamic studies revealed variable effects on bone marrow CD138(+) cell MEK1/2 and ERK1/2 phosphorylation. The best clinical response, a prolonged VGPR, occurred in a patient with an MMSET translocation., Conclusions: Single-agent AZD6244 was tolerable and had minimal activity in this heavily pretreated population., (©2015 American Association for Cancer Research.)

A phase 1 study with carfilzomib and vorinostat was conducted in 20 B-cell lymphoma patients. Vorinostat was given orally twice daily on days 1, 2, 3, 8, 9, 10, 15, 16, and 17 followed by carfilzomib (given as a 30-min infusion) on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16. A treatment cycle was 28 days. Dose escalation initially followed a standard 3 + 3 design, but adapted a more conservative accrual rule following dose de-escalation. The maximum tolerated dose was 20 mg/m2 carfilzomib and 100 mg vorinostat (twice daily). The dose-limiting toxicities were grade 3 pneumonitis, hyponatremia, and febrile neutropenia. One patient had a partial response and two patients had stable disease. Correlative studies showed a decrease in NF-κB activation and an increase in Bim levels in some patients, but these changes did not correlate with clinical response.

Purpose: This phase I study was conducted to determine the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for the combination of bortezomib and alvocidib in patients with B-cell malignancies (multiple myeloma, indolent lymphoma, Waldenstrom macroglobulinemia, and mantle cell lymphoma)., Experimental Design: Patients received bortezomib (intravenous push), followed by alvocidib (1-hour infusion), on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of a 21-day treatment cycle. Patients experiencing responses or stable disease continued on treatment at the investigator's discretion. A standard 3+3 dose-escalation design was used to identify the MTD based on DLTs, and pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies were conducted., Results: A total of 44 patients were enrolled, with 39 patients assessed for response. The MTD was established as 1.3 mg/m(2) for bortezomib and 40 mg/m(2) for alvocidib. The most common hematologic toxicities included leukopenia, lymphopenia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. The most common nonhematologic toxicities included diarrhea, fatigue, and sensory neuropathy. Three complete remissions (8%) and 10 partial remissions (26%) were observed for a total response rate of 33%. Pharmacokinetic findings with the current dosing regimen were consistent with the comparable literature and the hybrid dosing regimen. Pharmacodynamic study results did not correlate with clinical responses., Conclusions: The combination of bortezomib and alvocidib is tolerable, and an MTD has been established for this schedule. The regimen appears to be efficacious in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma or indolent non-Hodgkin lymphoma. As the nonhybrid regimen is less cumbersome than the previous hybrid dosing schedule regimen, the current schedule is recommended for successor studies., (©2014 American Association for Cancer Research.)

Purpose: This phase I study was conducted to identify the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) of alvocidib when combined with vorinostat in patients with relapsed, refractory, or poor prognosis acute leukemia, or refractory anemia with excess blasts-2. Secondary objectives included investigating the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic effects of the combination., Experimental Design: Patients received vorinostat (200 mg orally, three times a day, for 14 days) on a 21-day cycle, combined with 2 different alvocidib administration schedules: a 1-hour intravenous infusion, daily × 5; or a 30-minute loading infusion followed by a 4-hour maintenance infusion, weekly × 2. The alvocidib dose was escalated using a standard 3+3 design., Results: Twenty-eight patients were enrolled and treated. The alvocidib MTD was 20 mg/m(2) (30-minute loading infusion) followed by 20 mg/m(2) (4-hour maintenance infusion) on days one and eight, in combination with vorinostat. The most frequently encountered toxicities were cytopenias, fatigue, hyperglycemia, hypokalemia, hypophosphatemia, and QT prolongation. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) were cardiac arrhythmia-atrial fibrillation and QT prolongation. No objective responses were achieved although 13 of 26 evaluable patients exhibited stable disease. Alvocidib seemed to alter vorinostat pharmacokinetics, whereas alvocidib pharmacokinetics were unaffected by vorinostat. Ex vivo exposure of leukemia cells to plasma obtained from patients after alvocidib treatment blocked vorinostat-mediated p21(CIP1) induction and downregulated Mcl-1 and p-RNA Pol II for some specimens, although parallel in vivo bone marrow responses were infrequent., Conclusions: Alvocidib combined with vorinostat is well tolerated. Although disease stabilization occurred in some heavily pretreated patients, objective responses were not obtained with these schedules., (©2013 AACR.)

Purpose: A phase I study was conducted to determine the dose-limiting toxicities (DLT) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for the combination of bortezomib and alvocidib in patients with B-cell malignancies (multiple myeloma, indolent lymphoma, and mantle cell lymphoma)., Experimental Design: Patients received bortezomib by intravenous push on days 1, 4, 8, and 11. Patients also received alvocidib on days 1 and 8 by 30-minute bolus infusion followed by a 4-hour continuous infusion. Treatment was on a 21-day cycle, with indefinite continuation for patients experiencing responses or stable disease. Dose escalation employed a standard 3 + 3 design until the MTD was identified on the basis of DLTs. Pharmacokinetic studies and pharmacodynamic studies were conducted., Results: Sixteen patients were treated. The MTD was established as 1.3 mg/m(2) for bortezomib and 30 mg/m(2) for alvocidib (both the 30-minute bolus and 4-hour infusions). Common hematologic toxicities included leukopenia, lymphopenia, neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia. Common nonhematologic toxicities included fatigue and febrile neutropenia. DLTs included fatigue, febrile neutropenia, and elevated aspartate aminotransferase (AST) levels. Two complete responses (CR; 12%) and five partial responses (PR; 31%) were observed at the MTD (overall response rate = 44%). Pharmacokinetic results were typical for alvocidib and pharmacodynamic studies yielded variable results., Conclusions: The combination of bortezomib and alvocidib is tolerable and an MTD has been established for the tested schedule. The regimen appears active in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, justifying phase II studies to determine the activity of this regimen more definitively., (©2011 AACR.)

A Phase I trial has been conducted in patients with refractory/relapsed acute leukemia in which escalating doses of the protein kinase C (PKC) activator and down-regulator bryostatin 1 (NSC399555), administered as a 24-h continuous infusion on days 1 and 11, were given immediately before and after a split course of high-dose 1-beta-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine (HiDAC; 1.5 g/m(2) every 12 h x 4) administered on days 2 and 3, and 9 and 10. The bryostatin 1 maximally tolerated dose (MTD) was identified as 50 microg/m(2), with myalgias representing the major dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Other DLTs included prolonged neutropenia and thrombocytopenia, and hepatotoxicity. Of the 23 patients who completed their course of therapy and were fully evaluable for response, the large majority of whom had unfavorable prognostic characteristics, 4 complete remissions (CRs) were obtained. An additional 3 patients were treated at a 3 g/m(2) ara-C (1-beta-D-arabinofuranosylcytosine) dose level to determine whether this HiDAC dose could be administered in conjunction with bryostatin 1. All 3 of these patients experienced DLT, and this dose was considered above the MTD. However, one of the latter patients, who was heavily pretreated, also achieved a CR that persisted 5+ months without maintenance. Finally, 1 patient post-HiDAC and autologous bone marrow transplantation achieved a 5+ month leukemia-free survival although she did not meet the criteria for a CR because of persistent transfusion requirements. Correlative laboratory studies performed on blasts from 9 patients revealed that in vivo administration of bryostatin 1 resulted in variable effects on total blast PKC activity, including decreases in 4 samples, increases in 2, and no change in 3. Previous in vivo bryostatin 1 exposure also exerted disparate effects on the extent of apoptosis observed in blasts exposed to ara-C ex vivo, although increases were noted in a subset of patient samples. Interestingly, in vivo administration of bryostatin 1 by itself induced lethality in some patient specimens. No clear relationship between the in vivo effects of bryostatin 1 on blast PKC activity and the extent of ara-C-related apoptosis that occurred ex vivo was apparent. Together, these findings demonstrate that bryostatin 1 can be safely administered as a continuous infusion before and after a split course of HiDAC in patients with refractory leukemia, and identify the bryostatin 1 MTD as 50 microg/m(2) when given by this schedule. Furthermore, the achievement of several CRs in the setting of a Phase I trial in which many patients had particularly high-risk features (e.g., short initial remission, previous HiDAC or autologous bone marrow transplantation, and multiple previous salvage regimens) suggests that this regimen has activity in acute leukemia and warrants additional investigation.

Adoptive immunotherapy (AIT) of cancer with T lymphocytes may be limited by the need to activate tumor antigen-sensitized cells in vitro. In murine models, we have shown that AIT with tumor-sensitized T cells that have been pharmacologically activated with bryostatin 1 and ionomycin plus interleukin-2 can induce tumor regression. A Phase I clinical trial was carried out to assess the feasibility and toxicity associated with using tumor- or vaccine-draining lymph node cells, activated pharmacologically and expanded in culture with low-dose interleukin-2 and infused intravenously, followed by IL-2 infusion. Nine patients were entered into the trial, and six were treated as planned. Average expansion of cell numbers over 13 to 27 days in culture was 118-fold. No patient's cells reached the target cell number (2.5 x 10(10)). Infusion of these cells did not result in any unexpected toxicities. The toxicities observed were related to IL-2 infusion, and conformed to the expected range of side-effects. Based on these Phase I results, additional trials, with tumor antigen vaccine-sensitized DLN and technical modifications of the culture technique, are planned.

Purpose: To identify a recommended phase II dose for the second generation glycinamide ribonucleotide transformylase (GARFT) inhibitor, AG2034, administered by intravenous bolus every 3 weeks without folate supplementation and to describe AG2034 pharmacokinetics., Methods: Adults with advanced malignancies were enrolled in cohorts of three per dose level with expansion to six upon observation of dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as the dose at which two of up to six patients experienced DLT. Upon identification of an MTD and evidence of cumulative toxicity, a lower intermediate dose was explored as a candidate phase II dose. AG2034 plasma concentrations were measured using an ELISA assay., Results and Conclusions: The recommended phase II dose is 5.0 mg/m2. DLTs were anemia, thrombocytopenia, mucositis, diarrhea, hyperbilirubinemia, fatigue, and insomnia. Toxicities were modestly cumulative over three courses. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed a dose-AUC0-24 relationship and a progressive increase in AG2034 AUC0-24 over three courses. Both pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic factors may contribute to the modest cumulative toxicity observed with AG2034.

Purpose: Lometrexol [(6R)-5,10-dideaza-5,6,7,8-tetrahydrofolate] is the prototype folate antimetabolite that targets the de novo purine synthesis pathway. Early phase I trials were confounded by cumulative myelosuppression that prevented repetitive administration. Subsequent preclinical and clinical studies suggested that coadministration of folic acid might favorably modulate lometrexol toxicity without eliminating potential antitumor activity. We set out to determine if concurrent folic acid would allow administration of lometrexol on a weekly schedule, and, if so, to identify an appropriate dose combination for phase II trials. Pharmacokinetic and metabolism studies were undertaken in an attempt to improve our understanding of lometrexol pharmacodynamics., Methods: Patients with advanced cancer received daily oral folic acid beginning 7 days before lometrexol and continuing for 7 days beyond the last lometrexol dose. Lometrexol was administered by short i.v. infusion weekly for 8 weeks. Scheduled lometrexol doses were omitted for toxicity of more than grade 2 present on the day of treatment, and dose-limiting toxicity was prospectively defined in terms of frequency of dose omission as well as the occurrence of severe toxic events. Plasma and whole blood total lometrexol contents (lometrexol plus lometrexol polyglutamates) were measured in samples taken just prior to each lometrexol dose., Results: A total of 18 patients were treated at five lometrexol dose levels. The maximum tolerated dose was identified by frequent dose omission due to thrombocytopenia and mucositis. The recommended phase II dose combination is lometrexol 10.4 mg/m(2) per week i.v. with folic acid 3 mg/m(2) per day orally. One patient with melanoma experienced a partial response, and three patients, two with melanoma and one with renal cell carcinoma, experienced stable disease. Lometrexol was not detectable in any predose plasma sample tested. The total red blood cell content of lometrexol increased over several weeks and then appeared to plateau., Conclusions: Weekly administration of lometrexol is feasible and well-tolerated when coadministered with daily oral folic acid. The nature of the interaction between natural folates and lometrexol that renders this schedule feasible remains unclear. A definition of dose-limiting toxicity that incorporated attention to dose omissions allowed efficient identification of a recommended phase II dose that reflects the maximum feasible dose intensity for a weekly schedule. Lometrexol is a promising, anticancer agent.

Ormaplatin (NSC 363812, tetraplatin) is a stable platinum (IV) analog which has exhibited activity against cisplatin-resistant cell lines. A phase I trial of ormaplatin administered as a 1-h infusion every 4 weeks was performed. Forty-one patients received 101 cycles of drug over the dose range 4-128 mg/m2. The dose-limiting toxicity was reversible thrombocytopenia and granulocytopenia. Minimal myelosuppression was observed at dose levels < or = 78 mg/m2, while grade 3 or 4 myelosuppression (thrombocytopenia and/or granulocytopenia) was seen in 4/8 patients at 98 mg/m2 and 4/5 patients at 123 mg/m2. Nausea and vomiting was observed at all dose levels but was controlled with antiemetic premedication. Neurotoxicity was observed in 5/41 patients and the incidence appeared related to cumulative dose rather than to dose level or drug clearance. Platinum was measured by furnace atomic absorption spectrophotometry. Ormaplatin-derived plasma ultrafilterable platinum (UF-Pt) exhibited linear pharmacokinetics over the dose range studied. The mean total body clearance of UF-Pt was 135 ml/min/m2 and the mean elimination half-life (t1/2beta) was 13.6 h. Ormaplatin exhibited a high degree of protein binding, with more than 70% of platinum protein bound by the end of the infusion. Urinary excretion of platinum accounted for 37% of the total dose of ormaplatin in 24 hours. A phase II dose of 98 mg/m2 is recommended for testing in a patient population with cisplatin-refractory disease.

A Phase Ib trial of bryostatin 1, a macrocyclic lactone and protein kinase C (PKC) activator, was conducted in patients with refractory nonhematological malignancies with the primary goal of determining whether down-regulation of peripheral blood mononuclear cell (PBMNC) PKC activity could be achieved in vivo in humans. Patients (four patients/cohort) received bryostatin 1 (25 microg/m2) as a 1-h infusion weekly three times every 4 weeks, but to study the schedule dependence of pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics, the first dose was administered according to one of three schedules: (a) a 1-h infusion; (b) a 24-h infusion; or (c) a split course (12.5 microg/m2 as a 30-min infusion) on days 1 and 4. Conventional toxicities (grades I-III) included myalgias, fever, anemia, fatigue, phlebitis, and headache; in addition, two patients in cohort 3 experienced transient elevations in liver function tests, although these patients had preexisting liver metastases. No objective clinical responses were encountered. Effects on PBMNC PKC activity were heterogeneous. Several patients in cohorts 1 and 2 experienced significant declines in activity (approximately 50%) that were sustained in some cases for periods of > or = 72 h. Comparison of 72-h with baseline values for all three patient cohorts combined revealed a trend toward PKC down-regulation (P = 0.06; signed rank test). For each schedule, plasma bryostatin 1 levels were below the level of detection of a platelet aggregation-based bioassay (3-4 nm). Bryostatin 1 administration failed to produce consistent alterations in lymphocyte immunophenotypic profiles, interleukin 2-induced proliferation, or cytotoxicity, although two of three samples from patients in cohort 3 did show significant posttreatment increases in proliferation. Moreover, in some patients, bryostatin 1 treatment increased lymphokine-activated killer cell activity. These findings indicate that bryostatin 1 doses of 25 microg/m2 can induce in vivo PBMNC PKC down-regulation in at least a subset of patients and raise the possibility that higher bryostatin 1 doses may be more effective in achieving this effect.

Purpose: A phase I dose-escalation trial of intravenous (IV) L-buthionine-SR-sulfoximine (BSO) with melphalan (L-PAM) was performed to determine the toxicity and biologic activity of BSO, administered as a short infusion every 12 hours, and the combination of BSO plus L-PAM., Patients and Methods: Twenty-eight patients with refractory malignancies received 30-minute infusions of BSO every 12 hours for 6 to 10 doses in week 1 followed in week 2 by either IV L-PAM (15 mg/m2) alone or BSO as in week 1 with L-PAM. Patients received the combination in week 5 (course no. 2) if they received L-PAM alone during week 2 and vice versa. BSO doses ranged from 1.5 g/m2 to 13.104 g/m2., Results: The only toxicity observed with BSO infusions was occasional nausea/vomiting. Evaluation of 23 paired courses (L-PAM plus BSO v L-PAM) showed significantly (P < .001) greater leukopenia and thrombocytopenia with L-PAM plus BSO. No other significant toxicity was noted. Measurement of intracellular glutathione (GSH) levels in peripheral mononuclear cells (PBLs) of all patients receiving BSO showed a consistent, non-dose-dependent, linear decrease in GSH with repeated BSO doses. Maximal GSH depletion (40% of baseline values, absolute values 200 to 250 ng/10(6) PBLs) was noted after the sixth BSO dose; extended BSO dosing schedules beyond six total BSO doses did not further deplete GSH. Evaluation of gamma-glutamylcysteine synthetase (GCS) activity showed marked inhibition near the end of each infusion with near complete recovery of GCS activity before the next BSO dose. The pattern of GCS inhibition mirrored the plasma BSO concentrations with peak values (level 6, 4 to 8 mmol/L L,R+L,S BSO) observed at the end of the infusion with a rapid decrease in plasma concentrations with an estimated half-life (t1/2) of less than 2 hours. Differential elimination of the R+S stereoisomers was observed. Analysis of L-PAM pharmacokinetics showed marked interpatient variability and a significant decrease in total-body clearance (P = .01) and volume of distribution (P = .03) in courses with L-PAM plus BSO as compared with L-PAM alone., Conclusion: This study shows that BSO alone and in combination with L-PAM can be safely given to patients, but that a schedule of short infusions every 12 hours does not result in GSH depletion less than 30% of baseline values.

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) and gamma-interferon (gamma-IFN) are cytokines with synergistic biologic and antiproliferative effects in vitro and in mouse models. The biologic effects of the combination of TNF and gamma-IFN, however, have not been studied well in humans. A Phase I trial was conducted of TNF and gamma-IFN therapy in 24 patients with advanced malignancies to determine the tolerability of the combination and the biologic effects of TNF and gamma-IFN in vivo. Both TNF and gamma-IFN were administered as 30-minute intravenous infusions three times per week. Doses of TNF ranged from 25 to 100 micrograms/m2; all patients received 100 micrograms/m2 of gamma-IFN. Dose-limiting toxicity consisted primarily of orthostatic hypotension and constitutional symptoms. The maximum tolerated dose level (MTDL) of 50 micrograms/m2 of TNF and 100 micrograms/m2 of IFN-gamma was less than the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) observed in previous Phase I trials of gamma-IFN and TNF alone. Biologic responses were studied in seven patients treated at the MTDL. Serum interleukin-2 receptor levels and neopterin secretion were enhanced significantly 24 hours after therapy (P = 0.002); enhancement of monocyte Fc receptor levels had borderline statistical significance (P = 0.07). With the exception of the mean fluorescent intensity on monocytes positive for histocompatibility antigen HLA-DR (P = 0.03), HLA Class I and II cell surface protein expression was not increased. The combination significantly enhanced indoleamine dioxygenase activity and serum beta 2-microglobulin expression (P less than 0.04) but not 2',5'-oligoadenylate synthetase activity, bactericidal function, or chemiluminescence. These results were compared retrospectively with those observed in previous Phase I trials of gamma-IFN and TNF alone. The combination of TNF and gamma-IFN significantly increased urinary kynurenine levels more than either TNF alone or gamma-IFN alone. Given the limitations inherent in any retrospective analysis, however, the enhancement in the other biologic parameters measured at the MTDL during this trial did not differ significantly from the changes observed at the MTD of either TNF or gamma-IFN alone. It was concluded that the combination of TNF and gamma-IFN, when administered at the MTDL of the combination, does not offer any enhancement in biologic responses over either agent alone.

A phase I trial of 5-fluorouracil (FUra) and leucovorin (LV) given with and without dipyridamole (DP) by concurrent 120-h continuous infusion was performed in 27 patients with advanced solid malignancies, 8 of whom had previously received FUra. The LV and DP doses were fixed at 500 mg/m2 daily and 7.7 mg/kg daily, respectively, whereas the FUra dose was escalated. Level 3 (450 mg/m2 FUra daily) represented the maximum tolerated dose for both FUra/LV+DP and FUra/LV. Dose-limiting stomatitis (greater than or equal to grade 3 or grade 2 occurring during the infusion) was encountered in 75% of the first courses given at level 4 (600 mg/m2 daily). Stomatitis was observed in 44/78 (56%) courses. Diarrhea was infrequent and mild. DP infusions were complicated by mild to moderate headache, which was controlled with narcotic analgesics, and mild to moderate nausea/vomiting. FUra-related toxicity was not enhanced by DP administration. Limited pharmacokinetic sampling at levels 3 and 4 revealed mean steady-state FUra concentrations of around 1.0 microM with infusions of FUra/LV+DP. Among three paired courses given with and without DP, no statistically significant difference was found in the total body clearance of FUra (P = 0.44). One partial response was seen in a patient with metastatic gastric carcinoma. For phase II trials, we recommend that concurrent 120-h continuous infusions of FUra (450 mg/m2 daily) and LV (500 mg/m2 daily) be given with and without DP (7.7 mg/kg daily) every 21 days.

Tumor necrosis factor (TNF) is a cytokine with pleiotropic biological and antitumor effects in vitro and in mouse models. The immunological effects of the molecule as a single agent, however, have not been well studied clinically. We conducted a Phase I trial of TNF in 53 patients with advanced malignancies in order to determine the biological and clinical effects of TNF when administered as a 30-min i.v. infusion three times/week. Dose levels of TNF ranged from 5 to 275 micrograms/m2; doses of TNF were escalated between patient groups. The most common clinical toxicities of TNF consisted of rigors, anorexia, headache, and fatigue. Dose-limiting toxicity consisted of hypotension, fatigue, and nausea. Four patients treated at the maximally tolerated dose of 225 micrograms/m2 received dexamethasone to determine whether the toxicities of TNF could be ameliorated. No significant differences in hypotension or subjective symptomatology were observed in those patients receiving dexamethasone and those who did not or between injections in which dexamethasone was administered and when it was not. One patient with colorectal carcinoma treated with 50 micrograms/m2 had a partial response lasting about 9 months. Biological responses were evaluated in 8 patients treated at the maximally tolerated dose before therapy and 24 h afterward. TNF significantly (P less than 0.05 for all) enhanced serum beta 2-microglobulin, serum neopterin, and serum interleukin-2 receptor (Tac antigen) levels. Indoleamine 2,3-dioxygenase activity was also increased 24 h following the administration of TNF, although this increase was only of borderline statistical significance (P = 0.07). TNF did not enhance granulocyte bactericidal activity. The expression of cell surface proteins on monocytes, including HLA-DR, HLA-DQ, beta 2-microglobulin, and the Fc receptor, and serum interleukin-1 activity also were not significantly increased by the administration of TNF. Thus, in humans TNF caused biological response modulation with evidence of HLA Class I (beta 2-microglobulin) increase and T-cell (Tac antigen) and monocyte (neopterin) activation.

A phase I trial of fazarabine (ara-AC, 1-beta-D-arabinofuranosyl-5-azacytosine, NSC 281272) administered as a 24-h continuous infusion was performed in 24 adults with solid tumor malignancies. The majority of patients had received prior marrow-suppressive therapy. Level 7 (54.5 mg/m2/h for 24 h) was the maximum tolerated dose since during 6 evaluable first courses, 2 episodes of grade 4 granulocytopenia and 3 episodes of grade 3 occurred. Moderate thrombocytopenia also occurred at level 7 with 3 episodes of grade 1 and 1 episode of grade 4 thrombocytopenia during 6 first course treatments. Minimal myelosuppression, principally leukopenia, was seen prior to level 7. The nadir WBC through 47 courses had a linear relationship with plasma steady-state concentrations of ara-AC. The only other toxicity noted was moderate nausea/vomiting, which did not appear to be dose related. Plasma steady-state concentrations of ara-AC were reached in all patients within 4-6 h and ranged from 1.1 microM (11 mg/m2/h for 24 h) to 7.5 microM (54.5 mg/m2/h for 24 h). The mean total body clearance of ara-AC for 47 courses, levels 1-7, was 592 +/- 147 (SD) ml/min/m2 which is similar to prior pharmacokinetic data from the 24-h and 72-h infusion trials of the Pediatric and Medicine Branches, respectively. There were no objective disease responses during the trial. The recommended adult phase II dose for a 24-h infusion of ara-AC is 45-50 mg/m2/h.

SR-2508, a less lipophilic ane neurotoxic analogue of the nitroimidazole, misonidazole, has exhibited significant chemosensitization properties in preclinical studies with alkylating agents. A phase I trial was carried out to assess toxicity and possible pharmacological interactions of the combination of short infusions of SR-2508 and cyclophosphamide (CP). Patients were randomly assigned to receive either CP alone followed in 3 wk by CP + SR-2508, or CP + SR-2508 followed by CP alone. All additional courses were CP + SR-2508. The maximum tolerated dose of the combination was determined by dose escalation of SR-2508 while the dose of CP remained fixed, initially 1.0 g/m2, and then a second maximum tolerated dose was determined with CP at 1.6 g/m2. One hundred seventeen evaluated courses were administered to 39 patients, the majority of whom had received prior treatment. Somewhat unexpectedly, reversible grade 4 granulocytopenia was the dose-limiting toxicity occurring in four of five evaluable first combination courses at level 6 (SR-2508, 11.3 g/m2; CP, 1.0 g/m2), the initial maximum tolerated dose. SR-2508 enhanced CP-induced myelosuppression as exhibited by the significant difference (p less than 0.001) between the 27 paired courses (CP versus CP + SR-2508) for WBC nadirs over levels 1 to 6. The neurotoxicity encountered was similar to that seen in past clinical trials, being reversible, mild, and usually peripheral in nature. There was one treatment-related death (neutropenic sepsis) on study. No other significant toxicity was seen. SR-2508 exhibited linear pharmacokinetics over the dose range studied. The SR-2508 area under the concentration-time curve increased linearly with dose (r = 0.858; p less than 0.001). No other parameters were dose related. Neither drug appeared to affect the pharmacokinetics of the other, and CP pharmacokinetic values were consistent with those from prior studies. Due to the interaction noted between the two agents and the preclinical data suggesting preferential enhancement of antitumor efficacy under this combination, phase II study appears warranted.

Forty-seven patients with advanced malignancies were treated with a concurrent 72-h continuous infusion of 5-fluorouracil (FUra) and dipyridamole. The FUra dose was escalated over the dose range of 185 to 3600 mg/m2/day for 3 days. Dipyridamole was administered in a fixed dose of 7.7 mg/kg/day for 3 days. A total of 155 courses of therapy were completed of which there were 31 paired courses of the combination and FUra alone, at the same dose of FUra and in the same patient. This was for purposes of analysis of pharmacokinetics and modulation of FUra toxicity by dipyridamole. Stomatitis was the dose-limiting toxicity experienced by patients entered into this trial. Myelosuppression was not a serious problem. Increasing FUra plasma concentration was associated with greater leukopenia and stomatitis. Dipyridamole did not appear to modulate the systemic toxicity of FUra. The pharmacokinetics of FUra were altered by the concurrent administration of dipyridamole. Dipyridamole promoted the total body clearance of FUra which resulted in lower mean steady-state FUra plasma concentrations when compared with courses of FUra alone administered at the same dose level. These differences were statistically significant over the course of the trial. For courses of the combination, FUra exhibited linear pharmacokinetics over the dose range studied. Total body clearance of FUra declined slightly at the higher dose levels, but the differences were not significant. For courses of FUra alone, total body clearance was significantly decreased above the dose level of 2300 mg/m2/day. At the maximal tolerated dose of FUra, 2300 mg/m2/day x3, mean steady-state FUra plasma concentration and total body clearance were 6.6 microM and 122 liters/h/m2, respectively, for courses of the combination. The corresponding pharmacokinetic parameters were 7.4 microM and 103 liters/h/m2 for courses when FUra was given alone. Further evaluation of the utility of this regimen and basis of these pharmacokinetic observations appear warranted.