Search

PURPOSE Effective therapies are needed for the treatment of patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) with brain metastases. A trastuzumab radioisotope has been shown to localize in brain metastases of patients with HER2-positive MBC, and intracranial xenograft models have demonstrated a dose-dependent response to trastuzumab. METHODS In the phase II PATRICIA study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02536339 ), patients with HER2-positive MBC with CNS metastases and CNS progression despite prior radiotherapy received pertuzumab plus high-dose trastuzumab (6 mg/kg weekly) until CNS or systemic disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary end point was confirmed objective response rate (ORR) in the CNS per Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology Brain Metastases criteria. Secondary end points included duration of response, clinical benefit rate (complete response plus partial response plus stable disease ≥ 4 or ≥ 6 months) in the CNS, and safety. RESULTS Thirty-nine patients were treated for a median (range) of 4.5 (0.3-37.3) months at clinical cutoff. Thirty-seven patients discontinued treatment, most commonly because of CNS progression (n = 27); two remained on treatment. CNS ORR was 11% (95% CI, 3 to 25), with four partial responses (median duration of response, 4.6 months). Clinical benefit rate at 4 months and 6 months was 68% and 51%, respectively. Two patients permanently discontinued study treatment because of adverse events (left ventricular dysfunction [treatment-related] and seizure, both grade 3). No grade 5 adverse events were reported. No new safety signals emerged with either agent. CONCLUSION Although the CNS ORR was modest, 68% of patients experienced clinical benefit, and two patients had ongoing stable intracranial and extracranial disease for > 2 years. High-dose trastuzumab for HER2-positive CNS metastases may warrant further study.

PERJETA (pertuzumab), administered with Herceptin (trastuzumab), is used in the treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‐positive breast cancer. Pertuzumab is currently approved with an initial loading dose of 840 mg, followed by a 420‐mg maintenance dose intravenously every 3 weeks. A reloading dose is required if there is a ≥6‐week delay in treatment. In response to the potential treatment disruption due to COVID‐19, the impact of dose delays and alternative dosing regimens on intravenous pertuzumab for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2‐positive breast cancer treatment is presented. Simulations were conducted by using the validated population pharmacokinetic model for pertuzumab, and included (1) 4‐, 6‐, and 9‐week dose delays of the 840 mg/420 mg every 3 weeks dosing regimen and (2) 840 mg/420 mg every 4 weeks and 840 mg every 6 weeks alternative dosing regimens. Simulations were compared with the currently approved pertuzumab dosing regimen. The simulations in 1000 virtual patients showed that a dose reload (840 mg) is required following a dose delay of ≥6 weeks to maintain comparable Ctrough (lowest concentration before the next dose is given) levels to clinical trials. The 840 mg/420 mg every 4 weeks and 840 mg every 6 weeks alternative dosing regimens decrease median steady‐state Ctrough by ≈40% compared with the approved regimen, and

Purpose To characterize pertuzumab pharmacokinetics (PK) in FeDeriCa (NCT03493854: fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection [PH FDC SC] versus intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab); derive individual pertuzumab exposures in the PH FDC SC arm for subsequent pertuzumab exposure–response (ER) analyses; compare observed trastuzumab PK with predicted exposures from a previous SC trastuzumab model; assess whether pertuzumab affects trastuzumab PK; evaluate pertuzumab exposure–efficacy and –safety relationships and support the approved SC dosing regimen. Methods Population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations were used to describe the data. Standard goodness-of-fit diagnostics and prediction-corrected visual predictive checks were used for model performance assessment. Covariates were included from previously reported models. ER analysis was conducted using logistic regression. Results SC pertuzumab PK was described adequately by a two-compartment model with first-order absorption; significant covariates included in the final model were albumin, lean body weight, and Asian region; however, these appeared not to be clinically relevant. Trastuzumab concentrations were described adequately by the previous model; there was no evidence of a pertuzumab effect on trastuzumab PK as part of PH FDC SC and higher model-predicted pertuzumab exposure was not associated with differences in pathologic complete response rate or an increased probability of selected grade ≥ 3 adverse events of interest. Conclusion The approved PH FDC SC dose [loading: 1200/600 mg pertuzumab/trastuzumab (15 mL); maintenance: 600 mg pertuzumab/trastuzumab (10 mL) and 2000 U/mL recombinant human hyaluronidase every 3 weeks] provides a positive benefit–risk profile with comparable efficacy and safety to intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab.

Background: Intravenous pertuzumab (P IV) + trastuzumab (H IV) + chemotherapy (CT) improves outcomes in patients (pts) with HER2-positive breast cancer, compared with H + CT.A new subcutaneous (SC) formulation, for the first time combining two monoclonal antibodies, P + H, with recombinant human hyaluronidase in one vial, was developed. This ready-to-use fixed-dose combination (PH FDC) is administered subcutaneously into the thigh over 5-8 minutes. The dose of H SC was confirmed in the phase III HannaH trial (NCT00950300) and the dose of P SC was established in a phase Ib study (NCT02738970). We report the first results from FeDeriCa (NCT03493854), which was designed to assess the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of this novel SC PH FDC compared with H IV + P IV in pts with HER2-positive early breast cancer in the neoadjuvant-adjuvant setting. Methods: Pts with centrally confirmed HER2-positive invasive breast cancer (tumor >2 cm, or node-positive disease; Stage II-IIIC) were randomized 1:1 to receive 8 cycles of CT in the neoadjuvant setting with H IV (loading dose 8 mg/kg, maintenance 6 mg/kg) + P IV (loading dose 840 mg, maintenance 420 mg) (Arm A) or CT per Arm A + PH FDC (loading dose 1200 mg P SC/600 mg H SC, maintenance 600 mg each; Arm B) administered q3w during cycles 5-8. CT was investigator’s choice of either 4 cycles of dose-dense doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide q2w → 4 cycles of weekly paclitaxel (total: 12 weeks), or 4 cycles of doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide q3w → 4 cycles of docetaxel q3w. Post-surgery, pts continued anti-HER2 treatment per randomization to complete 18 cycles. The primary objective was noninferiority (NI) of the pre-dose cycle 8 P serum trough concentration (Ctrough) within the PH FDC versus P IV (NI margin for the lower bound of the 90% confidence interval [CI] of the geometric mean ratio [GMR]: ≥0.8). Key secondary objectives were NI of pre-dose cycle 8 H Ctrough within the PH FDC versus H IV, total pathologic complete response in the breast and axilla (ypT0/is, ypN0; tpCR), and safety (primary cardiac events were defined as heart failure [New York Heart Association III + IV] with significant left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] decline; cardiac death. Secondary cardiac events were defined as LVEF decline ≥10% from baseline to below 50% and confirmed LVEF decline). Results: Five-hundred pts were randomized (252 to Arm A, 248 to Arm B - ITT and safety populations) from 06/14/18-12/24/18 at 122 sites. At clinical cutoff (07/04/19), 242 pts (96.0%) in Arm A and 234 (94.4%) in Arm B completed the neoadjuvant treatment phase. Baseline pt demographics and disease characteristics were well balanced between arms.The study met its primary endpoint: P GMR was 1.22 (90% CI 1.14-1.31) with the lower limit of the 90% CI being above the prespecified NI margin of 0.8. H GMR was 1.33 (90% CI 1.24-1.43), meeting the NI criteria. tpCR rates were comparable between arms (59.5%; 95% CI 53.2-65.6 in Arm A and 59.7%; 95% CI 53.3-65.8 in Arm B) and were similar to other P + H + CT trials. Overall safety, including cardiac safety, was comparable between arms (Table). Safety was as expected for P + H + CT trials. Conclusions: SC PH FDC demonstrated noninferior pre-dose cycle 8 P + H Ctrough to that of P IV + H IV, with comparable efficacy and safety. PH FDC offers a faster and simpler method of P + H administration for HER2-positive breast cancer. Pts, %Arm A n = 252Arm B n = 248Any AE in >50% of pts99.6100Alopecia70.277.0Nausea60.358.9Diarrhea55.258.5Grade ≥352.848.8Serious17.916.1CardiacPrimary00.8Secondary3.61.6Asymptomatic LVEF decline needing treatment/discontinuation4.02.0Death0.4*0.4** Unrelated to HER2 treatment Citation Format: Antoinette R Tan, Seock-Ah Im, Andre Mattar, Ramon Colomer, Daniil Stroyakovskii, Zbigniew Nowecki, Michelino De Laurentiis, Jean-Yves Pierga, Kyung Hae Jung, Christian Schem, Sarah Heeson, Mahesh Shivhare, Whitney P. Kirschbrown, Eleonora Restuccia, Tanja Badovinac Crnjevic, Christian Jackisch. Subcutaneous administration of the fixed-dose combination of trastuzumab and pertuzumab in combination with chemotherapy in HER2-positive early breast cancer: Primary analysis of the phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label, two-arm FeDeriCa study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2019 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2019 Dec 10-14; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2020;80(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD4-07.

To characterize pertuzumab pharmacokinetics (PK) in FeDeriCa (NCT03493854: fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection [PH FDC SC] versus intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab); derive individual pertuzumab exposures in the PH FDC SC arm for subsequent pertuzumab exposure-response (ER) analyses; compare observed trastuzumab PK with predicted exposures from a previous SC trastuzumab model; assess whether pertuzumab affects trastuzumab PK; evaluate pertuzumab exposure-efficacy and -safety relationships and support the approved SC dosing regimen.Population pharmacokinetic modeling and simulations were used to describe the data. Standard goodness-of-fit diagnostics and prediction-corrected visual predictive checks were used for model performance assessment. Covariates were included from previously reported models. ER analysis was conducted using logistic regression.SC pertuzumab PK was described adequately by a two-compartment model with first-order absorption; significant covariates included in the final model were albumin, lean body weight, and Asian region; however, these appeared not to be clinically relevant. Trastuzumab concentrations were described adequately by the previous model; there was no evidence of a pertuzumab effect on trastuzumab PK as part of PH FDC SC and higher model-predicted pertuzumab exposure was not associated with differences in pathologic complete response rate or an increased probability of selected grade ≥ 3 adverse events of interest.The approved PH FDC SC dose [loading: 1200/600 mg pertuzumab/trastuzumab (15 mL); maintenance: 600 mg pertuzumab/trastuzumab (10 mL) and 2000 U/mL recombinant human hyaluronidase every 3 weeks] provides a positive benefit-risk profile with comparable efficacy and safety to intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab.

The objective of this research was to characterize the venetoclax exposure-efficacy and exposure-safety relationships and determine its optimal dose in elderly patients with newly diagnosed acute myeloid leukemia (AML) receiving venetoclax in combination with low intensity therapies (hypomethylating agent [HMA; azacitidine or decitabine] or low-dose cytarabine [LDAC]). A total of 212 patients from the HMA study and 92 patients from the LDAC study were included in the exposure-safety analyses. Those who received at least one dose of venetoclax and had at least one measurable response (201 and 83 in the HMA and LDAC studies, respectively) were included in the exposure-efficacy analyses. The probability of response based on International Working Group (IWG) for AML response criteria, adverse events of grade 3 or worse neutropenia or infection or a serious adverse event was modeled using logistic regression analyses to characterize the venetoclax exposure-response relationships. In combination with an HMA, increasing concentrations of venetoclax, up to those associated with a less than or equal to 400-mg once daily (QD) dose, were associated with a higher probability of response, with a trend for flat or decreasing probabilities of response thereafter. In combination with LDAC, increasing concentrations of venetoclax were associated with higher probabilities of response, with no plateau observed. Increasing concentrations of venetoclax were not associated with increasing probability of any safety event except for a slight increase in grade 3 or worse infections with HMAs; however, tolerability issues were observed at doses of greater than or equal to 800 mg QD in each study. Exposure-response analyses support the use of venetoclax 400 mg QD in combination with an HMA and 600 mg QD in combination with LDAC (ie, the next highest dose evaluated below 800 mg in each combination) to safely maximize the probability of response in elderly patients with newly diagnosed AML.

Adding pertuzumab to trastuzumab (both monoclonal antibodies targeting human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 [HER2]) has proven survival benefits when combined with chemotherapy for patients with HER2‐positive breast cancer. The combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab together in 1 vial for subcutaneous (SC) administration is being developed as a ready‐to‐use formulation to reduce the treatment burden on patients while improving healthcare efficiency. An open‐label, 2‐part, phase Ib dose‐finding study ({"type":"clinical-trial","attrs":{"text":"NCT02738970","term_id":"NCT02738970"}}NCT02738970) was undertaken in healthy male volunteers (part 1) and female patients with HER2‐postive early breast cancer who had completed standard (neo)adjuvant treatment (part 2). This study aimed to identify an SC pertuzumab dose given with recombinant human hyaluronidase that results in comparable exposure to that of the intravenous (IV) pertuzumab dose, based on pertuzumab serum trough concentration and area under the serum concentration–time curve. Pharmacokinetics (PK), safety, and tolerability of a single dose of SC pertuzumab given alone or in a fixed‐dose combination (comixed or coformulated) with trastuzumab were also assessed. A maintenance dose of 600 mg for SC pertuzumab resulted in an equivalent exposure to that of IV pertuzumab, and no new safety signals were identified for SC pertuzumab or trastuzumab. A loading dose of 1200 mg for SC pertuzumab was selected based on approximate dose proportionality. The PK and safety results support further development of a fixed‐dose coformulation combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for SC administration, which will be investigated in an upcoming phase III trial in patients with HER2‐positive early breast cancer.

Purpose The aim of the study was to characterize the population pharmacokinetics (PK) of the intravenous formulation of trastuzumab, assess the impact of patient and pathological covariates on trastuzumab PK, and perform simulations to support dosing recommendations in special situations. Methods Serum trastuzumab concentrations were obtained from 1582 patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), early breast cancer (EBC), advanced gastric cancer (AGC), or other tumor types/healthy volunteers in 18 phase I, II, and III trials and analyzed by nonlinear mixed-effects modeling. Results A two-compartment model with parallel linear and nonlinear elimination best described the data. During treatment, linear clearance (CL) dominated, resulting in a total CL of 0.173–0.337 L/day, which is similar to other IgG1 monoclonal antibodies. Covariates influencing CL were baseline body weight, aspartate aminotransferase, albumin, gastric cancer, and the presence of liver metastases. MBC and EBC had similar PK parameters, while CL was higher in AGC. Simulations indicated that at least 95% of patients with BC reach concentrations 1 week would take approximately 6 weeks to get back within steady-state exposure range. Conclusions Trastuzumab PK for the intravenous formulation was well-described across cancer types, disease status, and regimens. No dose adjustment is required for any of the identified patient covariates. A 7-month serum washout period for trastuzumab is recommended. A reloading dose is required if a maintenance dose is missed by > 1 week. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (10.1007/s00280-018-3728-z) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Summary Background A subcutaneous formulation of pertuzumab and trastuzumab with recombinant human hyaluronidase in one ready-to-use, fixed-dose combination vial (pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and hyaluronidase-zzxf) was approved by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on June 29, 2020. We report the primary analysis of the FeDeriCa study, which was designed to assess the pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and safety of the fixed-dose subcutaneous formulation compared to intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer in the neoadjuvant–adjuvant setting. Methods FeDeriCa, a randomised, open-label, international, multicentre, non-inferiority, phase 3 study, was done across 106 sites in 19 countries. Patients aged 18 years or older with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, HER2-positive, operable, locally advanced, or inflammatory stage II–IIIC breast cancer, and a left ventricular ejection fraction of 55% or more were randomly assigned (1:1), using a voice-based or web-based response system, to receive intravenous pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose, followed by 420 mg maintenance doses) plus intravenous trastuzumab (8 mg/kg loading dose, followed by 6 mg/kg maintenance doses) or the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection (1200 mg pertuzumab plus 600 mg trastuzumab loading dose in 15 mL, followed by 600 mg pertuzumab plus 600 mg trastuzumab maintenance doses in 10 mL), both administered every 3 weeks with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. Patients were stratified by hormone receptor status, clinical stage, and chemotherapy regimen. The investigator selected one of the two protocol-approved standard chemotherapy regimens before randomisation. Four cycles of HER2-targeted therapy were administered concurrently with the taxane. After surgery, patients continued the HER2-targeted therapy to receive an additional 14 cycles (total of 18). The primary endpoint was non-inferiority of the cycle 7 pertuzumab serum trough concentration (Ctrough; ie, cycle 8 predose pertuzumab concentration) within the fixed-dose combination for subcutaneous injection versus intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in the per-protocol pharmacokinetic population (all enrolled patients who adhered to prespecified criteria for pharmacokinetic assessment). Non-inferiority was concluded if the lower bound of the 90% CI of the geometric mean ratio was 0·8 or higher. The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of study medication, including chemotherapy or HER2-targeted therapy. Enrolment, neoadjuvant therapy, and surgery have been completed; adjuvant treatment and follow-up are ongoing. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03493854. Findings Between June 14, 2018, and Dec 24, 2018, 252 patients were randomly assigned to the intravenous infusion group and 248 to the fixed-dose combination group. The geometric mean ratio of pertuzumab serum Ctrough subcutaneous to serum Ctrough intravenous was 1·22 (90% CI 1·14–1·31). The most common grade 3–4 adverse events occurring during neoadjuvant treatment with HER2-targeted therapy plus chemotherapy in 5% or more of patients were neutropenia (34 [13%] of 252 patients in the intravenous infusion group vs 35 [14%] of 248 patients in the fixed-dose combination group), decreased neutrophil count (31 [12%] vs 27 [11%]), febrile neutropenia (14 [6%] vs 16 [6%]), diarrhoea (12 [5%] vs 17 [7%]), and decreased white blood cell count (18 [7%] vs nine [4%]). At least one treatment-related serious adverse event was reported in 25 (10%) patients in the intravenous infusion group and 26 (10%) patients in the fixed-dose combination group. One patient in each treatment group had an adverse event that led to death (urosepsis in the intravenous infusion group and acute myocardial infarction in the fixed-dose combination group); neither death was related to HER2-targeted therapy. Interpretation The study met its primary endpoint: the fixed-dose combination of pertuzumab and trastuzumab for subcutaneous injection provides non-inferior cycle 7 pertuzumab serum Ctrough concentrations to intravenous pertuzumab plus trastuzumab in the neoadjuvant setting with comparable total pathological complete response rates, supporting the FDA approval. Safety was similar between treatment groups, and in line with other pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and chemotherapy trials. Follow-up is ongoing for long-term outcomes, including efficacy and long-term safety. Funding F Hoffmann-La Roche and Genentech.

Background: A fixed-dose combination (FDC) of subcutaneous (SC) pertuzumab (F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, Basel, Switzerland) + SC trastuzumab (F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd) is being developed to reduce the treatment burden on patients while improving treatment facility efficiency. This phase Ib dose-finding study (NCT02738970) aimed to identify the SC pertuzumab dose that is comparable to the intravenous (IV) dose, based on serum trough concentrations (Ctrough) and area under the concentration–time curve (AUC) when administered with or without SC trastuzumab. Methods: This two-part study consisted of SC pertuzumab dose determination in healthy male volunteers (HMVs) (Part 1) and a subsequent SC pertuzumab dose confirmation in patients with early breast cancer (EBC) (Part 2). Part 1 of the study was comprised of 48 HMVs who received various SC pertuzumab doses (400–1200 mg) or the standard IV dose (420 mg), administered alone or co-mixed with SC trastuzumab 600 mg. Non-compartmental and statistical methods were used to test the pharmacokinetic (PK) interaction between SC pertuzumab and SC trastuzumab when administered with recombinant human hyaluronidase, a permeation enhancer. Two population PK (popPK) models were built to estimate PK parameters and PK variability. Model 1 used IV/SC PK data from Part 1 of the current study only. Model 2 used Part 1 SC PK data and PK parameters from the published IV pertuzumab popPK model (Garg A, et al. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 2014; 74: 819–829). Each popPK model was used to simulate 400 phase III clinical trials. Per simulated trial, the geometric mean ratio (GMR) of Cycle 8 Ctrough at steady state and AUC at steady state for SC/IV were calculated. The percentage of trials with the 5th percentile confidence interval of the GMR above 0.8 was tabulated. Results: In Part 1 of the study, there was no impact on pertuzumab or trastuzumab PK from co-mixing SC trastuzumab with SC pertuzumab. The absolute bioavailability of SC pertuzumab in HMVs was approximately 70–80%, with a median time to reach maximum concentrations of 4–5 days. Clinical trial simulations indicated that an SC pertuzumab dose of 600 mg will achieve the target Ctrough and AUC SC/IV GMRs > 99% of the time. Results were consistent between the models. Safety data supported the selection of an SC pertuzumab maintenance dose of 600 mg. The 600 mg SC pertuzumab dose determined in HMVs was confirmed in Part 2 of the study in patients with EBC. Conclusions: These data support the development of an SC pertuzumab + SC trastuzumab FDC product. Citation Format: Kirschbrown WP, Wynne C, Kagedal M, Wada R, Li H, Nijem I, Badovinac Crnjevic T, Heeson S, Eng-Wong J, Garg A. A phase Ib dose-finding study of subcutaneous pertuzumab in combination with subcutaneous trastuzumab in healthy male volunteers and female patients with early breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2017 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2017 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P5-20-07.

In the APHINITY study (NCT01358877, BIG 4-11/BO25126/TOC4939G), pertuzumab added to trastuzumab and chemotherapy significantly improved invasive disease-free survival as adjuvant treatment for patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer. The objective of this analysis was to assess the pharmacokinetics of pertuzumab in combination with trastuzumab in Chinese patients with early breast cancer. Samples for pertuzumab and trastuzumab pharmacokinetic analysis were taken from Chinese patients during cycle 1 of treatment and at steady-state in cycle 10. Noncompartmental analysis was used to estimate minimum and maximum serum concentrations (C-max and C-min), area under the concentration-time curve, clearance, and other pharmacokinetic parameters. In 15 patients, mean steady-state C-max and C-min pertuzumab serum concentrations (368 +/- 177 mu g/ml, and 122 +/- 47 mu g/ml, respectively) were numerically higher than observed previously in a pharmacokinetic analysis of the global population in APHINITY and in patients treated in the metastatic setting. The geometric mean ratio and corresponding 90% confidence interval for trastuzumab C-max and C-min in the presence (n = 15) or absence (n = 17) of pertuzumab were 104.6 (91.09-120) and 98.23 (84.58-114), respectively, indicating no apparent impact of pertuzumab on the pharmacokinetics of trastuzumab. Increases in pertuzumab C-max and C-min were not associated with an increase in adverse events. The APHINITY Chinese pharmacokinetic substudy analysis supports the dosing regimen for pertuzumab (840 mg loading dose followed by 420 mg maintenance doses every 3 weeks administered by intravenous infusion) in a Chinese HER2-positive early breast cancer patient population.

Purpose: To characterize the pharmacokinetics (PK) of, and perform an exploratory exposure–response (E–R) analysis for, pertuzumab in patients with HER2-positive early breast cancer (EBC) within the APHINITY study (NCT01358877, BIG 4–11/BO25126/TOC4939G). Methods: A previously developed pertuzumab two-compartment linear population pharmacokinetic (popPK) model was subjected to external validation to examine appropriateness for describing pertuzumab concentrations from the APHINITY study. Pharmacokinetic drug–drug interactions (DDIs) between pertuzumab, trastuzumab, and chemotherapy were assessed by comparing observed serum or plasma C max ,C min ,and AUC last geometric mean ratios with 90% CIs. Predictions of pertuzumab C max,ss ,C min,ss ,and AUC ss were derived from individual parameter estimates and used in an exploratory E–R analysis. Results: Using data from 72 patients, based on goodness-of-fit, the popPK model was deemed appropriate for predictions of individual exposures for subsequent comparisons to historical data, assessment of DDIs, and E–R analyses. No evidence of DDIs for pertuzumab on trastuzumab, trastuzumab on pertuzumab, or pertuzumab on chemotherapy PK was observed. Analyses of differences in exposure between patients with and without invasive disease-free survival events did not indicate improved efficacy with increased exposure. Overall Grade ≥ 3 diarrhea prevalence was higher with pertuzumab versus placebo, but was not greater with increasing pertuzumab exposure. No apparent E–R relationship was suggested with respect to other grade ≥ 3 AEs. Conclusion: Overall, the limited available data from this exploratory study suggest that no dose adjustments are needed for pertuzumab when administered in combination with trastuzumab and an EBC chemotherapy regimen., SCOPUS: ar.j, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Introduction: Elderly pts with R/R AML not eligible for cytotoxic therapy have limited therapeutic options, and dismal outcomes with available therapies. In preclinical studies, inhibition of BCL-2 and MDM2 with Ven and Idasa, respectively, has demonstrated potent synergistic apoptotic activity. In this ongoing, open-label, Phase Ib study, the safety, tolerability, and preliminary efficacy of Ven+cobimetinib (Arm A) and Ven+Idasa (Arm B) is being assessed in R/R AML (NCT02670044). Initial analysis indicated a tolerable safety profile for Ven+Idasa. Here, we present updated safety and efficacy results from Arm B. Methods: Pts (≥60 years) with R/R AML or secondary AML, previously treated for an antecedent hematologic disease but treatment naïve for AML, and ineligible for cytotoxic therapy/allogeneic stem cell transplant were enrolled. The maximum tolerated dose of Ven+Idasa was determined by two-dimensional dose escalation. Pts received Ven orally (PO) daily (400 or 600mg) + Idasa PO daily on Days (D) 1-5 (150mg, 200mg, or 400mg) in 28-day cycles. Responses were assessed according to revised International Working Group Response Criteria 2003. Pharmacokinetic (PK) analyses were performed on plasma samples on Cycles (C) 1 and 2, D1 and 5, and C4, D1. Exploratory assessments included minimal residual disease (MRD), assayed centrally at Covance Laboratories using 8-color flow cytometry. Data cut-off was June 21, 2019. Results: At data cut-off, 49 pts were treated with Ven+Idasa. Median age was 72 years (range 62-93); Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0-1: 84%; refractory AML: 57%; relapsed AML: 33%; and secondary previously untreated AML: 10%; Intermediate-I or Intermediate-II European Leukemia Net (ELN) risk classification: 66%; adverse ELN classification: 30%; de novo (49%) versus secondary (51%) AML; and median prior lines of treatment: 1 (range 1-4). Most common adverse events (AEs; any grade) irrespective of attribution were diarrhea (90%) and nausea (78%); the most common grade ≥3 AEs were febrile neutropenia (45%), neutropenia (27%), and thrombocytopenia (25%; Table 1). Laboratory tumor lysis syndrome occurred in 3 pts; none resulted in treatment discontinuation. Ven and Idasa treatment discontinuation due to AEs were noted in 18% and 20%, respectively, most commonly due to infections. 30- and 60-day mortality rates were 6% and 17%, respectively. No apparent PK drug-drug interaction was found between Ven and Idasa; overlap in Ven and Idasa exposure was substantial over the doses tested. Anti-leukemic response rate (complete response [CR] + CR with incomplete platelet count recovery [CRp] + CR with incomplete blood count recovery [CRi] + partial response [PR] + morphologic leukemia-free state [MLFS]) across all dose levels was 41% (Table 2). Across the two Ven 600mg cohorts being considered for the recommended Phase II dose (RP2D), the anti-leukemic response rate was 50% (CR+CRp+CRi rate 29%). Median time to CR+CRp+CRi+PR was 1.4 months (range 1-3), with a median response (CR+CRp+CRi) duration of 4.9 months (range 0.6-9.7). Median overall survival in all pts and in the Ven 600mg cohorts was 4.4 months and 5.7 months, respectively, with a median follow-up of 3.4 months (range 0.03-18). Individual pt responses are shown in Figure 1. MRD negativity ( Conclusions: The non-chemotherapy combination of Ven+Idasa demonstrated encouraging safety and efficacy in elderly pts with R/R AML who were ineligible for cytotoxic chemotherapy. The anti-leukemic response rate at the dose levels being considered for the RP2D was 50%, with a CR+CRp+CRi rate of 29%. Updated predictive biomarker data will be presented. Evaluation of Ven+Idasa RP2D is ongoing, and will be followed by dose expansion. Disclosures Daver: Otsuka: Consultancy; NOHLA: Research Funding; Jazz: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy; BMS: Consultancy, Research Funding; Immunogen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Forty-Seven: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Agios: Consultancy; Abbvie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy, Research Funding; Hanmi Pharm Co., Ltd.: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Servier: Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Research Funding. Garcia:Abbvie: Research Funding; Genentech: Research Funding. Jonas:AbbVie, Amgen, Celgene, GlycoMimetics, Jazz, Pharmacyclics, Tolero: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie, Accelerated Medical Diagnostics, AROG, Celgene, Daiichi Sankyo, Esanex, Forma, Genentech/Roche, GlycoMimetics, Incyte, LP Therapeutics, Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; AbbVie, Amgen, GlycoMimetics: Other: Travel expenses. Kelly:Novartis, Bayer, Janssen, Pharmacyclics, Celgene, Astrazeneca, Seattle Genetics: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Research Funding; Genentech, Verastem: Consultancy. Assouline:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria. Brandwein:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria; Otsuka: Honoraria; Roche: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Fenaux:Celgene Corporation: Honoraria, Research Funding; Astex: Honoraria, Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Aprea: Research Funding. Olin:Ignyta: Research Funding; Clovis: Research Funding; Spectrum: Research Funding; Revolution Medicine: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Honoraria; Pfizer: Research Funding; Genentech: Consultancy, Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding; Astellas: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Mirati Therapeutics: Research Funding; MedImmune: Research Funding; AstraZeneca: Research Funding. Martinelli:Amgen: Consultancy, Other: trial grant; Ariad: Consultancy, Other: trial grant; Incyte: Consultancy, Other: trial grant; Pfizer: Consultancy, Other: trial grant; Roche: Consultancy, Other: trial grant; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: trial grant; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: trial grant; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: trial grant; Novartis: Consultancy, Other: trial grant; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria. Pigneux:Novartis: Honoraria; Roche: Honoraria; Pfizer: Honoraria; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Daichi: Honoraria; Abbvie: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria. Pollyea:Celyad: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Diachii Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Forty-Seven: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Abbvie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Powell:Rafael Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Consultancy, Research Funding. Roboz:Orsenix: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Takeda: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Otsuka: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Trovagene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sandoz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; MEI Pharma: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; AbbVie: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Actinium: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Amphivena: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argenx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astex: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celltrion: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bayer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eisai: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Tafuri:Celgene: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Research Funding. Vey:Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria. Yee:Agensys, Astex, Hoffman La Roche, MedImmune, Merck, Millenium, Roche/Genentech: Research Funding; Novartis, Pfizer: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas, Celgene, Otsuka, Shire, Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Dail:Genentech: Employment, Equity Ownership. Green:Genentech Inc.: Employment. Kirschbrown:Genentech, Inc.: Employment; F. Hoffman La Roche, Ltd.: Equity Ownership. Hong:Roche: Equity Ownership; Genentech Inc.: Employment, Equity Ownership. Ott:Roche: Employment, Equity Ownership. Onishi:Genentech, Inc.: Employment. Wang:Genentech, Inc.: Employment; Roche: Equity Ownership. Konopleva:Forty-Seven: Consultancy, Honoraria; Eli Lilly: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Cellectis: Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; F. Hoffman La-Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Genentech: Honoraria, Research Funding; Ascentage: Research Funding; Kisoji: Consultancy, Honoraria; Reata Pharmaceuticals: Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties; Ablynx: Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Agios: Research Funding; Stemline Therapeutics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Calithera: Research Funding. Andreeff:Daiichi Sankyo, Inc.: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties: Patents licensed, royalty bearing, Research Funding; CLL Foundation: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NCI-RDCRN (Rare Disease Cliln Network): Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Leukemia Lymphoma Society: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; German Research Council: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NCI-CTEP: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Cancer UK: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Center for Drug Research & Development: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; NIH/NCI: Research Funding; CPRIT: Research Funding; Breast Cancer Research Foundation: Research Funding; Oncolyze: Equity Ownership; Oncoceutics: Equity Ownership; Senti Bio: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Eutropics: Equity Ownership; Aptose: Equity Ownership; BiolineRx: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Celgene: Consultancy; Amgen: Consultancy; AstaZeneca: Consultancy; 6 Dimensions Capital: Consultancy; Reata: Equity Ownership. OffLabel Disclosure: Venetoclax (VEN; ABT-199/GDC-0199) is a highly selective, potent, oral B-cell lymphoma-2 (BCL-2) inhibitor. Idasanutlin (idasa; RG7388) is an orally available, small molecule antagonist of MDM2 (mouse double minute; Mdm2 p53 binding protein homolog).

IHL-305 is a PEGylated liposomal formulation of irinotecan (CPT-11). The objective of this study was to evaluate the factors associated with interpatient variability in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of IHL-305 in patients with advanced solid tumors. IHL-305 was administered intravenously once every 4 weeks as part of a Phase I study. Pharmacokinetic studies of the liposomal sum total CPT-11, released CPT-11, SN-38, SN-38G, 7-ethyl-10-[4-N-(5-aminopentanoic acid)-1-piperidino]-carbonyloxycamptothecin, and 7-ethyl-10-[4-amino-1-piperidino]-carbonyloxycamptothecin in plasma were performed. Noncompartmental and compartmental pharmacokinetic analyses were conducted using pharmacokinetic data for sum total CPT-11. The pharmacokinetic variability of IHL-305 is associated with linear and nonlinear clearance. Patients whose age and body composition (ratio of total body weight to ideal body weight [TBW/IBW]) were greater than the median age and TBW/IBW of the study had a 1.7-fold to 2.6-fold higher ratio of released CPT-11 area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC) to sum total CPT-11 AUC. Patients aged

Introduction Effective therapies for R/R AML remain limited. MEK or MDM2 inhibition can downregulate MCL1, overcoming resistance to BCL2 inhibition. Preclinical synergy was seen when combining BCL2 inhibitor Ven with MEK inhibitor cobimetinib (cobi) or MDM2 inhibitor idasa (Han et al. ASH 2016; Pan et al. Cancer Cell 2017), supporting clinical evaluation in AML. Preliminary data in a Phase Ib dose-escalation study (NCT02670044) evaluating Ven+cobi/idasa in R/R AML suggested both combinations were tolerable (Daver et al. ASH 2017). However, Ven+cobi was closed due to limited clinical activity. Here we present data for additional pts, longer follow-up and biomarker analyses for Ven+idasa. Methods This ongoing, open-label, multicenter study evaluates safety, tolerability and efficacy of Ven+idasa in R/R AML or secondary AML previously treated for an antecedent hematologic disease. Pts >60 yrs of age and ineligible for cytotoxic therapy/allogeneic stem cell transplant were enrolled. A 2-dimensional dose escalation was used to establish the maximum tolerated dose: pts received doses of Ven orally (PO) daily (400mg or 600mg) + idasa PO daily on Days 1-5 (150mg, 200mg, or 400mg) in 28-day cycles. Plasma samples were taken for PK analysis at Cycles 1 and 2 Days 1 and 5, and Cycle 4 Day 1. BCL2, BCLxL and MCL1 status and minimal residual disease (MRD) were assayed centrally at Covance Laboratories using multicolor flow cytometry. Mutation (mut) sequencing was performed by Foundation Medicine using FoundationOne Heme at screening and from last bone marrow collected on study. Results As of April 6 2018, 34 pts received Ven+idasa across all dose cohorts (Table 1). Median age: 74 (range 64-93) yrs; median prior therapies: 1 (range 1-4); ECOG performance status 2: 18%; refractory: 56%; secondary AML: 53%; adverse cytogenetics: 27%. Pre-therapy mut data were available for 32 pts; most common muts were RUNX1 14 (41%), ASXL1 11 (32%), SRSF2 11 (32%). Other significant pre-therapy muts: TP53 6 (18%), IDH2 7 (21%), IDH1 1 (3%), FLT3 4 (13%). The most common adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (88%) and nausea (71%); the most common grade (Gr) ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (32%), febrile neutropenia (32%), thrombocytopenia (29%; Table 2). After 2 cases of Gr 3 diarrhea in the Ven 600mg cohorts, mandatory prophylaxis was implemented; no further cases of Gr ≥3 diarrhea were seen in the following 10 pts. Laboratory tumor lysis syndrome occurred in 3 pts (9%); none required treatment discontinuation. There was no apparent PK drug-drug interaction between Ven and idasa. PK was dose-proportional over the ranges tested for Ven and idasa. The recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) has not been identified yet. Across all dose cohorts, 30/34 pts were response-evaluable; the remaining 4 were still on study treatment without post-baseline response assessment. The anti-leukemic response rate (CR+CRp+CRi+MLFS+PR) was 37% (11/30). Across the 2 Ven 600mg cohorts, which are being considered for RP2D, the anti-leukemic response rate was 9/18 (50%) (Table 1, Figure 1). MRD negativity ( The median time to CR+CRp+CRi+PR (all pts) was 1.8 mo (range 0.8-2.7), with median response duration of 8.1 mo (range 0.3-9.7). Median overall survival in all pts and in the Ven 600mg cohorts was 3.9 mo and 5.3 mo (range 0.2-17.6), respectively; median follow-up was 2.9 mo (range 0-18). The anti-leukemic response rate was 86% in pts with IDH2 mut and 57% in pts with a RUNX1 mut, but only 20% in pts with a TP53 mut (Table 4). 8/20 pts with end-of-treatment mut data had either new TP53 muts or an increase in mut TP53 allele frequency (Figure 2). In 14 evaluable pts, those with AML blasts with a high ratio of BCL2:BCLxL or BCL2:MCL1 had a response rate of 100% (5/5) versus 11% (1/9) in pts with low ratios (Table 4). Conclusion Ven+idasa has a tolerable safety profile with appropriate prophylaxis in this R/R AML population. An anti-leukemic response rate of 50% was seen at dose levels being considered for RP2D (Ven 600mg + idasa 150/200mg). Overall, responses appeared deep and durable. Preliminary biomarker data indicate that the relative ratio of BCL2 to BCLxL and MCL1 may be important for Ven+idasa activity, whereas pts with baseline TP53 muts had lower response rates. To confirm the clinical benefit and safety of Ven+idasa, the combination will be further evaluated in an expansion arm, after confirmation of the RP2D. Disclosures Daver: Kiromic: Research Funding; ImmunoGen: Consultancy; Sunesis: Research Funding; Pfizer: Research Funding; Novartis: Research Funding; Novartis: Consultancy; Incyte: Research Funding; Daiichi-Sankyo: Research Funding; Sunesis: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Research Funding; Alexion: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; ARIAD: Research Funding; BMS: Research Funding; Otsuka: Consultancy; Incyte: Consultancy; Karyopharm: Consultancy. Pollyea:Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Curis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Argenx: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Gilead: Consultancy; Celyad: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Garcia:Celgene: Consultancy. Jonas:Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; AbbVie: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy; Glycomimetics: Research Funding; Esanex: Research Funding; Pharmacyclics: Research Funding; Incyte: Research Funding; LP Therapeutics: Research Funding; Tolero: Consultancy; Forma: Research Funding; Celgene: Consultancy, Research Funding; Accelerated Medical Diagnostics: Research Funding; Kalobios: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Research Funding. Yee:Agensys, Astex, GSK, Onconova, Genentech/Roche: Research Funding; Celgene, Novartis, Otsuka: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Fenaux:Otsuka: Honoraria, Research Funding; Roche: Honoraria; Jazz: Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding. Assouline:Roche: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; BMS: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding. Olin:Daiichi Sankyo, Astellas, Genentech: Research Funding. Roboz:Cellectis: Research Funding; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Janssen Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Bayer: Consultancy; Aphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy; Roche/Genentech: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Otsuka: Consultancy; Jazz Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Novartis: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy; Argenx: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Aphivena Therapeutics: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; Orsenix: Consultancy; AbbVie: Consultancy; Astex Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy; Eisai: Consultancy; Celltrion: Consultancy; Cellectis: Research Funding; Celltrion: Consultancy; Sandoz: Consultancy. Kirschbrown:Roche: Other: Ownership interests PLC; Genentech: Employment. Green:Genentech: Employment. Ma:Genentech: Employment. Dail:Genentech: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Genentech Inc: Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Equity Ownership. Ott:Roche: Other: Ownership interests PLC. Mobasher:Genentech Inc: Employment; F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd: Other: Ownership interests non-PLC. Phuong:Genentech Inc: Employment, Equity Ownership, Other: Ownership interests PLC. Hong:Genentech Inc/Roche: Employment, Other: Ownership interests PLC. Konopleva:Stemline Therapeutics: Research Funding. Andreeff:Aptose: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncoceutics: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy; Eutropics: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Oncolyze: Equity Ownership; United Therapeutics: Patents & Royalties: GD2 inhibition in breast cancer ; SentiBio: Equity Ownership; Daiichi-Sankyo: Consultancy, Patents & Royalties: MDM2 inhibitor activity patent, Research Funding; Astra Zeneca: Research Funding; Reata: Equity Ownership; Amgen: Consultancy, Research Funding; Jazz Pharma: Consultancy.

2564Background: The phase 2a, dose-finding JOSHUA study reported increased P clearance (CL; 37% lower P steady-state Cmin [Cmin,ss]) in pts with HER2+ mGEJC/GC vs metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Ba...

Navitoclax (ABT-263), a novel, oral Bcl-2 inhibitor, enhances the antitumor effects of chemotherapy in vitro by lowering the apoptotic threshold. This phase I study (NCT01009073) evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics, and preliminary antitumor activity of navitoclax combined with erlotinib in patients with advanced solid tumors. An open-label dose escalation study included an arm evaluating navitoclax combined with erlotinib, which included a dose escalation cohort and a planned safety expansion cohort. Patients with documented cancers for whom erlotinib therapy was appropriate received erlotinib 150 mg orally once daily plus navitoclax 150 mg orally once daily, with navitoclax dose escalation via a continuous reassessment method model. Eleven patients were enrolled, including six patients with nonsmall cell lung cancer. Dose-limiting toxicities, most commonly diarrhea, were observed in 4 patients. Navitoclax dosing remained at 150 mg/day because the maximum tolerated dose was exceeded at this starting dose. The planned dose escalation did not occur; no recommended phase II dose (RPTD) was identified, and there was no safety expansion cohort. The most common treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and decreased appetite. Pharmacokinetic analysis showed no apparent interactions between co-administered navitoclax and erlotinib. No objective responses were observed; the disease control rate was 27 % (95 % CI, 6–61 %). At the erlotinib and navitoclax doses administered, RPTD was not reached, but the safety profile of the combination was consistent with data from monotherapy studies. There were no apparent pharmacokinetic interactions between erlotinib and navitoclax. Three patients had stable disease.

Huali Wu,1 Jeffrey R Infante,2 Vicki L Keedy,3 Suzanne F Jones,2 Emily Chan,3 Johanna C Bendell,2 Wooin Lee,4 Whitney P Kirschbrown,1 Beth A Zamboni,5 Satoshi Ikeda,6 Hiroshi Kodaira,6 Mace L Rothenberg,3 Howard A Burris III,2 William C Zamboni1,7–9 1UNC Eshelman School of Pharmacy, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 2Sarah Cannon Research Institute/Tennessee Oncology, PLLC, 3Vanderbilt University, Nashville, TN, 4Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences, College of Pharmacy, University of Kentucky, Lexington,KY, 5Department of Mathematics, Carlow University, Pittsburgh, PA,USA; 6Yakult Honsha Co., Ltd., Medical Development Department, Tokyo, Japan; 7UNC Lineberger Comprehensive Cancer Center, 8UNCInstitute for Pharmacogenomics and Individualized Therapy, 9Carolina Center for Cancer Nanotechology Excellence, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, USA Abstract: IHL-305 is a PEGylated liposomal formulation of irinotecan (CPT-11). The objective of this study was to evaluate the factors associated with interpatient variability in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of IHL-305 in patients with advanced solid tumors. IHL-305 was administered intravenously once every 4 weeks as part of a Phase I study. Pharmacokinetic studies of the liposomal sum total CPT-11, released CPT-11, SN-38, SN-38G, 7-ethyl-10-[4-N-(5-aminopentanoic acid)-1-piperidino]-carbonyloxycamptothecin, and 7-ethyl-10-[4-amino-1-piperidino]-carbonyloxycamptothecin in plasma were performed. Noncompartmental and compartmental pharmacokinetic analyses were conducted using pharmacokinetic data for sum total CPT-11. The pharmacokinetic variability of IHL-305 is associated with linear and nonlinear clearance. Patients whose age and body composition (ratio of total body weight to ideal body weight [TBW/IBW]) were greater than the median age and TBW/IBW of the study had a 1.7-fold to 2.6-fold higher ratio of released CPT-11 area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC) to sum total CPT-11 AUC. Patients aged

Major advances in carrier-mediated agents, which include nanoparticles, nanosomes and conjugates, have revolutionized drug delivery capabilities over the past decade. While providing numerous advantages, such as greater solubility, duration of exposure and delivery to the site of action over their small-molecule counterparts, there is substantial variability in systemic clearance and distribution, tumor delivery and pharmacologic effects (efficacy and toxicity) of these agents. This review provides an overview of factors that affect the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of carrier-mediated agents in preclinical models and patients.

2525 Background: The aim of this analysis was to develop a PPK model for IV trastuzumab (Herceptin), to assess the impact of patient covariates on PK, and perform simulations to support dosing recommendations. Methods: Serum trastuzumab concentration data (26,040 samples) from 1582 patients with metastatic breast cancer (MBC), early breast cancer (EBC), advanced gastric cancer (AGC) or other tumor types, and 6 healthy volunteers in 18 Phase I, II, and III trials were analyzed using nonlinear mixed-effects modeling (NONMEM). Monte Carlo simulations were performed using the NONMEM PK parameter estimates (with variability) to inform dosing recommendations. Results: A two-compartment model with parallel linear and nonlinear elimination best described the data. Significant covariates (P < 0.001) influencing linear CL were baseline weight, SGOT, albumin, primary tumor type, and presence of liver metastases. MBC had similar PK parameters as EBC, with lower distributions of Cmin,ss in MBC explained by covariates. The higher linear CL in AGC patients resulted in a 30.5% lower Cmin,ss. Simulations for drug washout indicated that 95% of patients with breast cancer (BC) reach trastuzumab concentrations < 1 µg/mL (~97% washout) at ≤7 months. Simulations also indicated that a missed dose of trastuzumab in BC or AGC patients of ≤1 week did not result in a long PK under-exposure (i.e. the trastuzumab concentration is within 15% of Cmin,ss by 3 weeks) but a missed dose of > 1 week took approximately 6 weeks to get back within the steady-state exposure range. Conclusions: Trastuzumab PK was well described by a two-compartment model with parallel linear and nonlinear eliminationacross cancer types, disease status, and regimens. No dose adjustment is required based on any of the identified patient covariates (e.g. weight, tumor type). Simulations using the PPK model informed the prescribing information for Herceptin; trastuzumab has a 7-month serum washout period during which patients should avoid an anthracycline-based therapy, pregnancy, or breastfeeding. A re-loading dose is required if a maintenance dose is missed by > 1 week to maintain serum concentrations.