Mocetinostat for patients with previously treated, locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma and inactivating alterations of acetyltransferase genes

BackgroundThe authors evaluated mocetinostat (a class I/IV histone deacetylase inhibitor) in patients with urothelial carcinoma harboring inactivating mutations or deletions in CREB binding protein [CREBBP] and/or E1A binding protein p300 [EP300] histone acetyltransferase genes in a singleâ arm, openâ label phase 2 study.MethodsEligible patients with platinumâ treated, advanced/metastatic disease received oral mocetinostat (at a dose of 70 mg 3 times per week [TIW] escalating to 90 mg TIW) in 28â day cycles in a 3â stage study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02236195). The primary endpoint was the objective response rate.ResultsGenomic testing was feasible in 155 of 175 patients (89%). Qualifying tumor mutations were CREBBP (15%), EP300 (8%), and both CREBBP and EP300 (1%). A total of 17 patients were enrolled into stage 1 (the intentâ toâ treat population); no patients were enrolled in subsequent stages. One partial response was observed (11% [1 of 9 patients; the population that was evaluable for efficacy comprised 9 of the 15 planned patients]); activity was deemed insufficient to progress to stage 2 (null hypothesis: objective response rate of â ¤15%). All patients experienced â ¥1 adverse event, most commonly nausea (13 of 17 patients; 77%) and fatigue (12 of 17 patients; 71%). The median duration of treatment was 46 days; treatment interruptions (14 of 17 patients; 82%) and dose reductions (5 of 17 patients; 29%) were common. Mocetinostat exposure was lower than anticipated (doseâ normalized maximum serum concentration [Cmax] after TIW dosing of 0.2 ng/mL/mg).ConclusionsTo the authorsâ knowledge, the current study represents the first clinical trial using genomicâ based selection to identify patients with urothelial cancer who are likely to benefit from selective histone deacetylase inhibition. Mocetinostat was associated with significant toxicities that impacted drug exposure and may have contributed to modest clinical activity in these pretreated patients. The efficacy observed was considered insufficient to warrant further investigation of mocetinostat as a single agent in this setting.After the genomicâ based selection of patients with urothelial cancer with inactivating mutations/deletions in the histone acetyltransferase genes CREBBP and/or EP300, singleâ agent mocetinostat appears to be associated with significant toxicities that limit drug exposure. This may have contributed to the limited activity noted in the current phase 2 study (response rate of 11%) among heavily pretreated patients with platinumâ refractory disease.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/147860/1/cncr31817_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/147860/2/cncr31817.pd

Phase I Study of Glesatinib (MGCD265) in Combination with Erlotinib or Docetaxel in Patients with Advanced Solid Tumors

BACKGROUND: Oncogenic drivers in solid tumors include aberrant activation of mesenchymal epithelial transition factor (MET) and AXL. OBJECTIVE: This study investigated the safety and antitumor activity of glesatinib, a multitargeted receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor that inhibits MET and AXL at clinically relevant doses, in combination with erlotinib or docetaxel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The phase I portion of this open-label, multicenter study included two parallel arms in which ascending doses of oral glesatinib (starting dose 96 mg/m(2)) were administered with erlotinib or docetaxel (starting doses 100 mg once daily and 50 mg/m(2), respectively) using a modified 3 + 3 design. Maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was based on dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during the first 21-day treatment cycle. Enrollment focused on patients with solid tumor types typically associated with MET aberration and/or AXL overexpression. The primary objective was to determine the safety profile of the treatment combinations. Antitumor activity and pharmacokinetics (PK) were also assessed. RESULTS: Ten dose levels of glesatinib across three glycolate formulations (unmicronized, micronized, or micronized version 2 [V2] tablets) available during the course of the study were investigated in 14 dose-escalation cohorts (n = 126). MTDs of unmicronized glesatinib plus erlotinib or docetaxel, and micronized glesatinib plus erlotinib were not reached. Micronized glesatinib 96 mg/m(2) plus docetaxel exceeded the MTD. Further dosing focused on glesatinib micronized V2: maximum administered dose (MAD) was 700 mg twice daily with erlotinib 150 mg once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks. DLTs, acceptable at lower glesatinib (micronized V2) dose levels, occurred in two of five and two of six patients at the MADs of glesatinib + erlotinib and glesatinib + docetaxel, respectively. Across all cohorts, the most frequent treatment-related adverse events were diarrhea (glesatinib + erlotinib: 84.1%; glesatinib + docetaxel: 45.6%), fatigue (46.4%, 70.4%), and nausea (30.4%, 35.1%). The objective response rate was 1.8% and 12.0% in all glesatinib + erlotinib and glesatinib + docetaxel cohorts, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The safety profile of glesatinib plus erlotinib or docetaxel was acceptable and there were no PK interactions. MADs of glesatinib 700 mg twice daily (micronized V2) with erlotinib 150 mg once daily or docetaxel 75 mg/m(2) every 3 weeks exceeded the MTD by a small margin. Modest signals of efficacy were observed with these treatment combinations in non-genetically selected patients with advanced solid tumors. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00975767; 11 September 2009