An Adaptive Study to Determine the Optimal Dose of the Tablet Formulation of the PARP Inhibitor Olaparib

BACKGROUND: Olaparib is poorly soluble, requiring advanced drug delivery technologies for adequate bioavailability. Sixteen capsules/day are required for the approved 400 mg twice-daily dose; a tablet formulation was developed to reduce pill burden. This clinical trial evaluated the optimal dose and administration schedule of the tablet formulation. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two stages of sequentially enrolled cohorts: stage 1, pharmacokinetic properties of tablet and capsule formulations were compared in patients with advanced solid tumours; stage 2, tablet dose escalation with expansion cohorts at doses/schedules of interest in patients with solid tumours and BRCAm breast/ovarian cancers. RESULTS: Olaparib 200 mg tablets displayed similar Cmax,ss, but lower AUCss and Cmin,ss than 400 mg capsules. Following multiple dosing, steady-state exposure with tablets ≥300 mg matched or exceeded that of 400 mg capsules. After dose escalation, while 400 mg twice daily was the tablet maximum tolerated dose based on haematological toxicity, 65 % of patients in the randomized expansion phase eventually required dose reduction to 300 mg. Intermittent tablet administration did not significantly improve tolerability. Tumour shrinkage was similar for 300 and 400 mg tablet and 400 mg capsule cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: The recommended monotherapy dose of olaparib tablet for Phase III trials was 300 mg twice daily, simplifying drug administration from 16 capsules to four tablets per day. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: NCT00777582 (ClinicalTrials.gov

Safety, efficacy and survival of patients with primary malignant brain tumours (PMBT) in phase I (Ph1) trials: the 12-year Royal Marsden experience.

BACKGROUND:Primary malignant brain tumours (PMBT) constitute less than 2% of all malignancies and carry a dismal prognosis. Treatment options at relapse are limited. First-in-human solid tumour studies have historically excluded patients with PMBT due to the poor prognosis, concomitant drug interactions and concerns regarding toxicities. METHODS:Retrospective data were collected on clinical and tumour characteristics of patients referred for consideration of Ph1 trials in the Royal Marsden Hospital between June 2004 and August 2016. Survival analyses were performed using the Kaplan-Meier method, Cox proportional hazards model. Chi squared test was used to measure bivariate associations between categorical variables. RESULTS:100pts with advanced PMBT were referred. At initial consultation, patients had a median ECOG PS 1, median age 48 years (range 18-70); 69% were men, 76% had glioblastoma; 68% were on AEDs, 63% required steroid therapy; median number of prior treatments was two. Median OS for patients treated on a Ph1 trials was 9.3 months (95% CI 5.9-12.9) versus 5.3 months (95% CI 4.1-6.1) for patients that did not proceed with a Ph1 trial, p = 0.0094. Steroid use, poor PS, neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio and treatment on a Ph1 trial were shown to independently influence OS. CONCLUSIONS:We report a survival benefit for patients with PMBT treated on Ph1 trials. Toxicity and efficacy outcomes were comparable to the general Ph1 population. In the absence of an internationally recognized standard second line treatment for patients with recurrent PMBT, more Ph1 trials should allow enrolment of patients with refractory PMBT and Ph1 trial participation should be considered at an earlier stage

Clinical factors of response in patients with advanced ovarian cancer participating in early phase clinical trials.

Drug resistance to conventional anticancer therapies is almost inevitable in patients with advanced ovarian cancer (AOC), limiting their available treatment options. Novel phase I trial therapies within a dedicated drug development unit may represent a viable alternative; however, there is currently little evidence for patient outcomes in such patients. To address this, we undertook a retrospective review of patients with AOC allocated to phase I trials in the Drug Development Unit at Royal Marsden Hospital (RMH) between June 1998 and October 2010. A total of 200 AOC patients with progressive disease were allocated to ≥1 trial each, with a total of 281 allocations. Of these, 135 (68%) patients commenced ≥1 trial (mean 1.4 [1-8]), totaling 216 allocated trials; 65 (32%) patients did not start due to deterioration resulting from rapidly progressive disease (63 patients) or patient choice (2 patients). Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (RECIST) complete/partial responses (CR/PR) were observed in 43 (20%) of those starting trials, including those on poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase (PARP) inhibitors (18/79 [23%]), antiangiogenics (9/65 [14%]) and chemotherapy combinations (14/43 [33%]). Factors associated with CR/PR included: fewer prior treatments, platinum-sensitive disease, CR/PR with prior therapy, (the United States-based) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score, fewer metastatic sites, higher albumin and haemoglobin levels, lower white cell counts and baseline CA125 levels, germline BRCA1/2 mutations and better RMH Prognostic Score. Mean survival was 32° months for patients who achieved CR/PR. Treatments were generally well tolerated. Most patients with AOC (134/200 [67%]) received ≥1 subsequent line of therapy after phase I trials. Our data suggest that phase I trial referrals should be considered earlier in the AOC treatment pathway and before the onset of rapid disease progression particularly with the emergence of promising novel agents in the era of precision medicine

Clinical outcomes and prognostic factors of patients with advanced mesothelioma treated in a phase I clinical trials unit.

Background We have previously reported a prognostic score for patients in phase I trials in the Drug Development Unit, treated at the Royal Marsden Hospital (RPS). The RPS is an objective tool used in patient selection for phase I trials based on albumin, number of disease sites and LDH. Patients with mesothelioma are often selected for phase I trials as the disease remains localised for long periods of time. We have now reviewed the clinical outcomes of patients with relapsed malignant mesothelioma (MM) and propose a specific mesothelioma prognostic score (m-RPS) that can help identify patients who are most likely to benefit from early referral.Methods Patients who participated in 38 phase I trials between September 2003 and November 2015 were included in the analysis. Efficacy was assessed by response rate, median overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Univariate (UVA) and multivariate analyses (MVA) were carried out to develop the m-RPS.Results A total of 65 patients with advanced MM were included in this retrospective study. The PFS was 2.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.0-3.1 months) and OS was 8 months (95% CI 5.6-9.8 months). A total of four (6%) patients had RECIST partial responses, whereas 26 (40%) patients had RECIST stable disease >3 months. The m-RPS was developed comprising of three different prognostic factors: a neutrophil: lymphocyte ratio greater than 3, the presence of more than two disease sites (including lymph nodes as a single site of disease) and albumin levels less than 35 from the MVA. Patients each received a score of 1 for the presence of each factor. Patients in group A (m-RPS 0-1; n = 35) had a median OS of 13.4 months (95% CI 8.5-21.6), whereas those in group B (m-RPS 2-3; n = 30) had a median OS of 4.0 months (95% CI 2.9-7.1, P < 0.0001). A total of 56 (86%) patients experienced G1-2 toxicities, whereas reversible G3-4 toxicities were observed in 18 (28%) patients. Only 10 (15%) patients discontinued phase I trials due to toxicity.Conclusions Phase I clinical trial therapies were well tolerated with early signals of antitumour activity in advanced MM patients. The m-RPS is a useful tool to assess MM patient suitability for phase I trials and should now be prospectively validated

The HDAC Inhibitor FK228 Enhances Adenoviral Transgene Expression by a Transduction-Independent Mechanism but Does Not Increase Adenovirus Replication

The histone deacetylase inhibitor FK228 has previously been shown to enhance adenoviral transgene expression when cells are pre-incubated with the drug. Upregulation of the coxsackie adenovirus receptor (CAR), leading to increased viral transduction, has been proposed as the main mechanism. In the present study, we found that the highest increase in transgene expression was achieved when non-toxic concentrations of FK228 were added immediately after transduction, demonstrating that the main effect by which FK228 enhances transgene expression is transduction-independent. FK228 had positive effects both on Ad5 and Ad5/f35 vectors with a variety of transgenes and promoters, indicating that FK228 works mainly by increasing transgene expression at the transcriptional level. In some cases, the effects were dramatic, as demonstrated by an increase in CD40L expression by FK228 from 0.3% to 62% when the murine prostate cancer cell line TRAMP-C2 was transduced with Ad[CD40L]. One unexpected finding was that FK228 decreased the transgene expression of an adenoviral vector with the prostate cell-specific PPT promoter in the human prostate adenocarcinoma cell lines LNCaP and PC-346C. This is probably a consequence of alteration of the adenocarcinoma cell lines towards a neuroendocrine differentiation after FK228 treatment. The observations in this study indicate that FK228 enhances adenoviral therapy by a transduction-independent mechanism. Furthermore, since histone deacetylase inhibitors may affect the differentiation of cells, it is important to keep in mind that the activity and specificity of tissue- and tumor-specific promoters may also be affected

Histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors in recent clinical trials for cancer therapy

Heritable changes in gene expression that are not based upon alterations in the DNA sequence are defined as epigenetics. The most common mechanisms of epigenetic regulation are the methylation of CpG islands within the DNA and the modification of amino acids in the N-terminal histone tails. In the last years, it became evident that the onset of cancer and its progression may not occur only due to genetic mutations but also because of changes in the patterns of epigenetic modifications. In contrast to genetic mutations, which are almost impossible to reverse, epigenetic changes are potentially reversible. This implies that they are amenable to pharmacological interventions. Therefore, a lot of work in recent years has focussed on the development of small molecule enzyme inhibitors like DNA-methyltransferase inhibitors or inhibitors of histone-modifying enzymes. These may reverse misregulated epigenetic states and be implemented in the treatment of cancer or other diseases, e.g., neurological disorders. Today, several epigenetic drugs are already approved by the FDA and the EMEA for cancer treatment and around ten histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitors are in clinical development. This review will give an update on recent clinical trials of the HDAC inhibitors used systemically that were reported in 2009 and 2010 and will present an overview of different biomarkers to monitor the biological effects

Epigenetic regulation of prostate cancer

Prostate cancer is a commonly diagnosed cancer in men and a leading cause of cancer deaths. Whilst the underlying mechanisms leading to prostate cancer are still to be determined, it is evident that both genetic and epigenetic changes contribute to the development and progression of this disease. Epigenetic changes involving DNA hypo- and hypermethylation, altered histone modifications and more recently changes in microRNA expression have been detected at a range of genes associated with prostate cancer. Furthermore, there is evidence that particular epigenetic changes are associated with different stages of the disease. Whilst early detection can lead to effective treatment, and androgen deprivation therapy has a high response rate, many tumours develop towards hormone-refractory prostate cancer, for which there is no successful treatment. Reliable markers for early detection and more effective treatment strategies are, therefore, needed. Consequently, there is a considerable interest in the potential of epigenetic changes as markers or targets for therapy in prostate cancer. Epigenetic modifiers that demethylate DNA and inhibit histone deacetylases have recently been explored to reactivate silenced gene expression in cancer. However, further understanding of the mechanisms and the effects of chromatin modulation in prostate cancer are required. In this review, we examine the current literature on epigenetic changes associated with prostate cancer and discuss the potential use of epigenetic modifiers for treatment of this disease