Phase I dose-escalation trial of the oral AKT inhibitor uprosertib in combination with the oral MEK1/MEK2 inhibitor trametinib in patients with solid tumors.

PurposeThis study aimed to determine the safety, tolerability, and recommended phase II doses of trametinib plus uprosertib (GSK2141795) in patients with solid tumors likely to be sensitive to MEK and/or AKT inhibition.MethodsThis was a phase I, open-label, dose-escalation, and dose-expansion study in patients with triple-negative breast cancer or BRAF-wild type advanced melanoma. The primary outcome of the expansion study was investigator-assessed response. Among 126 enrolled patients, 63 received continuous oral daily dosing of trametinib and uprosertib, 29 received various alternative dosing schedules, and 34 were enrolled into expansion cohorts. Doses tested in the expansion cohort were trametinib 1.5 mg once daily (QD) + uprosertib 50 mg QD.ResultsAdverse events (AEs) were consistent with those reported in monotherapy studies but occurred at lower doses and with greater severity. Diarrhea was the most common dose-limiting toxicity; diarrhea and rash were particularly difficult to tolerate. Overall, 59% and 6% of patients reported AEs with a maximum severity of grade 3 and 4, respectively. Poor tolerability prevented adequate delivery of uprosertib with trametinib at a concentration predicted to have clinical activity. The study was terminated early based on futility in the continuous-dosing expansion cohorts and a lack of pharmacological or therapeutic advantage with intermittent dosing. The objective response rate was < 5% (1 complete response, 5 partial responses).ConclusionsContinuous and intermittent dosing of trametinib in combination with uprosertib was not tolerated, and minimal clinical activity was observed in all schedules tested

Interrogating two schedules of the AKT inhibitor MK-2206 in patients with advanced solid tumors incorporating novel pharmacodynamic and functional imaging biomarkers.

PURPOSE: Multiple cancers harbor genetic aberrations that impact AKT signaling. MK-2206 is a potent pan-AKT inhibitor with a maximum tolerated dose (MTD) previously established at 60 mg on alternate days (QOD). Due to a long half-life (60-80 hours), a weekly (QW) MK-2206 schedule was pursued to compare intermittent QW and continuous QOD dosing. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Patients with advanced cancers were enrolled in a QW dose-escalation phase I study to investigate the safety and pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic profiles of tumor and platelet-rich plasma (PRP). The QOD MTD of MK-2206 was also assessed in patients with ovarian and castration-resistant prostate cancers and patients with advanced cancers undergoing multiparametric functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) studies, including dynamic contrast-enhanced MRI, diffusion-weighted imaging, magnetic resonance spectroscopy, and intrinsic susceptibility-weighted MRI. RESULTS: A total of 71 patients were enrolled; 38 patients had 60 mg MK-2206 QOD, whereas 33 received MK-2206 at 90, 135, 150, 200, 250, and 300 mg QW. The QW MK-2206 MTD was established at 200 mg following dose-limiting rash at 250 and 300 mg. QW dosing appeared to be similarly tolerated to QOD, with toxicities including rash, gastrointestinal symptoms, fatigue, and hyperglycemia. Significant AKT pathway blockade was observed with both continuous QOD and intermittent QW dosing of MK-2206 in serially obtained tumor and PRP specimens. The functional imaging studies demonstrated that complex multiparametric MRI protocols may be effectively implemented in a phase I trial. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with MK-2206 safely results in significant AKT pathway blockade in QOD and QW schedules. The intermittent dose of 200 mg QW is currently used in phase II MK-2206 monotherapy and combination studies (NCT00670488).This study was supported by Merck & Co., Inc. The Drug Development Unit of the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research is supported in part by a program grant from Cancer Research U.K. Support was also provided by the Experimental Cancer Medicine Centre (to The Institute of Cancer Research), the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Biomedical Research Centre (jointly to the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust and The Institute of Cancer Research), the NIHR Clinical Research Facility (to the Royal Marsden NHS Foundation Trust) and the Cancer Research UK and EPSRC Cancer Imaging Centre. T.A. Yap is the recipient of the 2011 Rebecca and Nathan Milikowsky – PCF Young Investigator Award and is supported by the NIHR. M.O. Leach is an NIHR Senior Investigator.This is the accepted manuscript. The final version is available from AACR at http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/early/2014/09/19/1078-0432.CCR-14-0868

Case report and summary of literature: giant perineal keloids treated with post-excisional radiotherapy

BACKGROUND: Keloids are common benign tumors of the dermis, typically arising after insult to the skin. While typically only impinging on cosmesis, large or recurrent keloids may require therapeutic intervention. While no single standardized treatment course has been established, several series report excellent outcomes for keloids with post-surgery radiation therapy. CASE PRESENTATION: We present a patient with a history of recurrent keloids arising in the absence of an ascribed trauma and a maternal familial history of keloid formation, whose physical examination several large perineal keloids of 6-20 cm in the largest dimension. The patient was treated with surgical extirpation and adjuvant radiation therapy. Radiotherapy was delivered to the scar bed to a total dose of 22 Gy over 11 daily fractions. Acute radiotherapy toxicity necessitated a treatment break due to RTOG Grade III acute toxicity (moderate ulceration and skin breakdown) which resolved rapidly during a 3-day treatment break. The patient demonstrated local control and has remained free of local recurrence for more than 2 years. CONCLUSION: Radiotherapy for keloids represents a safe and effective option for post-surgical keloid therapy, especially for patients with bulky or recurrent disease

A phase I open-label study evaluating the cardiovascular safety of sorafenib in patients with advanced cancer

Purpose: To characterize the cardiovascular profile of sorafenib, a multitargeted kinase inhibitor, in patients with advanced cancer. Methods: Fifty-three patients with advanced cancer received oral sorafenib 400 mg bid in continuous 28-day cycles in this open-label study. Left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) was evaluated using multigated acquisition scanning at baseline and after 2 and 4 cycles of sorafenib. QT/QTc interval on the electrocardiograph (ECG) was measured in triplicate with a Holter 12-lead ECG at baseline and after 1 cycle of sorafenib. Heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) were obtained in duplicate at baseline and after 1 and 4 cycles of sorafenib. Plasma pharmacokinetic data were obtained for sorafenib and its 3 main metabolites after 1 and 4 cycles of sorafenib. Results: LVEF (SD) mean change from baseline was -0.8 ($\pm$8.6) LVEF(%) after 2 cycles (n=31) and -1.2 $\pm$7.8) LVEF(%) after 4 cycles of sorafenib (n=24). The QT/QTc mean changes from baseline observed at maximum sorafenib concentrations ($t_{max}$) after 1 cycle (n=31) were small (QTcB: 4.2 ms; QTcF: 9.0 ms). Mean changes observed after 1 cycle in BP (n=31) and HR (n=30) at maximum sorafenib concentrations ($t_{max}$) were moderate (up to 11.7 mm Hg and -6.6 bpm, respectively). No correlation was found between the AUC and ($C_{max}$) of sorafenib and its main metabolites and any cardiovascular parameters. Conclusions: The effects of sorafenib on changes in QT/QTc interval on the ECG, LVEF, BP, and HR were modest and unlikely to be of clinical significance in the setting of advanced cancer treatment

Phase I, Pharmacokinetic, and Pharmacodynamic Study of Amg 479, a Fully Human Monoclonal Antibody to Insulin-Like Growth Factor Receptor 1

PURPOSE: To determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and to assess the safety, pharmacokinetics, and evidence of antitumor activity of AMG 479, a fully human monoclonal antibody to insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 (IGF-1R). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Patients with advanced solid malignancies or non-Hodgkin's lymphoma received escalating doses of AMG 479 intravenously (IV) every 2 weeks (Q2W). Blood samples were assayed to determine pharmacokinetic parameters and IGF-1R occupancy on neutrophils; fluorodeoxyglucose-positron emission tomography scans were used to assess tumor metabolic effects. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients received 312 infusions of AMG 479 Q2W. Overall, the most common grades 1 to 2 toxicities were fatigue, thrombocytopenia, fever, rash, chills, and anorexia. One dose-limiting toxicity (ie, grade 3 thrombocytopenia) occurred in a patient at 20 mg/kg during course 1; grade 3 thrombocytopenia (n = 8) and grade 3 transaminitis elevations (n = 1) also were reported but not in the escalation phase. The maximum-planned dose of 20 mg/kg was safely administered; thus, an MTD was not reached. High levels of neutrophil IGF-1R binding and increases from baseline in serum IGF-1 levels were observed in the 12- and 20-mg/kg cohorts. Tumor responses included one durable complete response (CR) and one unconfirmed partial response( PR) in two patients with Ewing/primitive neuroectodermal tumors and included one PR and one minor response in two patients with neuroendocrine tumors. The patients with Ewing /PNET who had a CR have remained disease free on therapy after 28 months. CONCLUSION: AMG 479 can be administered safely at 20 mg/kg IV Q2W. The absence of severe toxicities, attainment of serum concentrations associated with high levels of IGF-1R binding on neutrophils, and provocative antitumor activity warrant additional studies of this agent