Faculty Bibliography

PURPOSE:Olaratumab is a recombinant human IgG1 monoclonal antibody against PGDFRα. Olaratumab plus doxorubicin improved survivalversus doxorubicin in an open-label, randomised phase 2 soft tissue sarcoma (STS) trial. We characterised the olaratumab exposure-response relationship for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. METHODS:). The rate of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) was compared across olaratumab exposure quartiles. RESULTS:in the study, respectively. Maximum predicted improvement in the hazard ratio for OS and PFS was approximately 75% and 60%, respectively. There was no change in the rate of TEAEs with increasing olaratumab serum levels. CONCLUSIONS:PFS/OS benefits occurred without a rate change in TEAEs across quartiles. Maximum benefit in OS was achieved in the upper three quartiles and a potential of early disease progression in the lower quartile of olaratumab serum exposure. These results prompted a loading dose strategy in the ongoing phase 3 STS trial.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:Platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α (PDGFRα) is expressed in primary prostate adenocarcinoma and in associated skeletal metastases. Olaratumab is a fully human monoclonal antibody that binds PDGFRα and blocks downstream signalling. This phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of olaratumab in combination with mitoxantrone and prednisone (M/P) versus M/P alone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) who progressed after docetaxel. METHODS:, Day 1) and prednisone (5 mg, twice daily) or M/P alone. Progression-free survival (PFS) was the primary end-point. Secondary end-points included overall survival (OS), safety, and circulating tumour cell (CTC) counts. RESULTS:A total of 123 patients were randomised, 63 to olaratumab + M/P and 60 to M/P. Median PFS was 2.3 months for olaratumab + M/P and 2.4 months for M/P (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.87-1.90). Median OS was 14.2 months for olaratumab + M/P and 12.8 months for M/P (HR = 1.08; 95% CI = 0.72-1.61). Both treatment arms had similar toxicity profiles; neutropenia (24% versus 15%), anaemia (13% versus 14%) and fatigue (11% versus 9%) (olaratumab + M/P versus M/P, respectively) were the most common grade ≥3 events. High CTC count was associated with poorer OS in both arms. Patients with very high cell counts (>37 cells/7.5 ml) exhibited improved OS with olaratumab + M/P (interaction P = 0.043). CONCLUSIONS:Olaratumab + M/P had an acceptable safety profile but did not improve the efficacy of M/P chemotherapy. Further study with selected patient populations and earlier in the disease course might be considered.

BACKGROUND:Olaratumab is a platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α (PDGFRα)-targeting monoclonal antibody blocking PDGFRα signaling. PDGFRα expression is associated with a more aggressive phenotype and poor ovarian cancer outcomes. This randomized, open label phase II study evaluated olaratumab plus liposomal doxorubicin compared with liposomal doxorubicin alone in advanced ovarian cancer patients. METHODS:, intravenous infusion) administered every 4 weeks with or without olaratumab (20 mg/kg, IV infusion) every 2 weeks. Patients were stratified based on prior response to platinum therapy (refractory vs resistant). The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, duration of response, and safety. RESULTS:A total of 123 patients were treated (62 olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin; 61 liposomal doxorubicin). Median PFS was 4.2 months for olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin and 4.0 months for liposomal doxorubicin (stratified hazard ratio [HR] = 1.043; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.698-1.558; p = 0.837). Median OS was 16.6 months and 16.2 months in the olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin and liposomal doxorubicin arms, respectively (HR = 1.098; 95% CI 0.71-1.71). In the platinum-refractory subgroup, median PFS was 5.5 months (95% CI 1.6-9.2) and 3.7 months (95% CI 1.9-9.2) in the olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin (n = 15) and liposomal doxorubicin arms (n = 16), respectively (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.38-1.91). Overall, 59.7% (olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin) and 65.6% (liposomal doxorubicin) of patients reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events regardless of causality. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (all grades) regardless of causality were fatigue related (61%), nausea (57%), and constipation (52%) with olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin and nausea (64%), fatigue related (62%), and mucositis (46%) with liposomal doxorubicin. CONCLUSIONS:The addition of olaratumab to liposomal doxorubicin did not result in significant prolongation of PFS or OS in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer. TRIAL REGISTRATION/BACKGROUND:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00913835 ; registered June 2, 2009.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:Olaratumab is a recombinant human monoclonal antibody that binds to platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α (PDGFRα). In a randomized phase II study, olaratumab plus doxorubicin met its predefined primary endpoint for progression-free survival and achieved a highly significant improvement in overall survival versus doxorubicin alone in patients with advanced or metastatic soft tissue sarcoma (STS). In this study, we characterize the pharmacokinetics (PKs) of olaratumab in a cancer patient population. METHODS:. RESULTS:), whereas tumor size significantly affected CL. A small subset of patients developed treatment-emergent anti-drug antibodies (TE-ADAs); however, TE-ADAs did not have any effect on CL or PK time course of olaratumab. There was no difference in the PKs of olaratumab between patients who received olaratumab as a single agent or in combination with chemotherapy. CONCLUSION:The PKs of olaratumab were best described by a model with linear disposition. Patient body weight and tumor size were found to be significant covariates. The PKs of olaratumab were not affected by immunogenicity or chemotherapeutic agents.

BACKGROUND:In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) mediates angiogenesis, tissue invasion, and tumor interstitial pressure. Olaratumab (IMC-3G3) is a fully human anti-PDGFRα monoclonal antibody. This Phase II study assessed safety and efficacy of olaratumab+paclitaxel/carboplatin (P/C) versus P/C alone for previously untreated advanced NSCLC. MATERIALS AND METHODS:and C AUC 6 (day 1)±olaratumab 15mg/kg (days 1 and 8). Primary endpoint was PFS. Olaratumab was continued in the olaratumab+P/C arm until disease progression. RESULTS:131 patients were: 67 with olaratumab+P/C and 64 with P/C; 74% had nonsquamous NSCLC. Median PFS was similar between olaratumab+P/C and P/C (4.4 months each) (HR 1.29; 95% CI [0.86-1.93]; p=0.21). Median OS was similar between olaratumab+P/C (11.8 months) and P/C (11.5 months) (HR 1.04; 95% CI [0.68-1.57]; p=0.87). Both arms had similar toxicity profiles. All evaluable cases were PDGFR-negative by immunohistochemistry. Tumor stroma PDGFR expression was evaluable in 23/131 patients, of which 78% were positive. CONCLUSIONS:The addition of olaratumab to P/C did not result in significant prolongation of PFS or OS in advanced NSCLC. Olaratumab studies in other patient populations, including soft tissue sarcoma (NCT02783599), pancreatic cancer (NCT03086369), and pediatric malignancies (NCT02677116) are underway.

BACKGROUND:Hepcidin plays a central role in iron homeostasis and erythropoiesis. Neutralizing hepcidin with a monoclonal antibody (mAb) may prevent ferroportin internalization, restore iron efflux from cells, and allow transferrin-mediated iron transport to the bone marrow. This multicenter, phase 1 study evaluated the safety, pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics (PD), and efficacy of a fully humanized mAb (LY2787106) with high affinity for hepcidin in cancer patients with anemia. METHODS:Thirty-three patients with hepcidin levels ≥5 ng/mL received LY2787106 either every 3 weeks (19 patients, dose range 0.3-10 mg/kg) (part A) or weekly (14 patients, dose 10 mg/kg) (part B). LY2787106 PK/PD markers of iron and hematology biology were measured. RESULTS:LY2787106 clearance (32 mL/h) and volume of distribution (7.7 L) were independent of dose and time, leading to a dose-proportional increase in concentration with dose. Consistent dose-dependent increases in serum iron, and transferrin saturation were seen at the 3 and 10 mg/kg dose levels, typically peaking within 24 h after LY2787106 administration and returning to baseline by day 8. CONCLUSIONS:Our findings indicate that LY2787106 was well tolerated in cancer patients with anemia and that targeting the hepcidin-ferroportin pathway by neutralizing hepcidin resulted in transient iron mobilization, thus supporting the role of hepcidin in iron regulation. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT01340976.

BACKGROUND:Treatment with doxorubicin is a present standard of care for patients with metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma and median overall survival for those treated is 12-16 months, but few, if any, novel treatments or chemotherapy combinations have been able to improve these poor outcomes. Olaratumab is a human antiplatelet-derived growth factor receptor α monoclonal antibody that has antitumour activity in human sarcoma xenografts. We aimed to assess the efficacy of olaratumab plus doxorubicin in patients with advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma. METHODS:We did an open-label phase 1b and randomised phase 2 study of doxorubicin plus olaratumab treatment in patients with unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma at 16 clinical sites in the USA. For both the phase 1b and phase 2 parts of the study, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had a histologically confirmed diagnosis of locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma not previously treated with an anthracycline, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, and available tumour tissue to determine PDGFRα expression by immunohistochemistry. In the phase 2 part of the study, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either olaratumab (15 mg/kg) intravenously on day 1 and day 8 plus doxorubicin (75 mg/m(2)) or doxorubicin alone (75 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle for up to eight cycles. Randomisation was dynamic and used the minimisation randomisation technique. The phase 1b primary endpoint was safety and the phase 2 primary endpoint was progression-free survival using a two-sided α level of 0.2 and statistical power of 0.8. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01185964. FINDINGS/RESULTS:15 patients were enrolled and treated with olaratumab plus doxorubicin in the phase 1b study, and 133 patients were randomised (66 to olaratumab plus doxorubicin; 67 to doxorubicin alone) in the phase 2 trial, 129 (97%) of whom received at least one dose of study treatment (64 received olaratumab plus doxorubicin, 65 received doxorubicin). Median progression-free survival in phase 2 was 6.6 months (95% CI 4.1-8.3) with olaratumab plus doxorubicin and 4.1 months (2.8-5.4) with doxorubicin (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0.67; 0.44-1.02, p=0.0615). Median overall survival was 26.5 months (20.9-31.7) with olaratumab plus doxorubicin and 14.7 months (9.2-17.1) with doxorubicin (stratified HR 0.46, 0.30-0.71, p=0.0003). The objective response rate was 18.2% (9.8-29.6) with olaratumab plus doxorubicin and 11.9% (5.3-22.2) with doxorubicin (p=0.3421). Steady state olaratumab serum concentrations were reached during cycle 3 with mean maximum and trough concentrations ranging from 419 μg/mL (geometric coefficient of variation in percentage [CV%] 26.2) to 487 μg/mL (CV% 33.0) and from 123 μg/mL (CV% 31.2) to 156 μg/mL (CV% 38.0), respectively. Adverse events that were more frequent with olaratumab plus doxorubicin versus doxorubicin alone included neutropenia (37 [58%] vs 23 [35%]), mucositis (34 [53%] vs 23 [35%]), nausea (47 [73%] vs 34 [52%]), vomiting (29 [45%] vs 12 [18%]), and diarrhoea (22 [34%] vs 15 [23%]). Febrile neutropenia of grade 3 or higher was similar in both groups (olaratumab plus doxorubicin: eight [13%] of 64 patients vs doxorubicin: nine [14%] of 65 patients). INTERPRETATION/CONCLUSIONS:This study of olaratumab with doxorubicin in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma met its predefined primary endpoint for progression-free survival and achieved a highly significant improvement of 11.8 months in median overall survival, suggesting a potential shift in the treatment of soft-tissue sarcoma. FUNDING/BACKGROUND:Eli Lilly and Company.

BACKGROUND:This phase Ib study used a parallel, multi-arm design to examine tasisulam-sodium (hereafter tasisulam), a drug with complex pharmacology, combined with standard chemotherapies in patients with advanced solid tumors, with the ultimate goal of accelerating drug development. METHODS:Patients received escalating doses of tasisulam (3 + 3 schema; target Cmax 300-400 μg/mL) every 28 days plus 1,000 mg/m(2) gemcitabine HCl (days 1 and 15), 60 mg/m(2) docetaxel, 200 mg/m(2)/day temozolomide, 75 mg/m(2) cisplatin, or 150 mg/day erlotinib. Following dose-escalation, patients were enrolled into specific tumor subtype arms, chosen based on the established activity of the standard agent. Because tasisulam is highly albumin-bound, patients in the tumor-specific confirmation arms were dosed targeting specific albumin-corrected exposure ranges (AUCalb) identified during dose-escalation (3,500 h*μg/mL [75th percentile] for docetaxel, temozolomide, and cisplatin; 4,000 h*μg/mL for gemcitabine and erlotinib). RESULTS:A total of 234 patients were enrolled. The safety profile of tasisulam with standard chemotherapies was sufficient to allow enrollment into the dose-confirmation phase in all arms. The primary dose-limiting toxicities were hematologic (thrombocytopenia and neutropenia). The most common grade ≥3 drug-related treatment-emergent adverse event was neutropenia, with the highest incidence in the docetaxel arm. CONCLUSIONS:The multi-arm design allowed the efficient determination of the maximum tolerated dose of tasisulam across multiple combinations, and a preliminary characterization of pharmacokinetics, safety, and potential efficacy. Although enrollment into all planned groups was not completed due to termination of compound development, these data support the feasibility of this approach for accelerated cancer drug development, even for drugs with complex pharmacology.

BACKGROUND:Tasisulam sodium (hereafter referred to as tasisulam) is a novel, highly albumin-bound agent that demonstrated activity in a phase 2 melanoma study. METHODS:In this open-label phase 3 study, patients with AJCC stage IV melanoma received tasisulam (targeting an albumin-corrected exposure of 1200-6400 h (hour).μg/mL on day 1) or paclitaxel (80 mg/m(2) on days 1, 8, and 15) every 28 days as second-line treatment. RESULTS:The study was placed on clinical hold after randomization of 336 patients when a safety review indicated an imbalance of possibly drug-related deaths in the tasisulam arm. Efficacy results for tasisulam versus paclitaxel revealed a response rate of 3.0% versus 4.8%, a median progression-free survival of 1.94 months versus 2.14 months (P = .048), and a median overall survival of 6.77 months versus 9.36 months (P = .121). The most common drug-related grade ≥3 laboratory toxicities (graded according to Common Terminology for Adverse Events [version 3.0]) were thrombocytopenia (18.9%) for patients treated with tasisulam and neutropenia/leukopenia (8.7%) among those receiving paclitaxel. There were 13 possibly related deaths reported to occur on the study, with the majority occurring during cycle 2 in the setting of grade 4 myelosuppression, all in the tasisulam arm. Investigation of the unexpectedly high rate of hematologic toxicity revealed a subset of patients with low tasisulam clearance, leading to drug accumulation and high albumin-corrected exposure in cycle 2. CONCLUSIONS:Although the study was stopped early because of safety issues in the tasisulam arm, tasisulam was considered unlikely to be superior to paclitaxel, and paclitaxel activity in the second-line treatment of melanoma was much lower than expected. The toxicity imbalance was attributed to an unexpectedly low tasisulam clearance in a subset of patients, underscoring the importance of pharmacokinetic monitoring of compounds with complex dosing, even in late-phase studies.

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE:This phase I study was designed to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and the dose to be recommended for a future phase II study of tasisulam sodium in Japanese patients with advanced, refractory solid tumors. Safety, pharmacokinetics and preliminary anti-tumor activities were assessed. Due to high-affinity albumin binding, an albumin-tailored dose to reduce the variability in tasisulam exposure was also studied. METHODS:A dose escalation scheme of tasisulam was used over 4 dose levels. Dose levels 1-3 targeted the maximum plasma concentration (C max) of 300, 340, and 360 μg/mL. Dose level 4 used an albumin-tailored range of C max-targeted doses to achieve an albumin-corrected exposure (AUCalb) of 1,200-6,400 μg h/mL, the range chosen for global tasisulam studies. Tasisulam was administered intravenously on day 1 of each 21-day (dose levels 1 and 2) or 28-day (dose levels 3 and 4) cycle. RESULTS:The major adverse events were related to bone marrow suppression, particularly neutropenia and thrombocytopenia. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were not observed until dose level 4, where 3 out of 6 patients experienced DLT, despite a tendency toward lower AUCalb variability (CV %) in the albumin-tailored dose group (38 %) compared with the targeted C max groups (50-236 %). CONCLUSIONS:Tasisulam in doses up to dose level 3 (target C max 360 μg/mL) was well tolerated. Although albumin-tailored dosing provided less AUCalb variability, a MTD that aligns with other global tasisulam studies was not identified. A lower AUCalb range may be required for the Japan population.