Ames, Matthew M.

9569 Background: Vorinostat, an orally administered histone deacetylase inhibitor, has potent antitumor activity against human cell lines in vitro (IC50 0.5 to 5 μM) and in xenograft models. A phase I trial of vorinostat was conducted in children with recurrent or refractory solid tumors to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), dose limiting toxicity (DLT), pharmacokinetics (PK) of vorinostat, and to assess accumulation of histone acetylation in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs). Methods: Vorinostat was administered once daily at dose levels of 180, 230, and 300 mg/m2/d. Courses were 28 days in duration, without interruption. PK analysis was performed during the 1st course. Vorinostat's ability to induce acetyl-histone (H3) accumulation in vivo was studied by western blot analysis. Results: 30 patients, 17 males, median age 15 years (range 4–21), were enrolled; 24 patients were fully evaluable for toxicity. At 180 mg/m2/d, 1/6 pts developed DLT (deep vein thrombosis) and at 230 mg/m2/d 1/6 pts developed DLT (hypokalemia). At 300 mg/m2/d, DLTs consisted of reversible hypokalemia (n=1), neutropenia (n=1) and thrombocytopenia (n=2), defining the MTD as 230 mg/m2/d. Other non-dose limiting grade 3 or 4 toxicities included elevated ALT/AST, hyperbilirubinemia, leucopenia, and lymphopenia. Western blot analysis of PBMC protein isolates found clear evidence of dose- dependent accumulation of acetylated H3 histones. 1 patient with a spindle cell sarcoma received 8 courses and 1 patient with a low-grade astrocytoma had an unconfirmed minor response. Conclusions: Vorinostat is well tolerated in children with recurrent or refractory solid tumors and inhibits histone deacetylase activity in PBMC. The recommended phase II dose for children with solid tumors is 230 mg/m2/d. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

9563 Background: Both temozolomide (TEM) and vincristine (VCR) can increase the preclinical activity of low-dose protracted irinotecan (IRN) against pediatric solid tumors. Because these drugs have different dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) and mechanisms of action, we combined these three agents and sought to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of orally administered IRN when given with fixed- dose TEM and VCR in children with relapsed or refractory solid tumors, using the antibiotic cefixime to reduce IRN-associated diarrhea. Methods: We studied two dose levels of oral IRN (35 or 50 mg/m2) administered on days 1–5 and 8–12, combined with oral TEM 100 mg/m2 on days 1–5 and intravenous VCR 1.5 mg/m2 on days 1 and 8. Courses were repeated every 21 days. Oral cefixime was started 5 days before chemotherapy and continued daily. Results: Of 21 patients enrolled, 17 (ages 3–21, median 14 yrs) were evaluable for toxicity and have to date received 46 courses (range 1–8, median 2). At the IRN dose of 50 mg/m2/d, 4 of 12 patients had DLT, including elevated ALT/AST (1), abdominal pain (1), hypokalemia (1), anorexia (1), thrombocytopenia (1), and fatal liver failure in a patient with metastatic disease in the liver and porta hepatis (1). In contrast, none of 5 patients treated at the dose of 35 mg/m2/d experienced first-course DLT, defining this dose as the MTD. UGT1A1 genotype did not correlate with DLT in this small trial. The median SN-38 lactone area under the curve (0–6h) at the IRN dose of 50 mg/m2/day was 13.5 ng/ml*h (range 3.8 to 30.9); pharmacokinetic analysis of patients treated at 35 mg/m2/day is ongoing. Six patients with the following tumors received more than 2 courses: neuroblastoma, ependymoma, hepatoblastoma, fibrillary astrocytoma, osteosarcoma, and Ewing sarcoma. Central review of response data is underway. Three patients continue on therapy at the MTD. Conclusions: Oral administration of IRN together with TEM and VCR was feasible and well tolerated at the MTD of 35 mg/m2 given dx5x2. Further study using a shorter 5-day course of oral IRN is planned. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

2039 Background: Vorinostat (V) is an oral inhibitor of histone deacetylase. In preclinical studies it inhibits growth of glioblastoma (GBM) cell lines and has supra-additive activity when combined with TMZ. Methods: The North American Brain Tumor Consortium (NABTC) is conducting a phase I study of V in combination with TMZ in patients with malignant gliomas (MG). Eligibility criteria are histologically proven GBM and anaplastic gliomas (AG) who have received radiotherapy and have not progressed on temozolomide, > 18 yrs old, life expectancy > 8 weeks, KPS > 60, adequate bone marrow reserve and organ function. There was no limitation to the type of antiepileptic drugs that could be used. All patients received TMZ at a dose of 150 mg/m2/day on days 1–5 days every 28 days. Variable doses of V were administered with food on days 1–14 every 28 days. Dose-limiting toxicities (DLT), determined during the first 4 weeks of therapy, were defined as any grade 4 hematologic toxicity except for grade 3 thrombocytopenia, and any grade 3 non-hematologic toxicities. Escalation was performed in standard groups of 3. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was defined as the dose at which DLTs occurred in no more than 1/6 patients. PKs were determined on cycle 1 for TMZ, V and its metabolites. Results: To date, 19 eligible patients have been enrolled (15 GBM; 4 AG). Patients’ characteristics are 11 male, 8 female; median age 54 yrs (36–78); median KPS 90 (70–100). DLTs were encountered at 300 mg bid of vorinostat (1 grade 3 thrombocytopenia; 1 grade 3 fatigue in 3 patients), 200 mg tid (1 grade 3 nausea, 1 grade 4 thrombocytopenia in 3 patients) and 200 mg twice daily (grade 3 fatigue in 2/6 patients). No DLTs were encountered in 6 patients receiving 300 mg daily. TMZ PKs included [n=16: Cmax 5.2 (± 1.55) μg/ml; AUC 20.1 (±4.66) μg x hr/ml; t1/2 1.9 (±0.32)/hr]. Vorinostat PKs (300mg dose level) were [n=4; Cmax 267 (±174) ng/ml; AUC0–8 603 (±197) ng x hr/ml]. The t1/2 for V and its glucuronide metabolite were identical (1.6 hrs) vs. 5.6 hrs for the acid metabolite. Conclusions: The MTD of vorinostat in combination with TMZ is 300 mg daily on days 1–14 every 28 days. Final PK results, and toxicities from an additional 10 patients enrolled at the MTD will be presented. [Table: see text]

2004 Background: Vorinostat is a histone deacetylase inhibitor that represents a rational therapeutic target in GBM. Methods: Recurrent GBM patients (pts) having received = 1 prior chemo regimen for progressive disease were eligible. Vorinostat dose was 200 mg bid x 14 days q 3 weeks. We applied a phase II design which had 90% power to declare the regimen active if the study PFS6 rate was 25%, a 15% rate increase over PFS6 in historical controls (10%). Results: 68 patients were treated. Grade 3+ non-hematologic toxicity consisting mainly of fatigue, diarrhea and dehydration occurred in 23% of pts; Grade 3+ hematologic toxicity consisting mainly of thrombocytopenia occurred in 25% of pts. Intra-patient dose escalation to 300 mg bid resulted in higher incidence of grade 3+ thrombocytopenia (45%) and was aborted. Pts receiving enzyme-inducing anticonvulsants (EIAC) had significantly less grade 3 + non-hematologic toxicity (p=0.01) and grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia (p=0.04). Pharmacokinetic analysis showed lower vorninostat C-max and AUC (0–24h) values and higher vorinostat-glucuronide C-max and AUC (0–24h) values in EIAC pts, although this did not reach statistical significance. The trial met the prospectively defined primary efficacy endpoint at the planned interim analysis with 5 of the first 22 patients (23%) being progression-free at 6 mo. RNA array analysis, performed in paired baseline and post-vorinostat treatment samples in a separate subgroup of 5 surgical recurrent GBM pts, who received vorinostat for 6 doses prior to surgery, showed upregulation of E-cadherin (p=0.02), thus indicating a biologic effect of the HDAC inhibitor on the glioblastoma tumors. Histone acetylation, Akt, phospho-Akt, P21Waf1/Cip1 and P27Kip1 expression analysis in all patients and correlation with outcome is ongoing. Conclusions: Vorinostat is well tolerated in recurrent GBM patients. EIAC patients have less toxicity, likely due to increased vorinostat metabolism via glucuronidation. Interim efficacy analysis is indicative of antitumor activity. Final efficacy analysis, RNA array data and correlative tissue analysis will be reported. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Abstract Background: MV-NIS is an Edmonston-lineage measles virus that expresses the human sodium-iodide symporter (hNIS). The virus is oncolytic, and its activity can be monitored by noninvasive imaging of radioiodine uptake by hNIS. The receptor is CD46, a membrane regulator of complement activation that is overexpressed on myeloma cells. Methods: Formal studies were done in collaboration with the RAID program to assess the efficacy, biodistribution and safety of MV-NIS in transgenic, measles susceptible mice and in non-human primates. The protocol therapy for the animal studies was modeled on the planned human clinical trial. Mouse efficacy studies were done in irradiated 6-week old female CB17 ICR SCID mice implanted subcutaneously with human KAS-6/1 cells. Mouse toxicity & biodistribution were done in 184 6–8 week IfnarKO x CD46 Ge mice treated with 105–107 TCID50 MV-NIS. Squirrel monkey toxicity studies were done in 12 measles-naïve adults with 108 TCID50. The clinical trial is a 3 patient/cohort dose escalation study which allows for 1 dose of MV-NIS/patient. Once MTD of MV-NIS is reached, subsequent cohorts will be treated with CTX 10 mg/kg 2 days prior to MV-NIS at MTD/100. Immune response to measles is tested pre & post therapy. PK & biodistribution are tested by measurements of MV-N in blood, urine, & gargle samples and by serial nuclear imaging, respectively. BM myeloma cells are tested for CD46 expression and MV infectivity. Results: Preclinical studies: The minimum effective dose in the mouse model was 4 x 106 TCID50 /kg. The MTD for MV-NIS with CTX was not reached in the mouse study. Pre-treatment with CTX changed the biodistribution of MV-NIS infected cells and the kinetics of virus elimination from infected tissues in mice and monkeys. In monkeys, MV-N mRNA was detected at day 1 in the buccal cavity with levels declining on day 2, then surging on day 8, suggesting viral replication. There were no unscheduled deaths or treatment related lesions on necropsy. Patients: Three patients were treated with a dose of 106 TCID50 (Table). No DLT was observed. Two patients had MV-N amplified from their gargle specimen. Accrual to dose level 2 has begun. Conclusions: IV administration of MV-NIS is feasible. The virus is capable of traveling to a distant site and replicating before being cleared by the immune system. Patient 2 Patient 2 Patient 3 *copies per microgram RNA of cells derived from gargle sample at each time point: day +3, +8, +15, +22, and +29; no MV-N detected in urine or blood Anti-measles neutralizing Ab titer, pre-Rx / post Rx 1:10 / 1:160 < 1:10 / 1:20 < 1:10 / 1:10 AEs possibly related Gr 2 plts Gr 1 plts, cough, fever, rigors Gr 2 Incr aPTT CD46 copies/cell CD138+ / CD138- BMPC 79,771 / 10,322 140,187 / 10,145 28,258 / 11,228 MV-N QRT-PCR: d3/ d8/ d15/ d22/ d29 (cp/ug RNA)* −/ −/ −/ nd / nd −/ −/ 16,440 / 1405 / − 123-I uptake on SPECT No Uptake day 8 No

Abstract Lessons Learned Dual epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-directed therapy with erlotinib and panitumumab in combination with gemcitabine was superior to gemcitabine and erlotinib, but the clinical relevance is uncertain given the limited role of gemcitabine monotherapy. A significantly longer overall survival was observed in patients receiving the dual EGFR-directed therapy. The dual EGFR-directed therapy resulted in increased toxicity. Background Gemcitabine is active in patients with advanced pancreatic adenocarcinoma. The combination of erlotinib, an oral epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) inhibitor, and gemcitabine was shown to modestly prolong overall survival when compared with gemcitabine alone. The North Central Cancer Treatment Group (now part of Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology) trial N064B compared gemcitabine plus erlotinib versus gemcitabine plus combined EGFR inhibition with erlotinib and panitumumab. Methods Eligible patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas were randomized to either gemcitabine 1,000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle with erlotinib 100 mg p.o. daily (Arm A) or the same combination with the addition of panitumumab 4 mg/kg on days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle (Arm B). The primary endpoint of the trial was overall survival. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival, the confirmed response rate, and toxicity. Comparison between arms for the primary endpoint was done with a one-sided log-rank test, and a p value less than .20 was considered statistically significant. Response rate comparison was done with Fisher's exact test. All other reported p values are two-sided. Results A total of 92 patients were randomized, 46 to each arm. The median overall survival was 4.2 months in Arm A and 8.3 months in Arm B (hazard ratio, 0.817; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.530–1.260; p = .1792). The progression-free survival was 2.0 months in Arm A and 3.6 months in Arm B (hazard ratio, 0.843; 95% CI, 0.555–1.280; p = .4190). A partial confirmed response was seen in 8.7% of patients on Arm A and 6.5% on Arm B (p = .9999). No patients had a complete response. Grade 3 and higher nonhematologic toxicities were more common in patients on Arm B compared with those on Arm A (82.6% vs. 52.2%; p = .0018). Conclusion Dual EGFR-directed therapy resulted in a significant prolongation of overall survival in patients with advanced adenocarcinoma of the pancreas but was associated with substantially increased toxicities. Dual EGFR-directed therapy in combination with gemcitabine alone cannot be recommended for further study, as single-agent gemcitabine is no longer considered an appropriate therapy for otherwise fit patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer.

1043 Background: In estrogen receptor (ER) positive MBC, mutations (e.g. ESR1), identified from tumor biopsies or cfDNA, confer resistance. The concordance between mutations observed in tumor and cfDNA and the implications for response to Z-endoxifen, a potent anti-estrogen, are unknown. Methods: We previously conducted a phase I trial of Z-endoxifen in endocrine refractory, ER positive MBC. Seven dose levels were considered ranging from 20 to 160 mg/day followed by expansion cohorts (EC) of 40, 80, and 100 mg/day. Pretreatment blood samples (all pts) and fresh tumor biopsies (EC) were collected prospectively. Tumor and cfDNA were evaluated by targeted NGS. Results: 41 pts (38 evaluable) were enrolled. Prior endocrine therapy included aromatase inhibitors (37/38, 97%), fulvestrant (22/38, 58%) and tamoxifen (26/38, 68%). Substantial endoxifen exposure without DLTs at doses above 80 mg/day led to a halt in dose escalation and opening of the EC. Overall clinical benefit (stable > 6 months [7 pts.] or partial response by RECIST criteria [3 pts.]) rate was 26.3% (95%CI: 13.4-43.1%). cfDNA was obtained from 36 pts and mutations were identified in 13 (36%) including ESR1 [ Y537N or D538G] (5), PIK3CA [ H1047R or E542K] (8), TP53 [ K132R, R248Q, R267Q, or H179Y] (4), AKT ( Q79K) (1), and KRAS ( G12D) (1). In 5 pts with cf ESR1 mutations, 4 had additional cfDNA mutations including PIK3CA (3), and TP53 (1). PFS was shorter in pts with cfDNA mutations relative to those without (median: 61 vs.132 days; log-rank p = 0.021). Discordance was observed between tumor and cfDNA mutations where 3/7 PIK3CA tumor mutations were detected by cfDNA, 1/2 TP53 tumor mutations were detected by cfDNA, and 0/1 AKT tumor mutations were detected by cfDNA. Conversely, 2 pts had cfDNA mutations (either ESR1, TP53 or AKT) undetected in tumor. Conclusions: The absence of cfDNA mutations in patients with endocrine resistant, MBC treated with Z-Endoxifen was associated with significantly longer PFS. Given the discordance between tumor and cfDNA sequence data, future studies must determine which approach maximizes prognosis and prediction of benefit for estrogen-targeted therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT01327781.

Purpose Endoxifen is a tamoxifen metabolite with potent antiestrogenic activity. Patients and Methods We performed a phase I study of oral Z-endoxifen to determine its toxicities, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), pharmacokinetics, and clinical activity. Eligibility included endocrine-refractory, estrogen receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer. An accelerated titration schedule was applied until moderate or dose-limiting toxicity occurred, followed by a 3+3 design and expansion at 40, 80, and 100 mg per day. Tumor DNA from serum (circulating cell free [cf); all patients] and biopsies [160 mg/day and expansion]) was sequenced. Results Of 41 enrolled patients, 38 were evaluable for MTD determination. Prior endocrine regimens during which progression occurred included aromatase inhibitor (n = 36), fulvestrant (n = 21), and tamoxifen (n = 15). Patients received endoxifen once daily at seven dose levels (20 to 160 mg). Dose escalation ceased at 160 mg per day given lack of MTD and endoxifen concentrations > 1,900 ng/mL. Endoxifen clearance was unaffected by CYP2D6 genotype. One patient (60 mg) had cycle 1 dose-limiting toxicity (pulmonary embolus). Overall clinical benefit rate (stable > 6 months [n = 7] or partial response by RECIST criteria [n = 3]) was 26.3% (95% CI, 13.4% to 43.1%) including prior tamoxifen progression (n = 3). cfDNA mutations were observed in 13 patients ( PIK3CA [n = 8], ESR1 [n = 5], TP53 [n = 4], and AKT [n = 1]) with shorter progression-free survival ( v those without cfDNA mutations; median, 61 v 132 days; log-rank P = .046). Clinical benefit was observed in those with ESR1 amplification (tumor; 80 mg/day) and ESR1 mutation (cfDNA; 160 mg/day). Comparing tumor biopsies and cfDNA, some mutations ( PIK3CA, TP53, and AKT) were undetected by cfDNA, whereas cfDNA mutations ( ESR1, TP53, and AKT) were undetected by biopsy. Conclusion In endocrine-refractory metastatic breast cancer, Z-endoxifen provides substantial drug exposure unaffected by CYP2D6 metabolism, acceptable toxicity, and promising antitumor activity.

BACKGROUNDOxaliplatin in combination with either 5‐fluorouracil or capecitabine is commonly used as first‐line therapy for patients with small bowel adenocarcinoma. The addition of irinotecan improves survival in other gastrointestinal tumors but at the cost of hematologic toxicity. The authors performed a phase 2 cooperative group study (North Central Cancer Treatment Group N0543, Alliance) using genotype‐dosed capecitabine, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin (gCAPIRINOX), with dosing assigned based on UDP glucuronosyltransferase family 1 member A1 (UGT1A1) genotype to test: 1) whether the addition of irinotecan would improve outcomes; and 2) whether UGT1A1 genotype‐based dosing could optimize tolerability.METHODSPreviously untreated patients with advanced small bowel adenocarcinoma received irinotecan (day 1), oxaliplatin (day 1), and capecitabine (days 2‐15) in a 21‐day cycle and were dosed with gCAPIRINOX according to UGT1A1*28 genotypes (6/6, 6/7, and 7/7).RESULTSA total of 33 patients (17 with the 6/6 genotype, 10 with the 6/7 genotype, and 6 with the 7/7 genotype) were enrolled from October 2007 to November 2013; 73% were male, with a mean age of 64 years (range, 41‐77 years). Location of the primary tumor included the duodenum (58%), jejunum (30%), and ileum (9%). The regimen yielded a confirmed response rate of 37.5% (95% confidence interval, 21%‐56%), with a median progression‐free survival of 8.9 months and a median overall survival of 13.4 months. Neither hematologic toxicity (grade ≥3 in 52.9%, 30.0%, and 33.3%, respectively, of the 6/6, 6/7, and 7/7 genotype groups) nor tumor response rate (41.2%, 33%, and 33%, respectively) were found to differ significantly by UGT1A1 genotype.CONCLUSIONSUGT1A1 genotype‐directed dosing (gCAPIRINOX) appears to be feasible with favorable rates of hematologic toxicity compared with prior 3‐drug studies in unselected patients. Larger studies would be needed to determine the regimen's comparability to oxaliplatin and capecitabine (CapeOx) alone or if response/toxicity differs among patients with different UGT1A1 genotypes. Cancer 2017;123:3494‐501. © 2017 American Cancer Society.