Ingham, Matthew A

PURPOSE This multicenter, single-arm, open-label, phase Ib study was designed to determine the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) and to evaluate the safety and preliminary efficacy of unesbulin plus dacarbazine (DTIC) in patients with advanced leiomyosarcoma (LMS). PATIENTS AND METHODS Adult subjects with locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic, relapsed or refractory LMS were treated with escalating doses of unesbulin orally twice per week in combination with DTIC 1,000 mg/m2 intravenously (IV) once every 21 days. The time-to-event continual reassessment method was used to determine the RP2D on the basis of dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) assessed during the first two 21-day treatment cycles. All explored doses of unesbulin (200 mg up to 400 mg) were in combination with DTIC. An expansion cohort was enrolled to evaluate the safety and efficacy of unesbulin at the RP2D. RESULTS Unesbulin 300 mg administered orally twice per week in combination with DTIC 1,000 mg/m2 IV once every 21 days was identified as the RP2D. On the basis of data from 27 subjects who were deemed DLT-evaluable, toxicity was higher in the unesbulin 400 mg group, with three of four subjects (75%) experiencing DLTs versus one of four subjects (25%) in the 200 mg group and three of 19 subjects (15.8%) in the 300 mg group. The most commonly reported DLTs and treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events were thrombocytopenia and neutropenia. At the RP2D, seven subjects who were efficacy evaluable achieved partial response for an objective response rate of 24.1%. CONCLUSION Unesbulin 300 mg twice per week plus DTIC 1,000 mg/m2 once every 21 days was identified as the RP2D, demonstrating a favorable benefit-risk profile in a heavily pretreated population of adults with advanced LMS.

AbstractUnesbulin is being investigated in combination with dacarbazine (DTIC) as a potential therapeutic agent in patients with advanced leiomyosarcoma (LMS). This paper reports the pharmacokinetics (PK) of unesbulin, DTIC, and its unreactive surrogate metabolite 5‐aminoimidazole‐4‐carboxamide (AIC) in 29 patients with advanced LMS. Drug interactions between DTIC (and AIC) and unesbulin were evaluated. DTIC (1000 mg/m2) was administered to patients with LMS via 1‐h intravenous (i.v.) infusion on day 1 of every 21‐day (q21d) cycle. Unesbulin dispersible tablets were administered orally twice weekly (b.i.w.), starting on day 2 of every cycle, except for cycle 2 (C2), where unesbulin was dosed either on day 1 together with DTIC or on day 2, 1 day after DTIC administration. The PK of DTIC, AIC, and unesbulin in cycle 1 (C1) and C2 were estimated using noncompartmental analysis. DTIC and AIC were measurable immediately after the start of infusion and reached maximum plasma concentration (Cmax) immediately or shortly after end of infusion at 1.0 and 1.4 h (time to Cmax), respectively. Co‐administration of unesbulin orally at 200 mg or above with DTIC inhibited cytochrome P450 (CYP)1A2‐mediated DTIC metabolism, resulting in 66.7% reduction of AIC exposures. Such inhibition could be mitigated when unesbulin was dosed the day following DTIC infusion. Repeated unesbulin dosing demonstrated evidence of clinical CYP1A2 induction and increased AIC Cmax by 69.4% and area under concentration‐time curve to infinity by 57.9%. No meaningful difference in unesbulin PK was observed between C2 and C1. The combination therapy of 1000 mg/m2 i.v. DTIC q21d and 300 mg unesbulin b.i.w. in a staggered regimen is well‐tolerated in patients with LMS.

PURPOSE Uterine leiomyosarcoma (uLMS) is an aggressive subtype of soft-tissue sarcoma with frequent metastatic relapse after curative surgery. Chemotherapy provides limited benefit for advanced disease. Multiomics profiling studies have identified homologous recombination deficiency in uLMS. In preclinical studies where olaparib and temozolomide provided modest activity, the combination was highly effective for inhibiting uLMS tumor growth. PATIENTS AND METHODS NCI Protocol 10250 is a single-arm, open-label, multicenter, phase II study evaluating olaparib and temozolomide in advanced uLMS. Patients with progression on ≥1 prior line received temozolomide 75 mg/m2 orally once daily with olaparib 200 mg orally twice a day both on days 1-7 in 21-day cycles. The primary end point was the best objective response rate (ORR) within 6 months. A one-stage binomial design was used. If ≥5 of 22 responded, the treatment would be considered promising (93% power; α = .06). All patients underwent paired biopsies that were evaluated with whole-exome sequencing (WES)/RNAseq and a RAD51 foci formation assay. RESULTS Twenty-two patients were evaluable. The median age was 55 years, and 59% had received three or more prior lines. Best ORR within 6 months was 23% (5 of 22). The overall ORR was 27% (6 of 22). The median progression-free survival (mPFS) was 6.9 months (95% CI, 5.4 months to not estimable). Hematologic toxicity was common (grade 3/4 neutropenia: 75%; thrombocytopenia: 32%) but manageable with dose modification. Five of 16 (31%) of tumors contained a deleterious homologous recombination gene alteration by WES, and 9 of 18 (50%) were homologous recombination-deficient by the RAD51 assay. In an exploratory analysis, mPFS was prolonged for patients with homologous recombination-deficient versus homologous recombination-proficient tumors (11.2 v 5.4 months, P = .05) by RAD51. CONCLUSION Olaparib and temozolomide met the prespecified primary end point and provided meaningful clinical benefit in patients with advanced, pretreated uLMS.