Back to Authors

Moss, Jonathan

Mayo Clinic

Research To Practice, Miami, FL

Citations 2

Model‐informed approach to support pediatric dosing for the pan‐PI3K inhibitor copanlisib in children and adolescents with relapsed/refractory solid tumors
Morcos, Peter N. , Schlender, Jan, Burghaus, Rolf , Moss, Jonathan, Lloyd, Adam , Childs, Barrett H. , Macy, Margaret E. , Chung, John, Garmann, Dirk , Schlender, Jan‐Frederik , Moss, Jonathan, Reid, Joel M.

Clinical and Translational Science | April 12, 2023 | Volume: 16 | Issue: 7 | Pages: 1197-1209

10.1111/cts.13523 Get It

AbstractCopanlisib is an intravenously administered phosphatidylinositol 3‐kinase (PI3K) inhibitor which was investigated in pediatric patients with relapsed/refractory solid tumors. A model‐informed approach was undertaken to support and confirm an empirically selected starting dose of 28 mg/m2 for pediatric patients ≥1 year old, corresponding to 80% of the adult recommended dose adjusted for body surface area. An adult physiologically based pharmacokinetic (PBPK) model was initially established using copanlisib physicochemical and disposition properties and clinical pharmacokinetics (PK) data and was shown to adequately capture clinical PK across a range of copanlisib doses in adult cancer patients. The adult PBPK model was then extended to the pediatric population through incorporation of age‐dependent anatomical and physiological changes and used to simulate copanlisib exposures in pediatric cancer patient age groups. The pediatric PBPK model predicted that the copanlisib 28 mg/m2 dose would achieve similar copanlisib exposures across pediatric ages when compared with historical adult exposures following the approved copanlisib 60 mg dose administered on Days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28‐day cycle. Clinical PK were collected from a phase I study in pediatric patients with relapsed/refractory solid tumors (aged ≥4 years). An established adult population PK model was extended to incorporate an allometrically‐scaled effect of body surface area and confirmed that the copanlisib maximum tolerated dose of 28 mg/m2 was appropriate to achieve uniform copanlisib exposures across the investigated pediatric age range and consistent exposures to historical data in adult cancer patients. The model‐informed approach successfully supported and confirmed the copanlisib pediatric dose recommendation.
Is adjuvant oxaliplatin (Ox) overutilized in colon cancer (CC)? 408 cases from the practices of 102 oncologists.
Love, Neil, Grothey, Axel, Hussein, Atif, Moss, Jonathan, Ziel, Kathryn, Venook, Alan P.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | February 24, 2017 | Volume: 31 | Issue: 4_suppl | Pages: 479-479

10.1200/jco.2013.31.4_suppl.479 Get It

479 Background: Recent long-term clinical trial follow-up suggests that adding Ox to a fluoropyrimidine (FP) may provide less benefit in adjuvant CC than originally believed (Tournigand JCO 2012). In addition, emerging data on tissue biomarkers such as microsatellite mismatch repair (MMR) and the 12-gene Recurrence Score (RS) suggest these assays may be helpful in better defining treatment benefit, and a new report provides evidence that RS may specifically predict the value of Ox. (O’Connell ASCO 2012) In view of these developments we sought to document current use of adjuvant chemotherapy and physician perceptions about these decisions. Methods: US-based oncologists were recruited to complete a survey and contribute treatment data for their last 3 patients (pts) with stage II disease and last pt with a stage III tumor. Results: 25 gastrointestinal cancer clinical investigators and 77 practicing oncologists participated, providing data from a total of 408 cases (92% treated since 2011). Findings from the 2 groups are similar and are presented in aggregate. A median of 9 and 15 pts annually were evaluated with stage II and III tumors, respectively. Clinicians stated that they require a median of a 5% absolute reduction in relapse rate to use a FP alone and an additional 5% reduction to add Ox. Ox/FP was administered to 95 of 102 pts with stage III tumors (93%) and 85 of 306 pts with stage II disease (28%), particularly to those under age 70 or with T4 tumors (Table). MMR was evaluated in 127 pts (42%) with stage II and 20 pts (20%) with stage III disease. RS was obtained for 46 pts (15%) with stage II tumors, but only 2 pts (2%) with stage III. Conclusions: Adjuvant Ox is employed extensively in spite of the fact that it may provide less benefit than many oncologists report requiring to initiate its use. However, several recent research developments may be laying the groundwork for a change in this treatment practice. [Table: see text]