Citations

Abstract Background: The primary mechanism by which tamoxifen (Tam) and its metabolites exert their biologic effects is through estrogen receptor (ER) binding and inhibition of ER signaling. We and others demonstrated that endoxifen (Endx) has greater antitumor activity in vitro and in vivo compared to Tam and the first-in-human Endx phase I study demonstrated its antitumor activity in patients with prior progression on Tam (Goetz SABC 2015). PKCs are a family of serine/threonine-specific protein kinases that regulate signaling pathways involved in cell proliferation and tumorigenic transformation. Our prior protein docking studies suggested endoxifen may be a substrate for PKCs. Here we report the effects of Tam and Endx on PKCβ1 binding, kinase activity, as well as interactions between PKCβ1 and ERα. Methods: Surface Plasmon Resonance (SPR, Biacore T200, GE Healthcare) was used to evaluate binding of Tam, N-desmethyl Tam (NDMT), 4-HT, and Endx to PKCβ1 and PKCβ2. The effects of Tam and Endx on PKCβ1 kinase activity were determined. Proliferation and colony formation in MCF7 parental and PKCβ1 overexpressing cells were evaluated. siRNA silencing was used to knockdown PKCβ1 expression in the following cells: MCF7 aromatase expressing cells that were either sensitive (MCF7/AC1) or resistant to letrozole (MCF7/AC1 L-resistant); T47D; and MDA-MB-361. Coimmunoprecipitation assay and DUOlink in situ proximity ligation were used to investigate the interaction between PKCβ1 and ERα. Results: Endx more potently inhibited PKCβ1 kinase activity compared to Tam ( IC50 350 nM vs 47.8 μM ) with KDs for PKCβ1 binding as follows: Endx (100 nM ), Tam ( 2 μM ), 4-HT ( 2 μM ) and NDMT (> 7 μM ). None of the SERMs exhibited PKCβ2 binding. In the MCF7/AC1 and MCF7/AC1 L-resistant cells, PKCβ1 knockdown resulted in ERα degradation and potently inhibited cell proliferation. These results were confirmed in T47D and MDA-MB-361 cells. Notably, PKCβ1 knockdown in MCF7/AC1 cells resulted in significantly greater E2 induced proliferation comparing siRNA knockdown vs. control. To further explore these effects, we evaluated the effects of PKCβ1 overexpression in MCF7 cells and demonstrated that PKCβ1 overexpression reduced cell proliferation and colony formation compared to parental MCF-7 cells without affecting ERα protein stability. Coimmunoprecipitation assays in transient transfected MCF-7 cells with exogenous PKCβ1 as well as PKCβ1 expressing MDA-MB-231 cells transiently or stably transfected with ERα demonstrated PKCβ1 and ERα interaction, with confirmation by Duolink assay that this interaction occurs in the cytoplasm. Conclusions: Our findings demonstrated that endoxifen binds and inhibits PKCβ1 at relevant concentrations achieved in the endoxifen clinical trial studies. PKCβ1 interacts with cytoplasmic ERα and PKCβ1 knockdown inhibits cell proliferation and enhances ERα turnover. However, in PKCβ1 overexpressing cells, PKCβ1 may exhibit tumor suppressive effects. These data suggest a complex interaction between PKCβ1 and ERα and that endoxifen's effects on PKCβ1 may alter drug response of endocrine therapy. Further studies are ongoing to characterize the role of PKCβ1 and its role in ER biology and response to endoxifen. Citation Format: Guo C, Kuffel MJ, Kudgus RA, Huang Z, Bode AM, Cheng J, Suman VJ, Reid JM, Bruinsma ES, Subramaniam M, Ames MM, Hawse JR, Goetz MP. Identification and characterization of a novel endoxifen substrate, PKCβ1, and its interaction with the estrogen receptor [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2016 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2016 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2017;77(4 Suppl):Abstract nr P1-08-03.

PURPOSE: To compare the pharmacokinetics of continuous venous infusion (CVI) fluorouracil (5-FU) with that of oral eniluracil/5-FU and to describe toxicities and clinical activity of prolonged oral administration of eniluracil/5-FU. PATIENTS AND METHODS: A randomized, open-label, cross-over study compared CVI 5-FU to an oral 5-FU/eniluracil combination. Seventeen patients (arm A) were randomly assigned to receive eniluracil/5-FU combination tablets (10:1 mg/m 2 BID for 7 days) during the first study period, followed by 5-FU (300 mg/m 2 CVI for 7 days) during period 2, with a 14-day washout between periods. Sixteen patients (arm B) received treatment in the opposite sequence. In period 3, all patients received eniluracil/5-FU tablets BID for 28 days. Plasma levels of 5-FU during CVI and oral administration were analyzed in periods 1 and 2. Dihydropyrimidine dehydrogenase (DPD) activity was determined by measuring plasma uracil, urinary α–fluoro-β-alanine, and peripheral-blood mononuclear cell (PBMC) DPD activity. RESULTS: There were no grade 3 or 4 toxicities in either arm. Partial responses were observed in three patients. Another three patients had stable disease for ≥ 3 months. Eniluracil and 5-FU pharmacokinetics were similar to those observed in previous studies and were unaffected by administration sequence. The mean ± SD steady-state plasma concentration (C P ) and area under the curve (AUC) 144-168h for CVI 5-FU (104 ± 45 ng/mL and 2,350 ± 826 ng·h/mL, respectively) were three-fold greater than those for oral 5-FU (38.1 ± 7.7 ng/mL and 722 ± 182 ng·h/mL, respectively [P < .00001]). Individual 5-FU concentrations during CVI were highly variable, whereas those after eniluracil/5-FU were very reproducible. DPD activity in PBMCs before each study period was normal. CONCLUSION: Both CVI 5-FU and oral eniluracil/5-FU were well tolerated, with moderate activity in these heavily pretreated patients. However, 5-FU steady-state C P and AUCs achieved with oral eniluracil/5-FU were significantly less than with CVI 5-FU.

314 Background: Small bowel adenocarcinoma (SB-ACA) is rare, having little prospective data guiding management. A prior phase I study evaluated UGT1A1 genotype specific dosing of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and capecitabine. Our prospective, multicenter clinical trial assessing tumor response in pts having metastatic SB-ACA, used a similar dosing strategy. Methods: Genotypes were determined via central lab. Previously untreated pts were dosed by UGT1A1*28 genotypes 6/6, 6/7, and 7/7 receiving 100/85/85 mg/m2 oxaliplatin d1, 150/150/75 mg/m2 irinotecan d1, and 1600/400/200 mg/m2 capecitabine (BID) d2-15 of 21 days. The study design was such that 1 confirmed response in 16 pts expanded enrollment to 33 pts, with 7 required for demonstrating efficacy. Results: 28 pts (13-6/6, 10-6/7, 5-7/7) have been enrolled [75% male, mean age 62.5 (range 41-77)]. Location of primary included: duodenum (63%), jejunum (26%), and ileum (7%), with pts having >1 metastatic site (abdominal-41%, bone-7%, liver-56%, lung-30%, nodal-52%, subcutaneous-4%, other-19%). Gr 3+ treatment related toxicity was not significantly different by genotype (50%-6/6, 44%-6/7, 20%-7/7, p=0.48) and included (pts): diarrhea(5), vomiting(5), leukopenia(5), neutropenia(7), and nausea(6). 57% (13 of 23) pts achieved responses during therapy, with a confirmed response rate of 39% (95% CI 0-58%). 18 have died, with a median follow-up of 8.3 mos (range 0-43). Conclusions: UGT1A1 genotype directed dosing with oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and capecitabine appears to result in prolonged response in this population. Larger studies are needed to determine comparability to CapeOx alone or if response/toxicity differs among genotypes. Supported by NIH Grant CA25224, Sanofi-Aventis, and Pfizer. [Table: see text]

Abstract Background/Purpose: Cancer registry data suggests that Duval County (greater Jacksonville, FL) has the highest breast cancer mortality rate for African American (AA) women in the southeastern US. Recent research revealed that race, residence, and insurance were associated with significantly poorer breast cancer outcomes in this area. Therefore we conducted a series of focus groups with AA breast cancer survivors from the urban core of Jacksonville, FL to directly address the disparities observed in our quantitative data. Methods: A series of focus groups were conducted to obtain qualitative data topics that included: breast cancer beliefs; delays to diagnosis and treatment; disparities; and health behaviors. Results: A total of 56 AA breast cancer survivors living in the urban core, with either Medicaid or who were uninsured, participated in the focus groups. Mean age was 62 years, with an average of 3.4 years since diagnosis. Only 21% of women were employed. Participants reported their mean time to see a doctor initially for their breast cancer was 39 days, and mean time to first treatment was 178 days. Participants responded that fear, financial limitations, and personal beliefs played the biggest roles in delays to diagnosis and treatment. Participants responded that poor health behaviors, genetics, lack of education, and personal beliefs accounted for both causing breast cancer, and the disparities observed in breast cancer mortality, and felt that environmental factors from living in the urban core also contribute. Conclusions: Our findings highlight several areas for potential intervention to reduce disparities in breast cancer. Citation Format: Sarah Osian, Monica Albertie, David Monticalvo, Steven Ames, Laila Samiian, Gerardo Colon-Otero. Examining reasons for breast cancer disparities in African American women in Duval County, FL. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Eighth AACR Conference on The Science of Health Disparities in Racial/Ethnic Minorities and the Medically Underserved; Nov 13-16, 2015; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 2016;25(3 Suppl):Abstract nr C06.

Abstract Background: AI's are more effective than TAM in ER+ breast cancer. In AI refractory MBC, the response rate to TAM is 0% (Osborne 2011). Z-Endx is an active metabolite of TAM and among TAM treated women in the adjuvant and metastatic settings, reduced CYP2D6 metabolism and low Endx concentrations (Css &lt;20 nM) have been associated with increased likelihood of disease recurrence. Preclinical studies have demonstrated greater Z-Endx exposure and anti-tumor activity with oral Z-Endx compared to equivalent doses of oral TAM (Reid 2014) Methods: We conducted a phase I trial to determine the maximum-tolerated dose (MTD) and evaluate the toxicities, clinical activity, and pharmacokinetics (PK) of Z-Endx in patients (pts) with ER+, AI refractory MBC. Unlimited prior endocrine regimens were allowed. An accelerated titration schedule was applied (2 pts/dose level) until moderate toxicity or DLT, followed by a 3+3 design and then to expansion cohorts (40, 80, and 100 mg/day). Z-Endx was administered orally once daily (28 day cycle). Eye exams were performed at baseline, and end of cycles 2 and 6. PK was performed during cycle 1 and prior to subsequent cycles. For pts in the expansion cohorts, tumor biopsies were obtained at baseline for DNA sequencing (Foundation Medicine). Plasma cholesterol levels were obtained at baseline and after 1 cycle. Results: From March 2011 to Dec 2014, 41 pts (38 evaluable), median age 60, received Z-Endx once daily encompassing 7 dose levels (20-160 mg/daily). The median number of prior hormonal regimens was 2 and 3 for the dose escalation and expansion cohorts, respectively. Dose escalation was stopped at 160 mg/day given MTD not reached and attainment of mean Endx Css of 3.6 uM. Cycle 1 DLT (PE) was observed in one patient (60 mg). No eye toxicity was observed. PK demonstrated mean Endx Css of &gt; 1 uM at all dose levels ≥ 40 mg/day. Antitumor activity was observed at multiple dose levels including 3 confirmed partial responses and an additional 7 with stable disease for ≥6 cycles. Of these 10 pts, 9 had prior progression on both AI and fulvestrant and 3 additionally on TAM. After 1 cycle, total and LDL cholesterol decreased &gt; 20 points in 54% and 40% of pts, respectively. Tumor sequencing in the expansion cohorts (n=14) did not identify ESR1 mutations; however, ESR1 amplification was identified in 1 pt with prolonged stable disease (&gt;200 days). Of 6 pts with rapid progression (≤2 cycles), 4/6 had either CCND1 amplification (n=1) or at least one of the following activating mutations: ERBB2 L755S (n=1), AKT1 E17K (n=1), MTOR E1799K (n=1). Conclusions: The direct administration of Z-END provides substantial drug exposure, acceptable toxicity, and "proof of principle" antitumor activity in endocrine resistant MBC. While the MTD was not determined, the goal of achieving Endx Css concentrations of &gt; 1 uM was achieved. Tumor sequencing identified pts with predicted and confirmed endocrine resistance. A randomized phase II comparing endoxifen (80 mg/day) with TAM in AI refractory MBC was recently activated (NCT02311933). Supported in part by CA 133049, CA186686, CA15083, CA116201, and CA15083. Citation Format: Goetz MP, Suman VJ, Reid JM, Northfelt DW, Mahr MA, Dockter T, Kuffel M, Buhrow SA, Safgren SL, McGovern RM, Collins JM, Streicher H, Hawse JR, Haddad TC, Erlichman C, Ames MM, Ingle JN. Final results of a first-in-human phase I study of the tamoxifen (TAM) metabolite, Z-Endoxifen hydrochloride (Z-Endx) in women with aromatase inhibitor (AI) refractory metastatic breast cancer (MBC) (NCT01327781). [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the Thirty-Eighth Annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium: 2015 Dec 8-12; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2016;76(4 Suppl):Abstract nr PD2-03.

AbstractThe population pharmacokinetic model reported here was developed using data from 2 phase 2 trials of irinotecan for treatment of malignant glioma to quantify the impact of concomitant therapy with enzyme‐inducing antiepileptic drugs (EIAEDs) on irinotecan pharmacokinetics. Patients received weekly irinotecan doses of 100 to 400 mg/m2, and plasma samples were collected and analyzed for irinotecan and its APC, SN‐38, and SN‐38G metabolites. Nonlinear mixed‐effects modeling was employed for population pharmacokinetic analysis. Concomitant therapy with phenytoin, phenobarbital, or carbamazepine increased the clearances of irinotecan, SN‐38, and SN‐38G but not APC. SN‐38 clearance was 2‐fold higher with concomitant EIAED use, resulting in 40% lower SN‐38 exposure. Evaluation of additional covariates revealed no clinically relevant effects of sex or concomitant corticosteroid use. The population pharmacokinetic model suggests that a 1.7‐fold increase in irinotecan dose may compensate for decreases in SN‐38 exposure in the presence of concomitant EIAEDs. Although slightly more conservative, this dose adjustment is consistent with those recommended based on increases in the maximally tolerated dose for malignant glioma patients receiving EIAEDs and may be an appropriate starting point for further investigation when extrapolating to other cancer types or alternative regimens.