Background

Activated PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway frequently occurs in metastatic or recurrent cervical carcinomas. However, the clinical benefits of matched therapy, a therapeutic approach targeting a specific mutational abnormality, have not yet been established.

Methods

We analyzed the outcomes of patients with metastatic or recurrent cervical carcinomas who had a test for PIK3CA mutation and/or PTEN loss/mutation, and received ≥1 phase I therapeutic regimen between January 2006 and June 2013.

Results

Patients with adenocarcinoma had fewer PIK3CA mutations (14%), and survived longer (median, 14.2 months) than those with squamous cell carcinoma (48% and 7.2 months; p = 0.016, and 0.001, respectively). Matched therapy targeting the activated PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway led to a favorable rate of SD ≥ 6 months/CR/PR (53%) and significantly longer progression-free survival (median, 6.0 months) than non-matched therapy (11% and 1.5 months; p = 0.08 and 0.026; respectively). In patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the cervix, the presence of PIK3CA mutations was associated with a significantly longer overall survival (median, 9.4 months) than the absence of PIK3CA mutations (median, 4.2 months; p = 0.019).

Conclusions

Matched therapy targeting the activated PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway provided meaningful clinical benefits. Thus, further evaluation of PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway targeted therapy is warranted, especially in metastatic or recurrent squamous cell carcinoma.

Purpose

MET alterations including amplifications and nucleotide variations have been associated with resistance to therapy and aggressive clinical behavior.

Experimental design

The medical records of patients presenting to the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Phase I Clinic with relapsed or metastatic ovarian cancers and known MET nucleotide variation or amplification status were reviewed retrospectively (n=178). Categorical and continuous clinical and molecular characteristics were compared using Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon rank-sum tests, respectively. Univariate and multivariate survival were assessed via Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analysis, respectively.

Results

MET amplification occurred in 4 (3.5%) of 113 patients, whereas nonsynonomous nucleotide variations were present in 9 (7.4%) of 122 patients. No patients exhibited concomitant amplification and variation. MET variations were observed only in white women with high-grade ovarian tumors, whereas amplifications were observed in both black and white women with high-grade serous ovarian primary tumors. No patients (n=4) exhibiting a MET alteration achieved an objective response when treated on a c-Met inhibitor phase I trial. In addition, ovarian cancer patients treated with a c-Met inhibitor with multikinase activity trended towards a longer time-to-failure compared with those treated with a c-Met-specific inhibitor (median: 1.5 vs. 4.5 months, p=0.07).

Conclusions

MET alterations occur in a minority of patients with ovarian cancer. c-Met inhibitors with multikinase activity may exhibit less activity in ovarian cancer than c-Met specific drugs. These findings warrant further investigation.

Preclinical studies demonstrate that epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) signals through both kinase-dependent and independent pathways and that combining a small-molecule EGFR inhibitor, EGFR antibody, and/or anti-angiogenic agent is synergistic. We conducted a dose-escalation, phase I study combining erlotinib, cetuximab, and bevacizumab. The subset of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer was analyzed for safety and antitumor activity. Forty-one patients with heavily pretreated metastatic colorectal cancer received treatment on a range of dose levels. The most common treatment-related grade ≥2 adverse events were rash (68%), hypomagnesemia (37%), and fatigue (15%). Thirty of 34 patients (88%) treated at the full FDA-approved doses of all three drugs tolerated treatment without drug-related dose-limiting effects. Eleven patients (27%) achieved stable disease (SD) ≥6 months and three (7%) achieved a partial response (PR) (total SD>6 months/PR= 14 (34%)). Of the 14 patients with SD≥6 months/PR, eight (57%) had received prior sequential bevacizumab and cetuximab, two (5%) had received bevacizumab and cetuximab concurrently, and four (29%) had received prior bevacizumab but not cetuximab or erlotinib (though three had received prior panitumumab). The combination of bevacizumab, cetuximab, and erlotinib was well tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with metastatic colorectal cancer.

Background

Preclinical data indicate EGFR signals through both kinase-dependent and independent pathways and that combining a small-molecule EGFR inhibitor, EGFR antibody, and/or anti-angiogenic agent is synergistic in animal models.

Methods

We conducted a dose-escalation, phase I study combining erlotinib, cetuximab, and bevacizumab. The subset of patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) was analyzed for safety and response.

Results

Thirty-four patients with NSCLC (median four prior therapies) received treatment on a range of dose levels. The most common treatment-related grade ≥2 adverse events were rash (n=14, 41%), hypomagnesemia (n=9, 27%), and fatigue (n=5, 15%). Seven patients (21%) achieved stable disease (SD) ≥6 months, two achieved a partial response (PR) (6%), and two achieved an unconfirmed partial response (uPR) (6%) (total=32%). We observed SD≥6 months/PR/uPR in patients who had received prior erlotinib and/or bevacizumab, those with brain metastases, smokers, and patients treated at lower dose levels. Five of 16 patients (31%) with wild-type EGFR experienced SD≥6 months or uPR. Correlation between grade of rash and rate of SD≥6 months/PR was observed (p less than 0.01).

Conclusion

The combination of erlotinib, cetuximab, and bevacizumab was well-tolerated and demonstrated antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with NSCLC.

Background

Since PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway activation diminishes the effects of hormone therapy, combining aromatase inhibitors (anatrozole) with mTOR inhibitors (everolimus) was investigated.

Patients and methods

We evaluated anastrozole and everolimus in 55 patients with metastatic estrogen (ER) and/or progesterone receptor (PR)-positive breast and gynecologic tumors. Endpoints were safety, antitumor activity and molecular correlates.

Results

Full doses of anastrozole (1 mg PO daily) and everolimus (10 mg PO daily) were well tolerated. Twelve of 50 evaluable patients (24%) (median = 3 prior therapies) achieved stable disease (SD) ≥ 6 months/partial response (PR)/complete response (CR) (n = 5 (10%) with PR/CR): 9 of 32 (28%) with breast cancer (n=5 (16%) with PR/CR); 2 of 10 (20%), ovarian cancer; and 1 of 6 (17%), endometrial cancer. Six of 22 patients (27%) with molecular alterations in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway achieved SD ≥ 6 months/PR/CR. Six of 8 patients (75%) with SD ≥ 6 months/PR/CR with molecular testing demonstrated at least one alteration in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway: mutations in PIK3CA (n=3) and AKT1 (n=1) or PTEN loss (n=3). All three responders (CR (n = 1); PR (n=2)) who had next generation sequencing demonstrated additional alterations: amplifications in CCNE1, IRS2, MCL1, CCND1, FGFR1 and MYC and a rearrangement in PRKDC.

Conclusions

Combination anastrozole and everolimus is well tolerated at full approved doses, and is active in heavily-pretreated patients with ER and/or PR-positive breast, ovarian and endometrial cancers. Responses were observed in patients with multiple molecular aberrations. CLINICAL TRAILS INCLUDED: NCT01197170.

Background

KRAS mutation is common in human cancer. We assessed the clinical factors, including type of KRAS mutation and treatment, of patients with advanced cancer and tumor KRAS mutations and their association with treatment outcomes.

Methods

Patients referred to the Phase I Clinic for treatment who underwent testing for KRAS mutations were analyzed.

Results

Of 1,781 patients, 365 (21%) had a KRAS mutation. The G12D mutation was the most common mutation (29%). PIK3CA mutations were found in 24% and 10% of patients with and without KRAS mutations (p<0.0001). Of 223 patients with a KRAS mutation who were evaluable for response, 56 were treated with a MEK inhibitor-containing therapy and 167 with other therapies. The clinical benefit (partial response and stable disease lasting ≥6 months) rates were 23% and 9%, respectively, for the MEK inhibitor versus other therapies (p=0.005). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.3 and 2.2 months, respectively (p=0.09). The respective median overall survival was 8.4 and 7.0 months (p=0.38). Of 66 patients with a KRAS mutation and additional alterations, higher rates of clinical benefit (p=0.04), PFS (p=0.045), and overall survival (p=0.02) were noted in patients treated with MEK inhibitor-containing therapy (n=9) compared to those treated with targeted therapy matched to the additional alterations (n=24) or other therapy (n=33).

Conclusions

MEK inhibitors in patients with KRAS-mutated advanced cancer were associated with higher clinical benefit rates compared to other therapies. Therapeutic strategies that include MEK inhibitors or novel agents combined with other targeted therapies or chemotherapy need further investigation.

Background

Demethylation process is necessary for the expression of various factors involved in chemotherapy cytotoxicity or resistance. Platinum-resistant cells may have reduced expression of the copper/platinum transporter CTR1. We hypothesized that azacitidine and oxaliplatin combination therapy may restore platinum sensitivity. We treated patients with cancer relapsed/refractory to any platinum compounds (3 + 3 study design) with azacitidine (20 to 50 mg/m(2)/day intravenously (IV) over 15 to 30 min, D1 to 5) and oxaliplatin (15 to 30 mg/m(2)/day, IV over 2 h, D2 to 5) (maximum, six cycles). Platinum content, LINE1 methylation (surrogate of global DNA methylation), and CTR1 expression changes (pre- vs. post-treatment) were assessed. Drug pharmacokinetics were analyzed.

Results

Thirty-seven patients were treated. No dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) was noted at the maximum dose. The most common adverse events were anemia and fatigue. Two (5.4%) patients had stable disease and completed six cycles of therapy. Oxaliplatin (D2) and azacitidine (D1 and 5) mean systemic exposure based on plasma AUCall showed dose-dependent interaction whereby increasing the dose of oxaliplatin reduced the mean azacitidine exposure and vice versa; however, no significant differences in other non-compartmental modeled parameters were observed. Blood samples showed universal reduction in global DNA methylation. In tumor samples, hypomethylation was only observed in four out of seven patients. No correlation between blood and tumor demethylation was seen. The mean cytoplasmic CTR1 score decreased. The pre-dose tumor oxaliplatin levels ranged from <0.25 to 5.8 μg/g tumor. The platinum concentration increased 3- to 18-fold. No correlation was found between CTR1 score and oxaliplatin level, which was found to have a trend toward correlation with progression-free survival.

Conclusions

Oxaliplatin and azacitidine combination therapy was safe. CTR1 expression was not correlated with methylation status or tissue platinum concentration.

Background

Bevacizumab and temsirolimus are active agents in advanced solid tumors. Temsirolimus inhibits mTOR in the PI3 kinase/AKT/mTOR pathway as well as CYP2A, which may be a resistance mechanism for cetuximab. In addition, temsirolimus attenuates upregulation of HIF-1α levels, which may be a resistance mechanism for bevacizumab.

Patients and methods

We analyzed safety and responses in 21 patients with advanced solid tumors treated with bevacizumab, cetuximab, and temsirolimus.

Results

The median age of patients was 60 years (range, 23-80 years). The median number of prior systemic therapies was 3 (range, 1-6). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was determined to be bevacizumab 10 mg/kg biweekly, temsirolimus 5 mg weekly and cetuximab 100/75 mg/m2 weekly. Grade 3 or 4 toxicities were seen in 52% of patients with the highest prevalence being hyperglycemia (14%) and hypophosphatemia (14%). Eighteen of the 21 patients were evaluable for response. Three patients were taken off the study before restaging for toxicities. Partial response (PR) was observed in 2/18 patients (11%) and stable disease (SD) lasting ≥ 6 months was observed in 4/18 patients (22%) (total = 6/18 (33%)). In 8 evaluable patients with squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (HNSCC) there were partial responses in 2/8 (25%) patients and SD ≥ 6 months in 1/8 (13%) patients (total = 3/8, (38%)).

Conclusion

The combination of bevacizumab, cetuximab, and temsirolimus showed activity in HNSCC; however, there were numerous toxicities reported, which will require careful management for future clinical development.

Cell-free (cf) DNA in the plasma of cancer patients offers an easily obtainable source of biologic material for mutation analysis. Plasma samples from 157 patients with advanced cancers who progressed on systemic therapy were tested for 21 mutations in BRAF, EGFR, KRAS, and PIK3CA using the BEAMing method and results were compared to mutation analysis of archival tumor tissue from a CLIA-certified laboratory obtained as standard of care from diagnostic or therapeutic procedures. Results were concordant for archival tissue and plasma cfDNA in 91% cases for BRAF mutations (kappa = 0.75, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63 - 0.88), in 99% cases for EGFR mutations (kappa = 0.90, 95% CI 0.71- 1.00), in 83% cases for KRAS mutations (kappa = 0.67, 95% CI 0.54 - 0.80) and in 91% cases for PIK3CA mutations (kappa = 0.65, 95% CI 0.46 - 0.85). Patients (n = 41) with > 1% of KRAS mutant cfDNA had a shorter median survival compared to 20 patients with 1% of mutant cfDNA (BRAF, EGFR, KRAS, or PIK3CA) had a shorter median survival compared to 33 patients with

Preclinical models suggest that histone deacetylase (HDAC) and mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) inhibitors have synergistic anticancer activity. We designed a phase I study to determine the safety, maximum tolerated dose (MTD), recommended phase II dose (RP2D), and dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of combined mTOR inhibitor sirolimus (1 mg-5 mg PO daily) and HDAC inhibitor vorinostat (100 mg-400 mg PO daily) in patients with advanced cancer. Seventy patients were enrolled and 46 (66%) were evaluable for DLT assessment since they completed cycle 1 without dose modification unless they had DLT. DLTs comprised grade 4 thrombocytopenia (n = 6) and grade 3 mucositis (n = 1). Sirolimus 4 mg and vorinostat 300 mg was declared RP2D because MTD with sirolimus 5 mg caused significant thrombocytopenia. The grade 3 and 4 drug-related toxic effects (including DLTs) were thrombocytopenia (31%), neutropenia (8%), anemia (7%), fatigue (3%), mucositis (1%), diarrhea (1%), and hyperglycemia (1%). Of the 70 patients, 35 (50%) required dose interruption or modification and 61 were evaluable for response. Partial responses were observed in refractory Hodgkin lymphoma (-78%) and perivascular epithelioid tumor (-54%), and stable disease in hepatocellular carcinoma and fibromyxoid sarcoma. In conclusion, the combination of sirolimus and vorinostat was feasible, with thrombocytopenia as the main DLT. Preliminary anticancer activity was observed in patients with refractory Hodgkin lymphoma, perivascular epithelioid tumor, and hepatocellular carcinoma.