Exposure-response relationship of AMG 386 in combination with weekly paclitaxel in recurrent ovarian cancer and its implication for dose selection

Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology

Volumn 69, Issue 5, 2012, Pages 1135-1144

  Lu, Jian Feng ^a   Rasmussen, Erik ^a   Karlan, Beth Y ^b   Vergote, Ignace B ^c   Navale, Lynn ^a   Kuchimanchi, Mita ^a   Melara, Rebeca ^a   Stepan, Daniel E ^a   Weinreich, David M ^a   Sun, Yu Nien ^a  

^a AMGEN INC   (United States)

^b CEDARS SINAI MEDICAL CENTER   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY HOSPITALS LEUVEN   (Belgium)

Author keywords

AMG 386; Exposure response analysis; Ovarian cancer; Paclitaxel; Pharmacokinetics; Population pharmacokinetic pharmacodynamic modeling

Indexed keywords

PACLITAXEL; PLACEBO; TREBANANIB; ANTINEOPLASTIC AGENT; HYBRID PROTEIN;

AREA UNDER THE CURVE; ARTHRALGIA; ARTICLE; CANCER COMBINATION CHEMOTHERAPY; CANCER GROWTH; CANCER MORTALITY; CANCER SURVIVAL; DIARRHEA; DOSE RESPONSE; DRUG BLOOD LEVEL; DRUG CLEARANCE; DRUG DISTRIBUTION; DRUG EXPOSURE; DRUG MEGADOSE; DRY SKIN; FEMALE; HUMAN; HYPERHIDROSIS; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MONOTHERAPY; MONTE CARLO METHOD; MOUTH ULCER; MULTIVARIATE ANALYSIS; NEUTROPENIA; OVARY CANCER; PERIPHERAL EDEMA; PERIPHERAL NEUROPATHY; PHASE 2 CLINICAL TRIAL; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGRESSION FREE SURVIVAL; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODEL; RECURRENT CANCER; RHINORRHEA; RISK REDUCTION; STEADY STATE; SURVIVAL TIME; THORAX PAIN; URINARY TRACT INFECTION; BIOLOGICAL MODEL; CLINICAL TRIAL; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONTROLLED CLINICAL TRIAL; CONTROLLED STUDY; DISEASE COURSE; EPIDEMIOLOGY; OVARY TUMOR; PATHOLOGY; PHASE 1 CLINICAL TRIAL; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME; TUMOR RECURRENCE;

ANTINEOPLASTIC COMBINED CHEMOTHERAPY PROTOCOLS; AREA UNDER CURVE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONFOUNDING FACTORS (EPIDEMIOLOGY); DISEASE PROGRESSION; DOSE-RESPONSE RELATIONSHIP, DRUG; FEMALE; HUMANS; MODELS, BIOLOGICAL; MONTE CARLO METHOD; NEOPLASM RECURRENCE, LOCAL; OVARIAN NEOPLASMS; PACLITAXEL; PROPORTIONAL HAZARDS MODELS; PROSPECTIVE STUDIES; RECOMBINANT FUSION PROTEINS; REGRESSION ANALYSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84862275233     PISSN: 03445704     EISSN: 14320843     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s00280-011-1787-5     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Wetherington JD, Pfister M, Banfield C, Stone JA, Krishna R, Allerheiligen S, Grasela DM (2010) Model-based drug development: strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats for broad application of pharmacometrics in drug development. J Clin Pharmacol 50:31S-46S
2. Gobburu JV (2010) Pharmacometrics 2020. J Clin Pharmacol 50:151S-157S
3. Goffin J, Baral S, Tu D, Nomikos D, Seymour L (2005) Objective responses in patients with malignant melanoma or renal cell cancer in early clinical studies do not predict regulatory approval. Clin Cancer Res 11:5928-5934 (Pubitemid 41170322)
4. Ratain MJ (2005) Phase II oncology trials: let's be positive. Clin Cancer Res 11:5661-5662 (Pubitemid 41170285)
5. Appels NM, Bolijn MJ, Chan K, Stephens TC, Hoctin-Boes G, Middleton M, Beijnen JH, de Bono JS, Harris AL, Schellens JH (2008) Phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of the prenyl transferase inhibitor AZD3409 in patients with advanced cancer. Br J Cancer 98:1951-1958 (Pubitemid 351821567)
6. Karrison TG, Maitland ML, Stadler WM, Ratain MJ (2007) Design of phase II cancer trials using a continuous endpoint of change in tumor size: application to a study of sorafenib and erlotinib in non small-cell lung cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst 99: 1455-1461
7. Workman P (2002) Challenges of PK/PD measurements in modern drug development. Eur J Cancer 38:2189-2193 (Pubitemid 35223253)
8. Ratain MJ, Humphrey RW, Gordon GB, Fyfe G, Adamson PC, Fleming TR, Stadler WM, Berry DA, Peck CC (2008) Recommended changes to oncology clinical trial design: revolution or evolution? Eur J Cancer 44:8-11 (Pubitemid 350258715)
9. Claret L, Girard P, Hoff PM, Van Cutsem E, Zuideveld KP, Jorga K, Fagerberg J, Bruno R (2009) Model-based prediction of phase III overall survival in colorectal cancer on the basis of phase II tumor dynamics. J Clin Oncol 27:4103-4108
10. Wang Y, Sung C, Dartois C, Ramchandani R, Booth BP, Rock E, Gobburu J (2009) Elucidation of relationship between tumor size and survival in non-small-cell lung cancer patients can aid early decision making in clinical drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 86:167-174
11. Houk BE, Bello CL, Poland B, Rosen LS, Demetri GD, Motzer RJ (2010) Relationship between exposure to sunitinib and efficacy and tolerability endpoints in patients with cancer: results of a pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic meta-analysis. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 66:357-371
12. Jimeno A, Rudek MA, Kulesza P, Ma WW, Wheelhouse J, Howard A, Khan Y, Zhao M, Jacene H, Messersmith WA, Laheru D, Donehower RC, Garrett-Mayer E, Baker SD, Hidalgo M (2008) Pharmacodynamic-guided modified continuous reassessment method-based, dose-finding study of rapamycin in adult patients with solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 26:4172-4179
13. Lu J-F, Claret L, Sutjandra L, Kuchimanchi M, Melara R, Bruno R, Sun Y-N (2010) Population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modeling for the time course of tumor shrinkage by motesanib in thyroid cancer patients. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 66:1151-1158
14. Guidance for industry end-of-phase 2A meetings (2009). United States Food and Drug Administration. Available at: http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Drugs/ GuidanceComplianceRegulatoryInformation/Guidances/ucm079690.pdf. Accessed 24 Aug 2009
15. US Food and Drug Administration (2006) Critical path opportunities report. US Department of Health and Human Services, Washington
16. Oliner J, Min H, Leal J, Yu D, Rao S, You E, Tang X, Kim H, Meyer S, Han SJ, Hawkins N, Rosenfeld R, Davy E, Graham K, Jacobsen F, Stevenson S, Ho J, Chen Q, Hartmann T, Michaels M, Kelley M, Li L, Sitney K, Martin F, Sun JR, Zhang N, Lu J, Estrada J, Kumar R, Coxon A, Kaufman S, Pretorius J, Scully S, Cattley R, Payton M, Coats S, Nguyen L, Desilva B, Ndifor A, Hayward I, Radinsky R, Boone T, Kendall R (2004) Suppression of angiogenesis and tumor growth by selective inhibition of angiopoietin-2. Cancer Cell 6:507-516 (Pubitemid 39469986)
17. Karlan BY, Oza AM, Richardson GE, Provencher DM, Hansen VL, Buck M, Chambers SK, Ghatage P, Pippitt Jr. CH, Brown III JV, Covens A, Nagarkar RV, Davy M, Leath III CA, Nguyen H, Stepan DE, Weinreich DM, Tassoudji M, Sun YN, Vergote IB (2011) A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 study of AMG 386 combined with weekly paclitaxel in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer. J Clin Oncol. doi:10.1200/JCO.2010.34.3178
18. Herbst RS, Hong D, Chap L, Kurzrock R, Jackson E, Silverman JM, Rasmussen E, Sun YN, Zhong D, Hwang YC, Evelhoch JL, Oliner JD, Le N, Rosen LS (2009) Safety, pharmacokinetics, and antitumor activity of AMG 386, a selective angiopoietin inhibitor, in adult patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 27:3557-3565
19. Therasse P, Arbuck SG, Eisenhauer EA, Wanders J, Kaplan RS, Rubinstein L, Verweij J, Van Glabbeke M, van Oosterom AT, Christian MC, Gwyther SG (2000) New guidelines to evaluate the response to treatment in solid tumors. European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, National Cancer Institute of the United States, National Cancer Institute of Canada. J Natl Cancer Inst 92:205-216 (Pubitemid 30099779)
20. Rustin GJ, Marples M, Nelstrop AE, Mahmoudi M, Meyer T (2001) Use of CA-125 to define progression of ovarian cancer in patients with persistently elevated levels. J Clin Oncol 19: 4054-4057 (Pubitemid 32976692)
21. Beal SL, Sheiner LB, Boeckmann AJ (eds) (1989-1998) NONMEM users guides. Icon Development Solutions, Ellicott City
22. Mandema JW, Verotta D, Sheiner LB (1992) Building population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic models. I. Models for covariate effects. J Pharmacokinet Biopharm 20:511-528 (Pubitemid 23034413)
23. Cockcroft DW, Gault MH (1976) Prediction of creatinine clearance from serum creatinine. Nephron 16:31-41
24. Marubini E, Grazia Valsecchi M (1995) Analysing survival data from clinical trials and observational studies. Wiley, Chichester
25. Lu JF, Bruno R, Eppler S, Novotny W, Lum B, Gaudreault J (2008) Clinical pharmacokinetics of bevacizumab in patients with solid tumors. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 62:779-786
26. Bruno R, Washington CB, Lu JF, Lieberman G, Banken L, Klein P (2005) Population pharmacokinetics of trastuzumab in patients with HER2+ metastatic breast cancer. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 56:361-369 (Pubitemid 41095399)
27. Rowinsky EK (2004) Curtailing the high rate of late-stage attrition of investigational therapeutics against unprecedented targets in patients with lung and other malignancies. Clin Cancer Res 10:4220s-4226s (Pubitemid 38812450)
28. Gombar C, Loh E (2007) Learn & confirm. Drug Discov Dev 10:22-27
29. European Medicines Agency (2005) The European Medicines Agency road map to 2010: preparing the ground for the future. London
30. US Food and Drug Administration (2004) Innovation or stagnation: challenge and opportunity on the critical path to new medical products. US Department of Health and Human Services. US Food and Drug Administration, Rockville
31. Agoram BM (2009) Use of pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic modelling for starting dose selection in first-in-human trials of high-risk biologics. Br J Clin Pharmacol 67:153-160
32. Rajman I (2008) PK/PD modelling and simulations: utility in drug development. Drug Discov Today 13:341-346
33. Jain RK, Lee JJ, Hong D, Markman M, Gong J, Naing A, Wheler J, Kurzrock R (2010) Phase I oncology studies: evidence that in the era of targeted therapies patients on lower doses do not fare worse. Clin Cancer Res 16:1289-1297
34. Adjei AA (2006) What is the right dose? The elusive optimal biologic dose in phase I clinical trials. J Clin Oncol 24:4054-4055 (Pubitemid 46622278)
35. Puchalski T, Prabhakar U, Jiao Q, Berns B, Davis HM (2010) Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of an antiinterleukin-6 chimeric monoclonal antibody (siltuximab) in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma. Clin Cancer Res 16:1652-1661
36. Tanaka C, O'Reilly T, Kovarik JM, Shand N, Hazell K, Judson I, Raymond E, Zumstein-Mecker S, Stephan C, Boulay A, Hattenberger M, Thomas G, Lane HA (2008) Identifying optimal biologic doses of everolimus (RAD001) in patients with cancer based on the modeling of preclinical and clinical pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data. J Clin Oncol 26:1596-1602
37. O'Donnell A, Faivre S, Burris HA III, Rea D, Papadimitrakopoulou V, Shand N, Lane HA, Hazell K, Zoellner U, Kovarik JM, Brock C, Jones S, Raymond E, Judson I (2008) Phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic study of the oral mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus in patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 26:1588-1595
38. Li J, Jameson MB, Baguley BC, Pili R, Baker SD (2008) Population pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model of the vascular-disrupting agent 5, 6-dimethylxanthenone-4-acetic acid in cancer patients. Clin Cancer Res 14:2102-2110 (Pubitemid 351551122)
39. Zandvliet AS, Karlsson MO, Schellens JH, Copalu W, Beijnen JH, Huitema AD (2010) Two-stage model-based clinical trial design to optimize phase I development of novel anticancer agents. Invest New Drugs 28:61-75
40. Sleijfer S, Wiemer E (2008) Dose selection in phase I studies: why we should always go for the top. J Clin Oncol 26:1576-1578
41. Bergsland E, Dickler MN (2004) Maximizing the potential of bevacizumab in cancer treatment. Oncologist 9(Suppl 1):36-42 (Pubitemid 38747846)
42. Lowe PJ (2010) Applying physiological and biochemical concepts to optimize biological drug development. Clin Pharmacol Ther 87:492-496