A phase I dose escalation and bioavailability study of oral sodium phenylbutyrate in patients with refractory solid tumor malignancies.

PURPOSE: Phenylbutyrate (PB) is an aromatic fatty acid with multiple mechanisms of action including histone deacetylase inhibition. Preclinically, PB demonstrates both cytotoxic and differentiating effects at a concentration of 0.5 mM. We conducted a Phase I trial of p.o. PB patients with refractory solid tumor malignancies to evaluate toxicity, pharmacokinetic parameters, and feasibility of p.o. administration. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Twenty-eight patients with refractory solid tumor malignancies were enrolled on this dose-escalation to maximally tolerated dose trial. Five dose levels of PB were studied: 9 g/day (n = 4), 18 g/day (n = 4), 27 g/day (n = 4), 36 g/day (n = 12), and 45 g/day (n = 4). Pharmacokinetic studies were performed and included an p.o. bioavailability determination. Compliance data were also collected. RESULTS: The recommended Phase II dose is 27 g/day. Overall the drug was well tolerated with the most common toxicities being grade 1-2 dyspepsia and fatigue. Nonoverlapping dose-limiting toxicities of nausea/vomiting and hypocalcemia were seen at 36 g/day. The p.o. bioavailability of PB was 78% for all dose levels, and the biologically active concentration of 0.5 mM was achieved at all dose levels. Compliance was excellent with 93.5% of all possible doses taken. No partial remission or complete remission was seen, but 7 patients had stable disease for more than 6 months while on the drug. CONCLUSIONS: PB (p.o.) is well tolerated and achieves the concentration in vivo that has been shown to have biological activity in vitro. PB may have a role as a cytostatic agent and should be additionally explored in combination with cytotoxics and other novel drugs.     

A phase I,dose-finding study of sunitinib in combination with irinotecan in patients with advanced solid tumours

Background:

Sunitinib is a multitargeted, oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor with antitumour and antiangiogenic activity. We investigated the safety and pharmacokinetics of sunitinib in combination with irinotecan in patients with advanced, refractory solid tumours.

Methods:

Sunitinib was initially administered once daily at 37.5 mg per day on days 1–14 of a 21-day cycle, in which irinotecan 250 mg m⁻² was given on day 1. In a second cohort, the sunitinib dose was reduced to 25 mg per day. Blood samples were collected for pharmacokinetic studies.

Results:

In the sunitinib 37.5 mg per day cohort, 3 out of 10 evaluable patients had objective responses, but dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) of neutropenia, pneumococcal sepsis, and fatigue were observed. There were no DLTs in the sunitinib 25 mg per day cohort. Paired observations of pharmacokinetic parameter values of sunitinib and irinotecan alone vs the combination did not reveal significant drug–drug interactions. The maximum tolerated dose was defined as sunitinib 25 mg per day (days 1–14) with irinotecan 250 mg m⁻² (day 1), but no activity was observed at this dose.

Conclusion:

Although a higher sunitinib dose of 37.5 mg per day (days 1–14) with irinotecan showed preliminary evidence of antitumour activity, this dose was poorly tolerated. Therefore, this particular combination will not be pursued for further studies.     

A phase I and pharmacologic study of the combination of bortezomib and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in patients with refractory solid tumors

Purpose  Pre-clinical studies combining the proteasome inhibitor bortezomib with anthracyclines have shown enhanced anti-tumor activity. We conducted a phase I trial of bortezomib and pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in patients with refractory solid tumors. Methods  Patients received bortezomib, 0.9–1.5 mg/m², on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of every 21-day cycle, along with PLD, 30 mg/m², on day 4. The goals were to determine the dose limiting toxicity (DLT) and maximum tolerated dose (MTD), and to investigate pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions of the combination. Results  A total of 37 patients with four median prior therapies were treated. Frequent grade 1–2 toxicities included fatigue, nausea, thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia, constipation, myalgias, and peripheral neuropathy. DLTs included grade 3 nausea and vomiting in 1 of 6 patients receiving bortezomib at 1.2 mg/m², and grade 3 nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea in 1 of 6 patients receiving bortezomib at 1.5 mg/m². Grade 3 toxicities in later cycles included hand-foot syndrome, thrombocytopenia, anemia, neutropenia, nausea, diarrhea, and abdominal pain. Because of frequent dose-delays, dose-reductions, and gastrointestinal toxicity at the 1.4 and 1.5 mg/m² levels, bortezomib at 1.3 mg/m² and PLD at 30 mg/m² are recommended for further testing. Among 19 patients with breast cancer, four had evidence of a clinical benefit. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic studies did not show any significant interactions between the two drugs. Conclusions  A regimen of bortezomib, 1.3 mg/m² on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 with PLD, 30 mg/m², on day 4 of a 21-day cycle, was safe in this study, and merits further investigation. Supported in part by grants from the following: Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc., General Clinical Research Centers Program of the Division of Research Resources, National Institutes of Health(RR00046), National Cancer Institute SPORE in Breast Cancer (5-P50-CA58223-09A1 H.S. Earp), National Inst. of Health (K23-RR16536 ECD), Leukemia and Lymphoma Society (6096-07 RZO), and National Cancer Institute (RO1 CA102278 RZO).     

Decreased exposure to sunitinib due to concomitant administration of ifosfamide: results of a phase I and pharmacokinetic study on the combination of sunitinib and ifosfamide in patients with advanced solid malignancies

Background:

This study aimed to define the maximally tolerated dose (MTD) of sunitinib combined with two different infusion schedules of ifosfamide.

Methods:

Patients with advanced solid tumours, good performance score, good organ function, and no standard therapy available were eligible. Continuous once daily sunitinib, in escalating doses per cohort, was combined with ifosfamide, 9 g m⁻² for 3 days or 6 g m⁻² for 5 days, administered every 3 weeks. Pharmacokinetic (PK) and pharmacodynamic (PD) assessments were performed.

Results:

With growth-factor support, the MTD of sunitinib combined with either ifosfamide schedule was 12.5 mg in 32 patients enrolled. Neutropenia-related adverse events were dose-limiting toxicities. Sunitinib did not affect ifosfamide PK. Ifosfamide significantly decreased exposure to sunitinib and increased exposure to its metabolite, SU12662. No consistent changes in PD parameters were observed.

Conclusion:

With growth-factor support, the MTD of sunitinib with both ifosfamide schedules was 12.5 mg. Ifosfamide produced decreased sunitinib blood levels because of CYP3A induction. As PK interactions cannot explain the relatively low sunitinib doses that can be combined with ifosfamide, synergy in toxicity is likely. Whether this also holds true for anti-tumour activity needs to be further explored.     

A phase II and pharmacodynamic study of sunitinib in relapsed/refractory oesophageal and gastro-oesophageal cancers

Background:

Blockade of the vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway shows evidence of activity in gastro-oesophageal (GE) and oesophageal cancer. We investigated the efficacy of sunitinib, a multikinase VEGF inhibitor, in patients with relapsed/refractory GE/oesophageal cancer.

Methods:

This was a single-stage Fleming phase II study. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) at 24 weeks. If five or more patients out of a total of 25 were free of progressive disease at 24 weeks, sunitinib would be recommended for further study. Patients received sunitinib 37.5 mg orally daily and imaged every 6 weeks. Exploratory correlative analysis included serum growth factors, tumour gene expression and dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging (DCE-MRI).

Results:

Twenty-five evaluable patients participated in the study. Progression-free survival at 24 weeks was 8% (n=2 patients; confidence interval (CI): 95% 1.4–22.5%), and the duration of best response for the patients was 23 and 72 weeks. Ten patients (42%) had stable disease (SD) for >10 weeks. Overall response rate is 13%. Median PFS is 7 weeks (95% CI: 5.6–11.4 weeks) and the median overall survival is 17 weeks (95% CI: 8.9–25.3 weeks). Most common grade 3/4 toxicities included fatigue (24%), anaemia (20%) thrombocytopenia (16%), and leucopenia (16%). No patients discontinued therapy due to toxicity. Serum VEGF-A and -C levels, tumour complement factor B (CFB) gene expression, and DCE-MRI correlated with clinical benefit, defined as SD or better as best response.

Conclusion:

Sunitinib is well tolerated but only a select subgroup of patients benefited. Serum VEGF-A and -C may be early predictors of benefit. On this study, patients with clinical benefit from sunitinib had higher tumour CFB expression, and thus has identified CFB as a potential predictor for efficacy of anti-angiogenic therapy. These findings need validation from future prospective trials.     

A phase 1 and pharmacokinetic study of gemcitabine and oxaliplatin in patients with solid tumors

Purpose: This dose escalation study aimed to determine the recommended doses, toxicity and pharmacokinetics of oxaliplatin and gemcitabine given on days 1 and 8 every 21 days. This schedule may maximize dose intensity of both drugs with acceptable or reduced toxicity. Patient and methods: Eligible patients had solid malignancies, no more than two prior courses of chemotherapy, ECOG performance status 0–2, neurotoxicity ≤ NCI-CTC grade 1 and adequate organ function. Dose escalation commenced at oxaliplatin 40 mg/m² and gemcitabine 750 mg/m², both given on days 1 and 8 every 21 days, and reached oxaliplatin 80 mg/m² and gemcitabine 1,500 mg/m². The two highest dose levels were each expanded to six patients to gain additional toxicity data. Results: There were no dose limiting toxicities related to treatment and an MTD was not reached. Five patients (24%) had grade 3 neutropenia, without associated infection, and seven patients (33%) had grade 3/4 thrombocytopenia. Neurotoxicity was mild and no worse than grade 1. Two patients with mesothelioma (10%) had partial responses and 11 patients (52%) had disease stabilization. No pharmacokinetic interaction between oxaliplatin and gemcitabine was detected. Dose intensity was maximal at level 4 (oxaliplatin 70 mg/m² and gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m²). Conclusions: This schedule allows oxaliplatin and gemcitabine to be delivered at the full dose intensity of each drug with excellent tolerability and predictable pharmacokinetics. The recommended doses for phase II studies are oxaliplatin 70 mg/m² and gemcitabine 1,250 mg/m² on days 1 and 8 every 21 days.     

A phase I study of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin and temsirolimus in patients with refractory solid malignancies

This study aimed to determine the maximum-tolerated dose and dose-limiting toxicities of pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) in combination with temsirolimus (T) in patients with refractory solid tumors. Using a standard “3+3” dose escalation design, 23 patients were enrolled in three dosing cohorts in this phase I study. The starting dose level was PLD at 30 mg/m² every 4 weeks and T at 20 mg weekly. Pharmacokinetics (PK) of doxorubicin were evaluated for patients in the expansion cohort. The most common treatment-related adverse events of all grades were mucositis/stomatitis (69.6 %), anorexia (52.2 %), thrombocytopenia (52.2 %), and fatigue (47.8 %). The recommended doses of this combination for phase II studies are 25 mg/m² PLD and 25 mg T. PK analyses suggested increased exposure of doxorubicin in this combination regimen compared to doxorubicin administered as a single agent, possibly due to PK drug interactions. Out of 18 patients evaluable for a treatment response, two had partial responses (PR) (breast cancer and hepatocellular carcinoma) and six had stable disease (SD). Two patients remained on treatment for more than 1 year. The combination of PLD and T is tolerable, and the treatment resulted in clinical benefit. The combination regimen should be further explored in appropriate tumor types.     

A phase 1b trial of the combination of the antiangiogenic agent sunitinib and radiation therapy for patients with primary and metastatic central nervous system malignancies

BACKGROUND:

In this phase 1 trial, the authors evaluated sunitinib combined with radiation therapy (RT) for the treatment of primary or metastatic central nervous system (CNS) malignancies.

METHODS:

Eligible patients had CNS malignancies that required a (minimum) 2‐week course of RT. Sunitinib (37.5 mg) was administered daily for the duration of RT with optional treatment extension of 1 month. Urine was collected at 3 time points for correlative biomarker studies. The primary endpoint was acute toxicity defined according to Common Toxicity Criteria version 3.

RESULTS:

Fifteen patients were enrolled (12 with CNS metastasis and 3 with primary tumors). RT doses ranged from 14 Gray (Gy) to 70 Gy (1.8‐3.5 Gy per fraction). Acute toxicities included hematologic, nausea, hyperglycemia, fatigue, hypocalcemia, and diarrhea. Six patients (40%) developed grade ≤2 toxicities. Grade 3 toxicities occurred in 7 patients (47%) and included hematologic toxicity, fatigue, deep vein thrombosis, dysphasia, hyperglycemia, and hyponatremia. No grade 3 through 5 hypertensive events or intracerebral hemorrhages occurred. Two grade 5 adverse events attributed to disease progression occurred. The median follow‐up was 34.2 months. Two patients (13%) achieved a partial response, 9 patients (60%) had stable disease, and 2 patients (13%) patients had progressive disease. The 6‐month progression‐free survival rate for patients who had brain metastasis was 58%. Grade 3 hematologic toxicity was correlated with greater changes in vascular endothelial growth factor levels changes between baseline and the completion of RT.

CONCLUSIONS:

Continuous 37.5‐mg sunitinib combined with RT in patients who had CNS malignancies yielded acceptable toxicities and adverse events. The current results indicated that changes in urine vascular endothelial growth factor levels are associated with hematologic toxicity, and this association should be analyzed in a larger cohort. The feasibility, safety, and early response results warrant a phase 2 trial. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.     

A phase I study of sirolimus and bevacizumab in patients with advanced malignancies

Background

We performed a single institution, phase I study of sirolimus and bevacizumab, in order to determine the dose limiting toxicity (DLT) and recommended phase II doses.

Patients and methods

Eligible patients had previously treated advanced malignancies and were enrolled in three cohorts. Sirolimus 90 mg PO weekly (45 mg on days 1 and 2) was combined with bevacizumab 7.5 mg/kg (cohort #1) or bevacizumab 15 mg/kg (cohort #2) IV q3weeks. Sirolimus 4 mg PO daily was combined with bevacizumab 15 mg/kg IV q3weeks (cohort #3).

Results

Twenty-eight patients enrolled. The most common tumour types were colorectal (21%), head/neck (14%), and renal cell (11%). No DLTs were observed in cohorts #1 (4 patients) and #2 (12 patients), while two DLTs (grade 3 confusion and grade 3 fatigue) were observed in the first six patients in cohort #3 (12 patients). The most common grade 3 toxicities were fatigue (18%), hypertension (14%) and anorexia (11%). There were no responses, but one patient has had stable disease for 78 weeks.

Conclusions

The combination of sirolimus and bevacizumab at full doses is tolerable in the majority of patients. The availability and cost of sirolimus compared with other mTOR inhibitors make this an attractive agent to combine with bevacizumab.     

A phase II study of bortezomib in patients with relapsed or refractory aggressive adult T‐cell leukemia/lymphoma

Adult T-cell leukemia/lymphoma (ATL) is a malignancy of peripheral T-lymphocytes with a poor prognosis. This multicenter, two-stage, single-arm, phase II study assessed the efficacy and safety of bortezomib in patients with relapsed/refractory ATL who received at least one regimen of chemotherapy. The primary endpoint was the best overall response rate (ORR), and secondary endpoints included safety, the best response by lesions, and progression-free survival (PFS). Fifteen patients were enrolled in the first stage of this study. One partial remission (PR) and five stable disease (SD) were observed as the best overall responses, and ORR was 6.7% (95% confidence interval (C.I.) 0.17-31.95%). Responses according to disease sites were one complete remission (CR) in peripheral blood, two PR in measurable targeted lesions, and two PR in skin lesions. Progression-free survival (PFS) was 38 (95% CI; 18–106) days. All patients developed ≥1 adverse events (AEs), and 80% of patients had ≥1 grade 3/4 AEs; however, no new safety findings were obtained. Although these results fulfilled the planned settings to proceed to the second stage, the coordinating committee decided to terminate this study because single agent activity did not appear to be very promising for this cohort of patients.     

A phase Ib/II translational study of sunitinib with neoadjuvant radiotherapy in soft-tissue sarcoma

Background:

Preoperative radiotherapy (RT) is commonly used to treat localised soft-tissue sarcomas (STS). Hypoxia is an important determinant of radioresistance. Whether antiangiogenic therapy can ‘normalise'' tumour vasculature, thereby improving oxygenation, remains unknown.

Methods:

Two cohorts were prospectively enrolled. Cohort A evaluated the implications of hypoxia in STS, using the hypoxic tracer ¹⁸F-azomycin arabinoside (FAZA-PET). In cohort B, sunitinib was added to preoperative RT in a dose-finding phase 1b/2 design.

Results:

In cohort A, 13 out of 23 tumours were hypoxic (FAZA-PET), correlating with metabolic activity (r²=0.85; P<0.001). Two-year progression-free (PFS) and overall (OS) survival were 61% (95% CI: 0.44–0.84) and 87% (95% CI: 0.74–1.00), respectively. Hypoxia was associated with radioresistance (P=0.012), higher local recurrence (Hazard ratio (HR): 10.2; P=0.02), PFS (HR: 8.4; P=0.02), and OS (HR: 41.4; P<0.04). In Cohort B, seven patients received sunitinib at dose level (DL): 0 (50 mg per day for 2 weeks before RT; 25 mg per day during RT) and two patients received DL: −1 (37.5 mg per day for entire period). Dose-limiting toxicities were observed in 4 out of 7 patients at DL 0 and 2 out of 2 patients at DL −1, resulting in premature study closure. Although there was no difference in PFS or OS, patients receiving sunitinib had higher local failure (HR: 8.1; P=0.004).

Conclusion:

In STS, hypoxia is associated with adverse outcomes. The combination of sunitinib with preoperative RT resulted in unacceptable toxicities, and higher local relapse rates.     

Results from AMBER,a randomized phase 2 study of bevacizumab and bortezomib versus bortezomib in relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma

BACKGROUND.

Newer systemic therapies have significantly advanced the treatment of multiple myeloma, but additional agents are needed. Bortezomib is a proteasome inhibitor with efficacy in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma that inhibits tumor angiogenesis, a process that has been implicated in multiple myeloma pathogenesis.

METHODS.

In AMBER(“A Randomized, Blinded, Placebo‐Controlled, Multicenter, Phase II Study of Bevacizumab in Combination With Bortezomib in Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma”), patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma were randomized to receive bortezomib (1.3 mg/m² on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 of each 21‐day cycle) and either placebo or bevacizumab (15 mg/kg on day 1 of each cycle) for up to 8 cycles. At completion, patients in the bortezomib‐plus‐bevacizumab arm could continue bevacizumab until they developed progressive disease or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival (PFS).

RESULTS.

The stratified hazard ratio of PFS for the bevacizumab‐containing arm (n = 49) relative to the bortezomib monotherapy arm (n = 53) was 0.743 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.43‐1.28; P = .2804); the median PFS was 6.2 months (95% CI, 4.4‐8.5 months) and 5.1 months (95% CI, 4.2‐7.2 months), respectively; the overall response rates were 51% and 43.4% (P = .4029), respectively; and the median response duration was 6.9 months (95% CI, 4.73‐11.83 months) and 6.0 months (95% CI, 4.86‐8.31 months), respectively. Frequent adverse events occurred at similar rates across treatment arms, but hypertension, fatigue, and neuralgia occurred more frequently in the bevacizumab‐containing arm.

CONCLUSIONS.

The addition of bevacizumab to bortezomib in unselected patients with pretreated multiple myeloma did not result in significant improvements in efficacy outcomes. The combination was well tolerated, and no new safety concerns for either agent were identified. Cancer 2013. © 2012 American Cancer Society.     

Phase 1 study of concurrent sunitinib and image‐guided radiotherapy followed by maintenance sunitinib for patients with oligometastases

BACKGROUND:

To determine the safety and maximum‐tolerated dose of concurrent sunitinib and image‐guided radiotherapy (IGRT) followed by maintenance sunitinib in oligometastastic patients.

METHODS:

Eligible patients had 1 to 5 sites of metastatic cancer measuring ≤6 cm. The most common treatment sites were bone, liver, and lung. Patients were treated with concurrent sunitinib (Day 1 through Day 28) and IGRT (40‐50 Gy in 10 fractions starting on Day 8) followed by maintenance sunitinib (50 mg daily, 4 weeks on/2 weeks off starting on Day 43). The starting dose was sunitinib 25 mg and IGRT 40 Gy. Doses were escalated in a ping‐pong design with incremental increases in either sunitinib or IGRT.

RESULTS:

Twenty‐one patients with 36 metastatic lesions were enrolled, with a median follow‐up of 10 months. No dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were noted at dose levels 1 or 2 (SU 37.5 mg/RT 40 Gy). One of 10 patients at dose level 3 (SU 37.5 mg/RT 50 Gy) and 2 of 5 patients at dose level 4 (SU 50 mg/RT 50 Gy) experienced DLTs comprising grade 4 myelosuppression and grade 3 nausea. At last follow‐up, 8 patients are alive without evidence of progression. The 1‐year local, progression‐free, and overall survival were 85%, 44%, and 75%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS:

Addition of SU (25 to 37.5 mg) to IGRT is tolerable in patients with oligometastases, without potentiation of RT toxicity. On the basis of promising antitumor responses observed with this novel combination, a multi‐institutional phase 2 trial using SU 37.5 mg/RT 50 Gy is ongoing. Cancer 2009; 115:3571–80. © 2009 American Cancer Society.     

Phase I study of bortezomib and cetuximab in patients with solid tumours expressing epidermal growth factor receptor

Bortezomib inhibits nuclear factor-κB (NF-κB). Cetuximab is a chimeric mouse–human antibody targeted against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). We hypothesised that concomitant blockade of NF-κB and EGFR signalling would overcome EGFR-mediated resistance to single-agent bortezomib and induce apoptosis through two molecular pathways. The aim of this phase I trial was to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for bortezomib plus cetuximab in patients with EGFR-expressing epithelial tumours. The 21-day treatment cycle consisted of bortezomib administered on days 1 and 8 through dose escalation (1.3–2 mg m⁻²). Cetuximab was delivered at a dose of 250 mg m⁻² on days 1, 8 and 15 (400 mg m⁻² day 1 cycle 1). A total of 37 patients were enroled and given a total 91 cycles. No grade ⩾3 haematological toxicity was noted. Non-hematological grade ⩾3 toxicities included fatigue (22% of patients), dyspnoea (16%) and infection (11%). The MTD was not reached at the highest tested bortezomib dose (2.0 mg m⁻²). Efficacy outcomes included disease progression in 21 patients (56.7%) and stable disease (SD) at 6 weeks in 16 patients (43.3%). Five of the six patients with SD at 12 weeks were diagnosed with cancers of the lungs or head and neck. This combination therapy was moderately effective in extensively pretreated patients with non-small cell lung or head and neck cancers and warrants further investigation.     

Sorafenib in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma refractory to either sunitinib or bevacizumab

BACKGROUND:

Bevacizumab and sunitinib are standard initial therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Despite common use, the safety and activity of sorafenib in bevacizumab‐ or sunitinib‐refractory mRCC have not been prospectively investigated.

METHODS:

Metastatic RCC patients with Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST)‐defined disease progression (PD) after treatment with either bevacizumab or sunitinib received twice daily 400 mg of sorafenib in a multicenter, prospective phase 2 study. Dose escalation was permitted in the absence of significant toxicity. The primary endpoint was tumor burden reduction rate, defined as the proportion of patients with ≥5% reduction in the sum of RECIST‐defined target lesions without other PD. Secondary endpoints included progression‐free survival (PFS), duration of response, overall survival, and safety. A 2‐stage accrual design was used to test the alternative hypothesis that the tumor burden reduction rate was >20% versus <5%.

RESULTS:

Forty‐eight patients were enrolled. The tumor burden reduction rate was 30% (95% confidence interval [CI], 17%‐45%). One unconfirmed objective partial response was observed. The median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI, 3.6‐5.9). There was no association of PFS and tumor shrinkage with response to prior therapy. Most treatment‐related adverse events were of mild‐to‐moderate intensity, and included fatigue, hypertension, diarrhea, and palmoplantar erythrodysesthesia (PPE). Patients previously treated with bevacizumab tended to develop more PPE (P = .03) and mucositis (P = .06), whereas sunitinib‐treated patients tended to develop more skin rash (P = .06).

CONCLUSIONS:

Administration of sorafenib is safe and feasible in patients with mRCC refractory to either bevacizumab or sunitinib. Modest clinical activity was observed supporting current practice patterns of sequential vascular endothelial growth factor‐targeted therapy in mRCC. Cancer 2010. © 2010 American Cancer Society.     

A phase 1a clinical trial of LYM-1 monoclonal antibody serotherapy in patients with refractory B cell malignancies

Ten patients with refractory B cell lymphomas were treated with weekly intravenous infusions of escalating doses of murine monoclonal antibody (MoAb) LYM-1 over four weeks. LYM-1 is a recently developed IgG2a murine MoAb that recognizes a polymorphic HLA-Dr antigen on surfaces of normal and malignant B cells but does not bind to any other normal tissues. MoAb LYM-1 has several advantages for serotherapy, since the antigen it recognizes is not shed from the cell surface and does not modulate in response to MoAb therapy. Furthermore, in vitro studies have indicated significant anti-tumour activity against lymphoma cell lines. In the current trial, dose-dependent levels of free LYM-1 were detected in the serum of all patients, but penetration of extravascular tumour tissues was poor. No significant toxicity or human anti-mouse antibody responses were observed in any patient. Clinical responses were minor and appeared to correlate with the number of infiltrating T cells seen in the initial lymphoma specimens. LYM-1 appears to be well-tolerated and has demonstrated several potential advantages as a therapeutic agent in patients with lymphoma. The mechanism of anti-tumour effect and plans for further clinical studies are discussed.