Sacituzumab govitecan: breakthrough targeted therapy for triple-negative breast cancer

Introduction: Triple negative breast cancer (TNBC) is an aggressive breast cancer subtype associated with an increased risk of recurrence and cancer-related death. Unlike hormone receptor-positive or HER2-positive breast cancers, there are limited targeted therapies available to treat TNBC and cytotoxic chemotherapy remains the mainstay of treatment. Sacituzumab govitecan (IMMU-132) is an antibody-drug conjugate targeting Trop-2 expressing cells and selectively delivering SN-38, an active metabolite of irinotecan.

Areas covered: This review covers the mechanism of action, safety and efficacy of sacituzumab govitecan in patients with previously treated, metastatic TNBC. Additionally, efficacy data in other epithelial malignancies is included based on a PubMed search for ‘sacituzumab govitecan’ and ‘clinical trial’.

Expert opinion: Sacituzumab govitecan has promising anti-cancer activity in patients with metastatic TNBC previously treated with at least two prior lines of systemic therapy based on a single arm Phase I/II clinical trial. A confirmatory Phase III randomized clinical trial is ongoing. Sacituzumab govitecan has a manageable side effect profile, with the most common adverse events being nausea, neutropenia, and diarrhea. The activity of sacituzumab govitecan likely extends beyond TNBC with promising early efficacy data in many other epithelial cancers, including hormone receptor-positive breast cancer.     

Sample size re-estimation for clinical trials with longitudinal negative binomial counts including time trends

In some diseases, such as multiple sclerosis, lesion counts obtained from magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) are used as markers of disease progression. This leads to longitudinal, and typically overdispersed, count data outcomes in clinical trials. Models for such data invariably include a number of nuisance parameters, which can be difficult to specify at the planning stage, leading to considerable uncertainty in sample size specification. Consequently, blinded sample size re-estimation procedures are used, allowing for an adjustment of the sample size within an ongoing trial by estimating relevant nuisance parameters at an interim point, without compromising trial integrity. To date, the methods available for re-estimation have required an assumption that the mean count is time-constant within patients. We propose a new modeling approach that maintains the advantages of established procedures but allows for general underlying and treatment-specific time trends in the mean response. A simulation study is conducted to assess the effectiveness of blinded sample size re-estimation methods over fixed designs. Sample sizes attained through blinded sample size re-estimation procedures are shown to maintain the desired study power without inflating the Type I error rate and the procedure is demonstrated on MRI data from a recent study in multiple sclerosis.     

Application of the adverse outcome pathway framework to genotoxic modes of action

In May 2017, the Health and Environmental Sciences Institute's Genetic Toxicology Technical Committee hosted a workshop to discuss whether mode of action (MOA) investigation is enhanced through the application of the adverse outcome pathway (AOP) framework. As AOPs are a relatively new approach in genetic toxicology, this report describes how AOPs could be harnessed to advance MOA analysis of genotoxicity pathways using five example case studies. Each of these genetic toxicology AOPs proposed for further development includes the relevant molecular initiating events, key events, and adverse outcomes (AOs), identification and/or further development of the appropriate assays to link an agent to these events, and discussion regarding the biological plausibility of the proposed AOP. A key difference between these proposed genetic toxicology AOPs versus traditional AOPs is that the AO is a genetic toxicology endpoint of potential significance in risk characterization, in contrast to an adverse state of an organism or a population. The first two detailed case studies describe provisional AOPs for aurora kinase inhibition and tubulin binding, leading to the common AO of aneuploidy. The remaining three case studies highlight provisional AOPs that lead to chromosome breakage or mutation via indirect DNA interaction (inhibition of topoisomerase II, production of cellular reactive oxygen species, and inhibition of DNA synthesis). These case studies serve as starting points for genotoxicity AOPs that could ultimately be published and utilized by the broader toxicology community and illustrate the practical considerations and evidence required to formalize such AOPs so that they may be applied to genetic toxicity evaluation schemes. Environ. Mol. Mutagen. 61:114–134, 2020. © 2019 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.     

Use of colony-stimulating factor primary prophylaxis and incidence of febrile neutropenia from 2010 to 2016: a longitudinal assessment

Background: Guidelines recommend primary prophylactic use of colony-stimulating factor (PP-CSF) when risk of febrile neutropenia (FN) – based on chemotherapy and patient risk factors – is high. Whether and how PP-CSF use may have changed over time (e.g. due to guideline revisions, increasing use of myelosuppressive regimens, controversy regarding inappropriate CSF use), and whether there has been a concomitant change in the incidence of FN, is unknown.

Methods: A retrospective cohort design and data from two US healthcare claims repositories were employed. The study population included patients who had non-metastatic cancer of the breast, colon/rectum, lung or ovaries, or non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma (NHL), and who received myelosuppressive chemotherapy regimens with an intermediate/high risk for FN. For each patient, the first cycle of the first course was characterized in terms of PP-CSF use and FN episodes. Crude incidence proportions for PP-CSF and FN during the first cycle were estimated by calendar quarter (2010–2016); multivariable logistic regression models were used to estimate quarter-specific adjusted mean probabilities of FN by PP-CSF use.

Results: The study population totaled 142,730 patients with breast cancer (61%), colorectal cancer (14%), NHL (11%), ovarian cancer (10%) or lung cancer (5%). PP-CSF use increased from 52% in 1Q2010 to 58% in 4Q2016; pegfilgrastim was the most commonly used agent (>96% across quarters). PP-CSF administration on the same day as chemotherapy ranged from 8 to 11% until 1Q2015, and increased to 64% by 4Q2016. Adjusted incidence proportions for FN in the first chemotherapy cycle ranged from 2.7% (95% CI: 2.3–3.0) to 3.7% (95% CI: 3.1–4.3) among those who did not receive PP-CSF, and was 2.6% (95% CI: 2.5–2.7) across quarters among those who received PP-CSF.

Conclusions: Although the use of PP-CSF is commonplace in current US clinical practice, underutilization in cancer patients receiving chemotherapy regimens with an intermediate/high risk for FN may still be an issue. Use of same-day PP-CSF increased markedly from the end of 2015, although this finding reflects (at least in part) increased uptake of pegfilgrastim delivered via an on-body injector as well as the recent change in clinical practice guidelines. Overall, patients receiving PP-CSF appear to have a lower risk of FN during the first cycle of chemotherapy.