A number of important drugs used to treat cancer—many of which serve as the backbone of modern chemotherapy regimens—have outdated prescribing information in their drug labeling. The Food and Drug Administration is undertaking a pilot project to develop a process and criteria for updating prescribing information for longstanding oncology drugs, based on the breadth of knowledge the cancer community has accumulated with the use of these drugs over time. This article highlights a number of considerations for labeling updates, including selecting priorities for updating; data sources and evidentiary criteria; as well as the risks, challenges, and opportunities for iterative review to ensure prescribing information for oncology drugs remains relevant to current clinical practice.

Colleen Lewis, MSN, ANP-BC, AOCNP®, and R. Donald Harvey, PharmD, BCOP, FCCP, FHOPA, presented on the new world of tumor-agnostic treatment approaches, including those aimed at managing patients with tumors that have high microsatellite instability (MSI-H) or neurotrophic receptor tyrosine kinase (NTRK) fusions. Learn about the clinical trial designs that enable development of these novel therapies, and discover how testing methodologies support precision medicine advances.

Renal impairment (RI) is a major complication of multiple myeloma (MM). This study aimed to characterize the single-dose pharmacokinetics (PK) of the oral proteasome inhibitor, ixazomib, in cancer patients with normal renal function [creatinine clearance (CrCl) ≥90 ml/min; n = 20), severe RI (CrCl <30 ml/min; n = 14), or end-stage renal disease requiring haemodialysis (ESRD; n = 7). PK and adverse events (AEs) were assessed after a single 3 mg dose of ixazomib. Ixazomib was highly bound to plasma proteins (~99%) in all renal function groups. Unbound and total systemic exposures of ixazomib were 38% and 39% higher, respectively, in severe RI/ESRD patients versus patients with normal renal function. Total ixazomib concentrations were similar in pre- and post-dialyser samples collected from ESRD patients; therefore, ixazomib can be administered without regard to haemodialysis timing. Except for anaemia, the incidence of the most common AEs was generally similar across groups, but grade 3 and 4 AEs were more frequent in the severe RI/ESRD groups versus the normal group (79%/57% vs. 45%), as were serious AEs (43%/43% vs. 15%). The PK and safety results support a reduced ixazomib dose of 3 mg in patients with severe RI/ESRD.

Purpose: Abiraterone acetate (AA) is a standard of care for metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (CRPC). Despite a large food effect, AA was administered under fasting conditions in its pivotal trials. We sought to test the hypothesis that low-dose AA (LOW; 250 mg with a low-fat meal) would have comparable activity to standard AA (STD; 1,000 mg fasting) in patients with CRPC. Patients and Methods: Patients (n = 72) with progressive CRPC from seven institutions in the United States and Singapore were randomly assigned to STD or LOW. Both arms received prednisone 5 mg twice daily. Prostate-specific antigen (PSA) was assessed monthly, and testosterone/dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate were assessed every 12 weeks with disease burden radiographic assessments. Plasma was collected for drug concentrations. Log change in PSA, as a pharmacodynamic biomarker for efficacy, was the primary end point, using a noninferiority design. Progression-free survival (PFS), PSA response ($ 50% reduction), change in androgen levels, and pharmacokinetics were secondary end points. Results: Thirty-six patients were accrued to both arms. At 12 weeks, there was a greater effect on PSA in the LOW arm (mean log change, 21.59) compared with STD (21.19), and noninferiority of LOW was established according to predefined criteria. The PSA response rate was 58% in LOW and 50% in STD, and the median PFS was approximately 9 months in both groups. Androgen levels decreased similarly in both arms. Although there was no difference in PSA response or PFS, abiraterone concentrations were higher in STD. Conclusion: Low-dose AA (with low-fat breakfast) is noninferior to standard dosing with respect to PSA metrics. Given the pharmacoeconomic implications, these data warrant consideration by prescribers, payers, and patients. Additional studies are indicated to assess the long-term efficacy of this approach.

Purpose This phase Ib study (NCT01862328) evaluated the maximum tolerated dose (MTD), safety, and efficacy of pevonedistat in combination with standard-of-care chemotherapies in patients with solid tumors. Methods Patients received pevonedistat with docetaxel (arm 1, n = 22), carboplatin plus paclitaxel (arm 2, n = 26), or gemcitabine (arm 3, n = 10) in 21-days (arms 1 and 2) or 28-days (arm 3) cycles. A lead-in cohort (arm 2a, n = 6) determined the arm 2 carboplatin dose. Dose escalation proceeded via continual modified reassessment. Results Pevonedistat MTD was 25 mg/m 2 (arm 1) or 20 mg/m 2 (arm 2); arm 3 was discontinued due to poor tolerability. Fifteen (23%) patients experienced dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1 (grade ≥3 liver enzyme elevations, febrile neutropenia, and thrombocytopenia), managed with dose holds or reductions. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 95% of patients. Most common AEs included fatigue (56%) and nausea (50%). One drug-related death occurred in arm 3 (febrile neutropenia). Pevonedistat exposure increased when co-administered with carboplatin plus paclitaxel; no obvious changes were observed when co-administered with docetaxel or gemcitabine. Among 54 response-evaluable patients, two had complete responses (arm 2) and 10 had partial responses (three in arm 1, one in arm 2a, six in arm 2); overall response rates were 16% (arm 1) and 35% (arm 2). High ERCC1 expression correlated with clinical benefit in arm 2. Conclusion Pevonedistat with docetaxel or with carboplatin plus paclitaxel was tolerable without cumulative toxicity. Sustained clinical responses were observed in pretreated patients receiving pevonedistat with carboplatin and paclitaxel. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT01862328.

Therapeutic antibodies that block the programmed cell death protein-1 (PD-1) immune checkpoint pathway prevent T-cell downregulation and promote immune responses against cancer. Several PD-1 pathway inhibitors have shown robust activity in initial trials. This article reviews the preclinical evidence, rationale, and clinical pharmacology of blockade of PD-1 or its ligands as therapy for lung cancer and provides an overview of agents in development, clinical evidence to date, and implications for clinical application.

Background: Citarinostat (CC-96241; previously ACY-241), an oral inhibitor of histone deacetylases (HDACs) with selectivity for HDAC6, has demonstrated synergistic anticancer activity with paclitaxel in multiple solid tumor models. Combination therapy using citarinostat with paclitaxel was evaluated in this phase Ib 3 + 3 dose-escalation study in patients with advanced solid tumors. Methods: Patients with previously treated advanced solid tumors received citarinostat 180, 360, or 480 mg once daily on days 1 to 21 plus paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was determination of the maximum tolerated dose (MTD). Secondary endpoints included safety, antitumor activity, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics. Results: Twenty patients were enrolled and received study treatment; 15 had received prior taxane therapy. No dose-limiting toxicities were reported at any dose; therefore, the MTD was not identified. Citarinostat 360 vs 480 mg was associated with reduced incidence and severity of neutropenia. Three patients experienced a confirmed partial response and 13 achieved stable disease. Pharmacokinetic parameters were linear up to citarinostat 360 mg, the dose at which the highest levels of histone and tubulin acetylation were observed in peripheral blood mononuclear cells. Conclusions: The combination of citarinostat plus paclitaxel showed an acceptable safety profile, with no unexpected or dose-limiting toxicities and potential evidence of antitumor activity in patients with heavily pretreated advanced solid tumors. Citarinostat 360 mg once daily is considered the recommended phase II dose for use in combination with paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 every 3 of 4 weeks. This trial is registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02551185).

Purpose: Evaluate the safety, pharmacokinetic profile, pharmacodynamic effects, and antitumor activity of the first-in-class investigational NEDD8-activating enzyme (NAE) inhibitor pevonedistat (TAK-924/MLN4924) in patients with relapsed/refractory lymphoma or multiple myeloma. Experimental Design: Patients with relapsed/refractory myeloma (n = 17) or lymphoma (n = 27) received intravenous pevonedistat 25 to 147 mg/m 2 on days 1, 2, 8, 9 (schedule A; n = 27) or 100 to 261 mg/m 2 on days 1, 4, 8, 11 (schedule B; n = 17) of 21-day cycles. Results: Maximum tolerated doses were 110 mg/m 2 (schedule A) and 196 mg/m 2 (schedule B). Dose-limiting toxicities included febrile neutropenia, transaminase elevations, muscle cramps (schedule A), and thrombocytopenia (schedule B). Common adverse events included fatigue and nausea. Common grade ≥3 events were anemia (19%; schedule A), and neutropenia and pneumonia (12%; schedule B). Clinically significant myelosuppression was uncommon. There were no treatment-related deaths. Pevonedistat pharmacokinetics exhibited a biphasic disposition phase and approximate dose-proportional increases in systemic exposure. Consistent with the short mean elimination half-life of approximately 8.5 hours, little-to-no drug accumulation in plasma was seen after multiple dosing. Pharmacodynamic evidence of NAE inhibition included increased skin levels of CDT-1 and NRF-2 (substrates of NAE-dependent ubiquitin ligases), and increased NRF-2-regulated gene transcript levels in whole blood. Pevonedistat-NEDD8 adduct was detected in bone marrow aspirates, indicating pevonedistat target engagement in the bone marrow compartment. Three lymphoma patients had partial responses; 30 patients achieved stable disease. Conclusions: Pevonedistat demonstrated anticipated pharmacodynamic effects in the clinical setting, a tolerable safety profile, and some preliminary evidence that may be suggestive of the potential for activity in relapsed/refractory lymphoma.

Background: Approximately 12 million Americans are affected with cancer. Of these, 53% experience pain at all stages of cancer. Pain may remain uncontrolled despite high-dose opioid therapy, and opioids have many well-documented harmful side effects. Intranasal ketamine has been shown to be effective in controlling breakthrough noncancer pain in a double-blind randomized control trial (DBRCT) by Carr et al in 2003 as well as to help with depression in a DBRCT by Lapidus et al in 2014. We seek to obtain preliminary data on the safety, feasibility, and utility of this novel technique for the treatment of uncontrolled cancer pain. Objective: This study aimed to obtain preliminary data via a clinical trial addressing the safety, feasibility, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of intranasal ketamine. These initial findings will be applied to a subsequent trial to determine the effectiveness and associated toxicities of ketamine in a larger sample of cancer patients and to address the compelling need to identify new, successful management therapies for cancer pain. Methods: This is an institutional review board- And investigational new drug-approved, prospective phase I/II trial to investigate the safety and use of intranasal ketamine in patients with uncontrolled pain related to cancer or cancer treatment. Informed consent will be obtained prior to all study procedures. All patients will be assigned to the same investigational treatment arm. After patient selection via inclusion/exclusion criteria, patients will be seen over 5 visits, with each visit conducted 2-7 days apart. Patients will be administered ketamine on visits 1-4 and monitored for 240 minutes with continuous pulse oximetry and regular blood pressure checks. Blood samples as well as patient-reported outcomes will be collected at set time points at baseline and after drug delivery. Patients will receive 10 mg intranasal ketamine on visit 1, 10 mg intravenous ketamine on visit 2, 30 mg intranasal ketamine on visit 3, and 50 mg intranasal ketamine on visit 4. On visit 5, an addition blood sample will be drawn. Results: As of March 2019, enrollment is in progress, and a total of 7 subjects have completed the study. Enrollment is expected to be completed by April 2019. Final data analysis will commence soon after, and the results are expected to be submitted for publication in 2019. Conclusions: If intranasal ketamine can be utilized for pain control in cancer patients, it could provide superior analgesia and better quality of life, without the risk of significant respiratory depression and constipation associated with opioid medications. These findings will be an important initial step toward testing the effectiveness of intranasal ketamine as a nonopioid medication for cancer pain and as potential maintenance outpatient therapy.

Ixazomib is an oral proteasome inhibitor, approved in USA, Canada, Australia and Europe in combination with lenalidomide and dexamethasone, for the treatment of patients with multiple myeloma who have received at least one prior therapy. We report a population pharmacokinetic model-based analysis for ixazomib that was pivotal in describing the clinical pharmacokinetics of ixazomib, to inform product labelling. Plasma concentration–time data were collected from 755 patients who received oral or intravenous ixazomib in once- or twice-weekly schedules in ten trials, including the global phase III TOURMALINE-MM1 study. Data were analysed using nonlinear mixed-effects modelling (NONMEM software version 7.2, ICON Development Solutions, Hanover, MD, USA). Ixazomib plasma concentrations from intravenous and oral studies were described by a three-compartment model with linear distribution and elimination kinetics, including first-order linear absorption with a lag time describing the oral dose data. Body surface area on the volume of the second peripheral compartment was the only covariate included in the final model. None of the additional covariates tested including body surface area (1.2–2.7 m 2 ), sex, age (23–91 years), race, mild/moderate renal impairment and mild hepatic impairment were found to impact systemic clearance, suggesting that no dose adjustment is required based on these covariates. The geometric mean terminal disposition phase half-life was 9.5 days, steady-state volume of distribution was 543 L and systemic clearance was 1.86 L/h. The absolute bioavailability of an oral dose was estimated to be 58%.