Nashat Gabrail

Gabrail Cancer Center, Canton, Ohio, United States

Are you Nashat Gabrail?

Claim your profile

Publications (24)186.7 Total impact

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The US community-based, phase IIIB UPFRONT trial was designed to compare three frontline bortezomib-based regimens in transplantation-ineligible patients with myeloma. Patients (N = 502) were randomly assigned 1:1:1 to 24 weeks (eight 21-day cycles) of induction with bortezomib-dexamethasone (VD; n = 168; intravenous bortezomib 1.3 mg/m(2), days 1, 4, 8, and 11 plus oral dexamethasone 20 mg, days 1, 2, 4, 5, 8, 9, 11, and 12 [cycles 1 to 4], or 1, 2, 4, and 5 [cycles 5 to 8]), bortezomib-thalidomide-dexamethasone (VTD; n = 167; bortezomib and dexamethasone as before plus oral thalidomide 100 mg, days 1 to 21), or bortezomib-melphalan-prednisone (VMP; n = 167; bortezomib as before plus oral melphalan 9 mg/m(2) and oral prednisone 60 mg/m(2), days 1 to 4, every other cycle), followed by 25 weeks (five 35-day cycles) of bortezomib maintenance (1.6 mg/m(2), days 1, 8, 15, and 22). The primary end point was progression-free survival. After 42.7 months' median follow-up, median progression-free survival with VD, VTD, and VMP was 14.7, 15.4, and 17.3 months, respectively; median overall survival was 49.8, 51.5, and 53.1 months, with no significant differences among treatments for either end point (global P = .46 and P = .79, respectively, Wald test). Overall response rates were 73% (VD), 80% (VTD), and 70% (VMP). Adverse events were more common with VTD than VD or VMP. Bortezomib maintenance was feasible without producing cumulative toxicity. Although all bortezomib-containing regimens produced good outcomes, VTD and VMP did not appear to offer an advantage over VD in transplantation-ineligible patients with myeloma treated in US community practice. © 2015 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 06/2015; DOI:10.1200/JCO.2014.58.7618 · 18.43 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Despite advances with new therapies, a significant proportion of patients (>30%) suffer delayed-onset chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) despite use of antiemetics. APF530 is a sustained-release subcutaneous (SC) formulation of granisetron for preventing CINV. APF530 pharmacokinetics, safety, and efficacy were studied in two open-label, single-dose Phase II trials (C2005-01 and C2007-01, respectively) in patients receiving moderately emetogenic chemotherapy or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. In C2005-01, 45 patients received APF530 250, 500, or 750 mg SC (granisetron 5, 10, or 15 mg, respectively). In C2007-01, 35 patients were randomized to APF530 250 or 500 mg SC. Injections were given 30 to 60 minutes before single-day moderately emetogenic chemotherapy or highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Plasma granisetron was measured from predose to 168 hours after study drug administration. Safety and efficacy were also evaluated. APF530 pharmacokinetics were dose proportional, with slow absorption and elimination of granisetron after a single SC dose. Median time to maximum plasma concentration and half-life were similar for APF530 250 and 500 mg in both trials, with no differences between the groups receiving moderately and highly emetogenic chemotherapy. Exposure to granisetron was maintained at a therapeutic level over the delayed-onset phase, at least 168 hours. Adverse events in both trials were as expected for granisetron; injection site reactions (eg, erythema and induration) were predominantly mild and seen in ≤20% of patients. Complete responses (no emesis, with no rescue medication) were obtained in the acute, delayed, and overall phases in ≥80% and ≥75% of patients in both trials with the 250 and 500 mg doses, respectively. After a single injection of APF530, there were dose-proportional pharmacokinetics and sustained concentrations of granisetron over 168 hours. The 250 and 500 mg doses were well tolerated and maintained therapeutic granisetron levels for ≥5 days.
    Cancer Management and Research 03/2015; 7:83-92. DOI:10.2147/CMAR.S72626
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Purpose Subcutaneous APF530 provides controlled sustained release of granisetron to prevent acute (0-24 h) and delayed (24-120 h) chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV). This randomized, double-blind phase 3 trial compared APF530 and palonosetron in preventing acute and delayed CINV after moderately (MEC) or highly emetogenic chemotherapy (HEC). Methods Patients receiving single-day MEC or HEC received single-dose APF530 250 or 500 mg subcutaneously (SC) (granisetron 5 or 10 mg) or intravenous palonosetron 0.25 mg. Primary objectives were to establish APF530 noninferiority to palonosetron for preventing acute CINV following MEC or HEC and delayed CINV following MEC and to determine APF530 superiority to palonosetron for preventing delayed CINV following HEC. The primary efficacy end point was complete response (CR [using CI difference for APF530 − palonosetron]). A lower confidence bound greater than −15 % indicated noninferiority. Results In the modified intent-to-treat population (MEC = 634; HEC = 707), both APF530 doses were noninferior to palonosetron in preventing acute CINV after MEC (CRs 74.8 % [−9.8, 9.3] and 76.9 % [−7.5, 11.4], respectively, vs. 75.0 % palonosetron) and after HEC (CRs 77.7 % [−11.5, 5.5] and 81.3 % [-7.7, 8.7], respectively, vs. 80.7 % palonosetron). APF530 500 mg was noninferior to palonosetron in preventing delayed CINV after MEC (CR 58.5 % [−9.5, 12.1] vs. 57.2 % palonosetron) but not superior in preventing delayed CINV after HEC. Adverse events were generally mild and unrelated to treatment, the most common (excluding injection-site reactions) being constipation. Conclusions A single subcutaneous APF530 injection offers a convenient alternative to palonosetron for preventing acute and delayed CINV after MEC or HEC.
    Supportive Care Cancer 09/2014; 23(3). DOI:10.1007/s00520-014-2400-3 · 2.50 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Study Objective To assess the dose proportionality of azacitidine pharmacokinetics (PK) after single subcutaneous (SC) doses of 25–100 mg/m2, and determine the effect of renal impairment on PK after single and multiple 75 mg/m2 SC azacitidine doses. DesignMulticenter, phase I, open-label, parallel group study. SettingCommunity clinics and major academic centers. PatientsTwenty-seven patients with solid or hematologic malignancies. InterventionsPart 1 evaluated azacitidine dose proportionality in patients with normal renal function randomized to single 25, 50, 75, or 100 mg/m2 SC doses. The 75 mg/m2 dosing group received 4 additional days of SC azacitidine. In Part 2, patients with severe renal impairment (creatinine clearance < 30 ml/min/1.73 m2 Cockcroft-Gault adjusted) received azacitidine 75 mg/m2 for 5 consecutive days. Measurements and Main ResultsPK parameters were determined using noncompartmental methods. In patients with normal renal function (n=21), azacitidine area under the plasma-time curve (AUC0–∞) and maximum observed plasma concentration (Cmax) were dose proportional within the 25–100 mg/m2 range. Concentration versus time profiles after single and multiple azacitidine 75 mg/m2 doses were similar in shape for patients with normal (n=6) or impaired renal function (n=6), with higher mean concentrations in the latter group. Higher mean exposures (AUC0–∞ and Cmax) in renally impaired patients were observed; however, individual exposure values were, with few exceptions, within the same range in both groups. No drug accumulation after multiple doses was observed in either group. Terminal half-life and time to maximum plasma concentration were comparable between groups. Azacitidine tolerability was similar in patients with normal or impaired renal function. Conclusion Azacitidine is dose proportional over the 25–100 mg/m2 dosing range. Overall, renal impairment had no important effect on azacitidine PK. Therefore, no initial azacitidine dose adjustment in patients with renal impairment is required.
    Pharmacotherapy 05/2014; 34(5). DOI:10.1002/phar.1371 · 2.20 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Vintafolide (EC145) is a folic acid-desacetylvinblastine conjugate that binds to the folate receptor (FR), which is expressed on the majority of epithelial ovarian cancers. This randomized phase II trial evaluated vintafolide combined with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) compared with PLD alone. The utility of an FR-targeted imaging agent, (99m)Tc-etarfolatide (EC20), in selecting patients likely to benefit from vintafolide was also examined. Women with recurrent platinum-resistant ovarian cancer who had undergone ≤ two prior cytotoxic regimens were randomly assigned at a 2:1 ratio to PLD (50 mg/m(2) intravenously [IV] once every 28 days) with or without vintafolide (2.5 mg IV three times per week during weeks 1 and 3). Etarfolatide scanning was optional. The primary objective was to compare progression-free survival (PFS) between the groups. The intent-to-treat population comprised 149 patients. Median PFS was 5.0 and 2.7 months for the vintafolide plus PLD and PLD-alone arms, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.96; P = .031). The greatest benefit was observed in patients with 100% of lesions positive for FR, with median PFS of 5.5 compared with 1.5 months for PLD alone (HR, 0.38; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.85; P = .013). The group of patients with FR-positive disease (10% to 90%) experienced some PFS improvement (HR, 0.873), whereas patients with disease that did not express FR experienced no PFS benefit (HR, 1.806). Vintafolide plus PLD is the first combination to demonstrate an improvement over standard therapy in a randomized trial of patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. Etarfolatide can identify patients likely to benefit from vintafolide.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 10/2013; 31(35). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2013.49.7685 · 18.43 Impact Factor
  • Cancer Research 08/2013; 73(8 Supplement):LB-294-LB-294. DOI:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2013-LB-294 · 9.28 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The attenuated vaccinia virus, modified vaccinia Ankara, has been engineered to deliver the tumor antigen 5T4 (TroVax(®)). Here, we report results from a randomized open-label phase II trial in castration-resistant prostate cancer patients in which TroVax was administered in combination with docetaxel and compared against docetaxel alone. The aim was to recruit 80 patients (40 per arm), but the study was terminated early due to recruitment challenges. Therefore, this paper reports the comparative safety and immunological and clinical efficacy in 25 patients, 12 of whom were treated with TroVax plus docetaxel and 13 with docetaxel alone. 5T4-specific immune responses were monitored throughout the study. Clinical responses were assessed by measuring changes in tumor burden by CT and bone scan and by quantifying PSA concentrations. TroVax was well tolerated in all patients. Of 10 immunologically evaluable patients, 6 mounted 5T4-specific antibody responses. Patients treated with TroVax plus docetaxel showed a greater median progression-free survival of 9.67 months compared with 5.10 months for patients on the docetaxel alone arm (P = 0.097; HR = 0.31; 95 % CI 0.08-1.24). Importantly, a pre-treatment biomarker previously demonstrated to predict 5T4 immune response and treatment benefit showed a strong association with 5T4 antibody response and a statistically significant association with progression-free survival in patients treated with TroVax plus docetaxel, but not docetaxel alone.
    Cancer Immunology and Immunotherapy 07/2013; 62(9). DOI:10.1007/s00262-013-1457-z · 3.94 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: PURPOSEThis open-label, randomized phase II trial assessed efficacy and tolerability of two low-dose regimens of subcutaneous (SC) decitabine in patients with low- or intermediate-1-risk myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients received decitabine 20 mg/m(2) SC per day for 3 consecutive days on days 1, 2, and 3 every 28 days (schedule A) or 20 mg/m(2) SC per day once every 7 days on days 1, 8, and 15 every 28 days (schedule B) for up to 1 year. Primary efficacy end point was overall improvement rate (OIR: complete remission [CR], partial remission [PR], marrow CR [mCR], or hematologic improvement [HI]). Secondary end points were HI, transfusion independence, cytogenetic response, overall survival (OS), and time to acute myeloid leukemia or death. RESULTS: schedule A, n = 43; schedule B, n = 22. Median time from MDS diagnosis to treatment was 3.6 months; 89% had de novo MDS. The trial was terminated early on achievement of protocol-defined OIR superiority of schedule A over schedule B; OIR was 23% for schedule A (seven CRs, three HIs) and 23% for schedule B (one mCR, one PR, three HIs). No differences were observed in secondary end points. Median OS was not reached; approximately 70% of patients were alive at 500 days. Patients in schedule A (67%) and schedule B (59%) were RBC/platelet independent on study. The most frequent drug-related adverse events overall were neutropenia (28% v 36%), anemia (23% v 18%), and thrombocytopenia (16% v 32%). CONCLUSION In this phase II study, low-dose decitabine showed promising results in patients with low- or intermediate-1-risk MDS.
    Journal of Clinical Oncology 06/2013; 31(20). DOI:10.1200/JCO.2012.44.6823 · 18.43 Impact Factor
  • Clinical Pharmacokinetics 04/2013; 52(5). DOI:10.1007/s40262-013-0059-4 · 5.49 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND: Cancer-induced muscle wasting begins early in the course of a patient's malignant disease, resulting in declining physical function and other detrimental clinical consequences. This randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 2 trial assessed the efficacy and safety of enobosarm, a selective androgen receptor modulator, in patients with cancer. METHODS: We enrolled male (>45 years) and female (postmenopausal) patients with cancer who were not obese and who had at least 2% weight loss in the previous 6 months. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1:1 ratio, by computer generated list, block size three, stratified by cancer type) to receive once-daily oral enobosarm 1 mg, 3 mg, or placebo for up to 113 days at US and Argentinian oncology clinics. The sponsor, study personnel, and participants were masked to assignment. The primary endpoint was change in total lean body mass from baseline, assessed by dual-energy x-ray absorptiometry. Efficacy analyses were done only in patients who had a baseline and an on-treatment assessment in the protocol-specified window of within 10 days before baseline or first study drug, and within 10 days of day 113 or end of study (evaluable efficacy population). Adverse events and other safety measurements were assessed in the intention-to-treat (safety) population. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00467844. FINDINGS: Enrolment started on July 3, 2007, and the last patient completed the trial on Aug 1, 2008. 159 patients were analysed for safety (placebo, n=52; enobosarm 1 mg, n=53; enobosarm 3 mg, n=54). The evaluable efficacy population included 100 participants (placebo, n=34; enobosarm 1 mg, n=32; enobosarm 3 mg, n=34). Compared with baseline, significant increases in total lean body mass by day 113 or end of study were noted in both enobosarm groups (enobosarm 1 mg median 1·5 kg, range -2·1 to 12·6, p=0·0012; enodosarm 3 mg 1·0 kg, -4·8 to 11·5, p=0·046). Change in total lean body mass within the placebo group (median 0·02 kg, range -5·8 to 6·7) was not significant (p=0·88). The most common serious adverse events were malignant neoplasm progression (eight of 52 [15%] with placebo vs five of 53 [9%] with enobosarm 1 mg vs seven of 54 [13%] with enobosarm 3 mg), pneumonia (two [4%] vs two [4%] vs three [6%]), and febrile neutropenia (three [6%vs one [2%] vs none). None of these events were deemed related to study drug. INTERPRETATION: Cancer cachexia is an unmet medical need and our data suggest that use of enobosarm might lead to improvements in lean body mass, without the toxic effects associated with androgens and progestational agents. FUNDING: GTx.
    The Lancet Oncology 03/2013; 14(4). DOI:10.1016/S1470-2045(13)70055-X · 24.73 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background We previously reported results of a prospective trial evaluating the significance of circulating tumor cells (CTCs) in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This secondary analysis assessed the relationship of the CTC number with carcinoembryonic antigen (CEA) and overall survival.Patients and methodsPatients with mCRC had CTCs measured at baseline and specific time points after the initiation of new therapy. Patients with a baseline CEA value ≥10 ng/ml and CEA measurements within ±30 days of the CTC collection were included.ResultsWe included 217 patients with mCRC who had a CEA value of ≥10 ng/ml. Increased baseline CEA was associated with shorter survival (15.8 versus 20.7 months, P = 0.012). Among all patients with a baseline CEA value of ≥25 ng/ml, patients with low baseline CTCs (<3, n = 99) had longer survival than those with high CTCs (≥3, n = 58; 20.8 versus 11.7 months, P = 0.001). CTCs added prognostic information at the 3-5- and 6-12-week time points regardless of CEA. In a multivariate analysis, CTCs at baseline but not CEA independently predicted survival and both CTCs and CEA independently predicted survival at 6-12 weeks.Conclusions This study demonstrates that both CEA and CTCs contribute prognostic information for patients with mCRC.
    Annals of Oncology 10/2012; 24(2). DOI:10.1093/annonc/mds336 · 6.58 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Carfilzomib is a selective proteasome inhibitor that binds irreversibly to its target. In phase 1 studies, carfilzomib elicited promising responses and an acceptable toxicity profile in patients with relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma (R/R MM). In the present phase 2, multicenter, open-label study, 129 bortezomib-naive patients with R/R MM (median of 2 prior therapies) were separated into Cohort 1, scheduled to receive intravenous carfilzomib 20 mg/m(2) for all treatment cycles, and Cohort 2, scheduled to receive 20 mg/m(2) for cycle 1 and then 27 mg/m(2) for all subsequent cycles. The primary end point was an overall response rate (≥ partial response) of 42.4% in Cohort 1 and 52.2% in Cohort 2. The clinical benefit response (overall response rate + minimal response) was 59.3% and 64.2% in Cohorts 1 and 2, respectively. Median duration of response was 13.1 months and not reached, and median time to progression was 8.3 months and not reached, respectively. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events were fatigue (62.0%) and nausea (48.8%). Single-agent carfilzomib elicited a low incidence of peripheral neuropathy-17.1% overall (1 grade 3; no grade 4)-in these pretreated bortezomib-naive patients. The results of the present study support the use of carfilzomib in R/R MM patients. This trial is registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as NCT00530816.
    Blood 05/2012; 119(24):5661-70. DOI:10.1182/blood-2012-03-414359 · 10.43 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This open-label phase II study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of eribulin, a non-taxane microtubule dynamics inhibitor with novel mechanism of action, as monotherapy in patients who have advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Enrolled patients had progressed during or after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy. Initially, two patient cohorts (taxane-pre-treated and taxane-naïve) received eribulin mesylate (1.4 mg/m(2)) as a 2- to 5-minute intravenous infusion on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle. To assess tolerability of a second dosing schedule, a cohort of taxane-pre-treated patients received eribulin on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) evaluated using Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) by independent radiographic review. One hundred three patients received eribulin. The ORR was 9.7% (all partial responses [PR]). Overall disease control rate (PR + stable disease) was 55.3%. Median duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival were 5.8, 3.4, and 9.4 months, respectively. The most common drug-related adverse events were neutropenia (54%; 49% grade 3/4); fatigue (49%; 11% grade 3, no grade 4); nausea (38%; 1% grade 3, no grade 4); alopecia (32%); anemia (29%, 4% grade 3/4) and neuropathy (23%; 2% grade 3, no grade 4). The 28-day schedule was associated with many dose delays, interruptions, or omissions due to neutropenia (day 15). The 21-day cycle was well-tolerated. Eribulin monotherapy administered on days 1 and 8 of a 21-day cycle is active and tolerated as second- or later-line chemotherapy for NSCLC.
    Clinical Lung Cancer 08/2011; 13(1):31-8. DOI:10.1016/j.cllc.2011.06.010 · 3.22 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This randomized, double-blind, crossover study assessed the efficacy and tolerability of a new rapid onset nasal fentanyl formulation (Fentanyl Pectin Nasal Spray; FPNS) for breakthrough cancer pain (BTCP). Eighty-three of 114 patients experiencing one to four BTCP episodes/day while taking ≥60 mg/day of oral morphine or equivalent successfully identified an effective dose of FPNS during a titration phase and entered a double-blind phase in which 10 BTCP episodes were treated with this effective dose (7) or placebo (3). Compared with placebo, FPNS significantly improved mean summed pain intensity difference (SPID) from 10 min (P<0.05) until 60 min (P<0.0001), including the primary endpoint at 30 min (P<0.0001). FPNS significantly improved pain intensity (PI) scores as early as 5 min (P<0.05); pain intensity difference (PID) from 10 min (P<0.01); and pain relief (PR) scores from 10 min (P<0.001). More patients showed a clinically meaningful (≥ 2-point reduction in PI) pain reduction from 10 min onward (P ≤ 0.01) and 90.6% of the FPNS-treated versus 80.0% of placebo-treated BTCP episodes did not require rescue medication (P<0.001). Approximately 70% of patients were satisfied or very satisfied with the convenience and ease of use of FPNS. Only 5.3% of patients withdrew from treatment due to adverse events, no significant nasal effects were reported, and 87% of patients elected to continue open-label treatment post-study. In this short-term study, FPNS was safe, well tolerated, and rapidly efficacious for BTCP.
    Pain 12/2010; 151(3):617-24. DOI:10.1016/j.pain.2010.07.028 · 5.84 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of the thrombolytic tenecteplase, a fibrin-specific recombinant tissue plasminogen activator, for restoring function to dysfunctional central venous catheters (CVCs). In this double-blind, placebo-controlled study, eligible patients with dysfunctional nonhemodialysis CVCs were randomly assigned to two treatment arms. In the first arm (TNK-TNK-PBO), patients received an initial dose of intraluminal tenecteplase (TNK) (up to 2 mg), a second dose of tenecteplase if indicated, and a third placebo (PBO) dose. In the PBO-TNK-TNK arm, placebo was instilled first followed by up to two doses of tenecteplase, if needed, for restoration of catheter function. After administration of each dose, CVC function was assessed at 15, 30, and 120 minutes. There were 97 patients who received either TNK-TNK-PBO (n = 50) or PBO-TNK-TNK (n = 47). Within 120 minutes of initial study drug instillation, catheter function was restored to 30 patients (60%) in the TNK-TNK-PBO arm and 11 patients (23%) in the PBO-TNK-TNK arm, for a treatment difference of 37 percentage points (95% confidence interval 18-55; P = .0002). Cumulative restoration rates for CVC function increased to 87% after the second dose of tenecteplase in both study arms combined. Two patients developed a deep vein thrombosis (DVT) after exposure to tenecteplase; one DVT was considered to be drug related. No cases of intracranial hemorrhage, major bleeding, embolic events, catheter-related bloodstream infections, or catheter-related complications were reported. Tenecteplase was efficacious for restoration of catheter function in these study patients with dysfunctional CVCs.
    Journal of vascular and interventional radiology: JVIR 12/2010; 21(12):1852-8. DOI:10.1016/j.jvir.2010.09.002 · 2.15 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Aflibercept (vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] trap), a recombinant fusion protein, blocks the activity of VEGF-A and placental growth factor and has demonstrated activity in pretreated patients with lung cancer in a phase I trial. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of intravenous aflibercept in patients with platinum- and erlotinib-resistant lung adenocarcinoma. An open-label, single arm, multicenter trial was conducted, with the primary end point of response rate (modified RECIST). Additional endpoints included safety, duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Patients with platinum- and erlotinib-resistant lung adenocarcinoma were eligible. Aflibercept 4.0 mg/kg intravenous every 2 weeks was administered until progression of disease or intolerable toxicity. Ninety-eight patients were enrolled; 89 were evaluable for response. Median age was 60 years, 41% were men with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1/2 in 35/55/9% of patients. The overall response rate was 2.0%, (95% confidence interval, 0.2-7.2%). Median progression-free survival was 2.7 months, and overall was survival 6.2 months. Six- and 12-month survival rates were 54 and 29%, respectively. A median of four cycles was administered (range 1-22). Common grade 3/4 toxicities included dyspnea (21%), hypertension (23%), and proteinuria (10%). Two cases of grade 5 hemoptysis were reported, and one case each of tracheoesophageal fistula, decreased cardiac ejection fraction, cerebral ischemia, and reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy. Aflibercept has minor single agent activity in heavily pretreated lung adenocarcinoma, and is well tolerated, with no unexpected toxicities. Further studies evaluating aflibercept in lung cancer, in combination with chemotherapy and other targeted therapies, are ongoing.
    Journal of thoracic oncology: official publication of the International Association for the Study of Lung Cancer 07/2010; 5(7):1054-9. · 5.80 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Introduction: Aflibercept (vascular endothelial growth factor [VEGF] trap), a recombinant fusion protein, blocks the activity of VEGF-A and placental growth factor and has demonstrated activity in pretreated patients with lung cancer in a phase I trial. This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of intravenous aflibercept in patients with platinum- and erlotinib-resistant lung adenocarcinoma. Methods: An open-label, single arm, multicenter trial was conducted, with the primary end point of response rate (modified RECIST). Additional endpoints included safety, duration of response, progression-free survival, and overall survival. Patients with platinum- and erlotinib-resistant lung adenocarcinoma were eligible. Aflibercept 4.0 mg/kg intravenous every 2 weeks was administered until progression of disease or intolerable toxicity. Results: Ninety-eight patients were enrolled; 89 were evaluable for response. Median age was 60 years, 41% were men with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0/1/2 in 35/55/9% of patients. The overall response rate was 2.0%, (95% confidence interval, 0.2-7.2%). Median progression-free survival was 2.7 months, and overall was survival 6.2 months. Six- and 12-month survival rates were 54 and 29%, respectively. A median of four cycles was administered (range 1-22). Common grade 3/4 toxicities included dyspnea (21%), hypertension (23%), and proteinuria (10%). Two cases of grade 5 hemoptysis were reported, and one case each of tracheoesophageal fistula, decreased cardiac ejection fraction, cerebral ischemia, and reversible posterior leukoencephalopathy. Conclusions: Aflibercept has minor single agent activity in heavily pretreated lung adenocarcinoma, and is well tolerated, with no unexpected toxicities. Further studies evaluating aflibercept in lung cancer, in combination with chemotherapy and other targeted therapies, are ongoing.
    Journal of Thoracic Oncology 06/2010; 5(7):1054-1059. DOI:10.1097/JTO.0b013e3181e2f7fb · 5.80 Impact Factor
  • Journal of Vascular and Interventional Radiology 02/2010; 21(2). DOI:10.1016/j.jvir.2009.12.303 · 2.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We demonstrated that circulating tumor cell (CTC) number at baseline and follow-up is an independent prognostic factor in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). This analysis was undertaken to explore whether patient and treatment characteristics impact the prognostic value of CTCs. CTCs were enumerated with immunomagnetic separation from the blood of 430 patients with mCRC at baseline and on therapy. Patients were stratified into unfavorable and favorable prognostic groups based on CTC levels of > or = 3 or <3 CTCs/7.5 ml, respectively. Subgroups were analyzed by line of treatment, liver involvement, receipt of oxaliplatin, irinotecan, or bevacizumab, age, and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS). Seventy-one percent of deaths have occurred. Median follow-up for living patients is 25.8 months. For all patients, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for unfavorable compared with favorable baseline CTCs is shorter (4.4 versus 7.8 m, P = 0.004 for PFS; 9.4 versus 20.6 m, P < 0.0001 for OS). In all patient subgroups, unfavorable baseline CTC was associated with inferior OS (P < 0.001). In patients receiving first- or second-line therapy (P = 0.003), irinotecan (P = 0.0001), having liver involvement (P = 0.002), >/=65 years (P = 0.0007), and ECOG PS of zero (P = 0.04), unfavorable baseline CTC was associated with inferior PFS. Baseline CTC count is an important prognostic factor within specific subgroups defined by treatment or patient characteristics.
    Annals of Oncology 03/2009; 20(7):1223-9. DOI:10.1093/annonc/mdn786 · 6.58 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Bortezomib, an antineoplastic for the treatment of relapsed multiple myeloma and mantle cell lymphoma, undergoes metabolism through oxidative deboronation by cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, primarily CYP3A4 and CYP2C19. Omeprazole, a proton-pump inhibitor, is primarily metabolized by and demonstrates high affinity for CYP2C19. This study investigated whether coadministration of omeprazole affected the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety profile of bortezomib in patients with advanced cancer. The variability of bortezomib pharmacokinetics with CYP enzyme polymorphism was also investigated. This open-label, crossover, pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction study was conducted at seven institutions in the US and Europe between January 2005 and August 2006. Patients who had advanced solid tumours, non-Hodgkin's lymphoma or multiple myeloma, were aged >/=18 years, weighed >/=50 kg and had a life expectancy of >/=3 months were eligible. Patients received bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 on days 1, 4, 8 and 11 for two 21-day cycles, plus omeprazole 40 mg in the morning of days 6-10 and in the evening of day 8 in either cycle 1 (sequence 1) or cycle 2 (sequence 2). On day 21 of cycle 2, patients benefiting from therapy could continue to receive bortezomib for six additional cycles. Blood samples for pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic evaluation were collected prior to and at various timepoints after bortezomib administration on day 8 of cycles 1 and 2. Blood samples for pharmacogenomics were also collected. Pharmacokinetic parameters were calculated by noncompartmental analysis of plasma concentration-time data for bortezomib administration on day 8 of cycles 1 and 2, using WinNonlin version 4.0.1.a software. The pharmacodynamic profile was assessed using a whole-blood 20S proteasome inhibition assay. Twenty-seven patients (median age 64 years) were enrolled, 12 in sequence 1 and 15 in sequence 2, including eight and nine pharmacokinetic-evaluable patients, respectively. Bortezomib pharmacokinetic parameters were similar when bortezomib was administered alone or with omeprazole (maximum plasma concentration 120 vs 123 ng/mL; area under the plasma concentration-time curve from 0 to 72 hours 129 vs 135 ng . h/mL). The pharmacodynamic parameters were also similar (maximum effect 85.8% vs 93.7%; area under the percent inhibition-time curve over 72 hours 4052 vs 3910 % x h); the differences were not statistically significant. Pharmacogenomic analysis revealed no meaningful relationships between CYP enzyme polymorphisms and pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic parameters. Toxicities were generally similar between patients in sequence 1 and sequence 2, and between cycle 1 and cycle 2 in both treatment sequences. Among 26 evaluable patients, 13 (50%) were assessed as benefiting from bortezomib at the end of cycle 2 and continued to receive treatment. No impact on the pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and safety profile of bortezomib was seen with coadministration of omeprazole. Concomitant administration of bortezomib and omeprazole is unlikely to cause clinically significant drug-drug interactions and is unlikely to have an impact on the efficacy or safety of bortezomib.
    Clinical Pharmacokinetics 02/2009; 48(3):199-209. DOI:10.2165/00003088-200948030-00006 · 5.49 Impact Factor