Jennifer L. Spratlin

Clinical Applications of Metabolomics in Oncology: A Review

Metabolomics, an omic science in systems biology, is the global quantitative assessment of endogenous metabolites within a biological system. Either individually or grouped as a metabolomic profile, detection of metabolites is carried out in cells, tissues, or biofluids by either nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy or mass spectrometry. There is potential for the metabolome to have a multitude of uses in oncology, including the early detection and diagnosis of cancer and as both a predictive and pharmacodynamic marker of drug effect. Despite this, there is lack of knowledge in the oncology community regarding metabolomics and confusion about its methodologic processes, technical challenges, and clinical applications. Metabolomics, when used as a translational research tool, can provide a link between the laboratory and clinic, particularly because metabolic and molecular imaging technologies, such as positron emission tomography and magnetic resonance spectroscopic imaging, enable the discrimination of metabolic markers noninvasively in vivo. Here, we review the current and potential applications of metabolomics, focusing on its use as a biomarker for cancer diagnosis, prognosis, and therapeutic evaluation.

The Absence of Human Equilibrative Nucleoside Transporter 1 Is Associated with Reduced Survival in Patients With Gemcitabine- Treated Pancreas Adenocarcinoma

Purpose: Gemcitabine monotherapy is the standard palliative chemotherapy for pancreatic adenocarcinoma. Gemcitabine requires plasma membrane nucleoside transporter proteins to efficiently enter cells and exert it cytotoxicity. In vitro studies have demonstrated that deficiency of human equilibrative nucleoside transporter 1 (hENT1), the most widely abundant and distributed nucleoside transporter in human cells, confers resistance to gemcitabine toxicity, but the distribution and abundance of nucleoside transporters in normal and malignant pancreatic tissue is unknown. Experimental Design: We studied tumor blocks from normal pancreas and 21 Alberta patients with gemcitabine-treated pancreatic cancer. Immunohistochemistry on the formalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded tissues was performed with specific hENT1 and human Concentrative Nucleoside Transporter 3 monoclonal antibodies and scored by a pathologist blinded to clinical outcomes. Results: hENT1 was detected in normal Langerhan cells and lymphocytes but not in normal glandular elements. Patients in whom all adenocarcinoma cells had detectable hENT1 had significantly longer median survivals from gemcitabine initiation than those for whom hENT1 was absent in a proportion (10 to 100%) of adenocarcinoma cells (median survival, 13 versus 4 months, P = 0.01). Immunohistochemistry for human Concentrative Nucleoside Transporter 3 revealed moderate to high-intensity staining in all adenocarcinoma tissue samples. Conclusions: Patients with pancreatic adenocarcinoma with uniformly detectable hENT1 immunostaining have a significantly longer survival after gemcitabine chemotherapy than tumors without detectable hENT1. Immunohistochemistry for hENT1 shows promise as a molecular predictive assay to appropriately select patients for palliative gemcitabine chemotherapy but requires formal validation in prospective, randomized trials.

Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B): Monoclonal antibody inhibition of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2.

Angiogenesis, a well-recognized characteristic of malignancy, has been exploited more than any other pathway targeted by biologic anti-neoplastic therapies. Vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2 (VEGFR-2) is the critical receptor involved in malignant angiogenesis with its activation inducing a number of other cellular modifications resulting in tumor growth and metastases. Ramucirumab (IMC-1121B; ImClone Systems Corporation, Branchburg, NJ) is a fully human monoclonal antibody developed to specifically inhibit VEGFR-2. Ramucirumab is currently being investigated in multiple clinical trials across a variety of tumor types. Herein, angiogenesis inhibition in cancer is reviewed and up-to-date information on the clinical development of ramucirumab is presented.

Safety and Efficacy of Nivolumab in Combination With Ipilimumab in Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: The CheckMate 016 Study

Purpose Combination treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors has shown enhanced antitumor activity compared with monotherapy in tumor types such as melanoma. The open-label, parallel-cohort, dose-escalation, phase I CheckMate 016 study evaluated the efficacy and safety of nivolumab plus ipilimumab in combination, and nivolumab plus a tyrosine kinase inhibitor in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). Safety and efficacy results from the nivolumab plus ipilimumab arms of the study are presented. Patients and Methods Patients with mRCC received intravenous nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 1 mg/kg (N3I1), nivolumab 1 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (N1I3), or nivolumab 3 mg/kg plus ipilimumab 3 mg/kg (N3I3) every 3 weeks for four doses followed by nivolumab monotherapy 3 mg/kg every 2 weeks until progression or toxicity. End points included safety (primary), objective response rate, and overall survival (OS). Results All patients in the N3I3 arm (n = 6) were censored at the time of analysis as a result of dose-limiting toxicity or other reasons. Forty-seven patients were treated in both the N3I1 and the N1I3 arm, and baseline patient characteristics were balanced between arms. Grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 38.3% and 61.7% of the patients in the N3I1 and N1I3 arms, respectively. At a median follow-up of 22.3 months, the confirmed objective response rate was 40.4% in both arms, with ongoing responses in 42.1% and 36.8% of patients in the N3I1 and N1I3 arms, respectively. The 2-year OS was 67.3% and 69.6% in the N3I1 and N1I3 arms, respectively. Conclusion Nivolumab plus ipilimumab therapy demonstrated manageable safety, notable antitumor activity, and durable responses with promising OS in patients with mRCC.

The role of bevacizumab in colorectal cancer: understanding its benefits and limitations

Introduction: Angiogenesis is a key factor in the development of aberrant blood vessels required for malignant growth, invasion and progression. Inhibiting VEGF is by far the most clinically advanced anti-angiogenic target. Bevacizumab (BV), the only humanized mAb directed against VEGF, is approved for use in multiple tumor types after successful clinical trial results demonstrated benefits in progression-free survival and/or overall survival when combined with common cytotoxic chemotherapies. Areas covered: The review focuses on the use of BV in colorectal cancer, discusses the clinical trial data supporting its increasing use and explores its limitations. Readers will gain a succinct description of the trial data demonstrating a modest survival benefit in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) and the lack of benefit of BV when utilized in the adjuvant setting. A review of common BV toxicities and a discussion about possible BV resistance mechanisms are also provided. Expert opinion: Although BV has demonstrated efficacy in mCRC, there is an urgent need to improve the understanding of its mechanism of action and the development of BV resistance. Furthermore, there is a need for delineating predictive markers of BV efficacy and toxicity.

Food effects on abiraterone pharmacokinetics in healthy subjects and patients with metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer

Food effect on abiraterone pharmacokinetics and safety on abiraterone acetate coadministration with low‐fat or high‐fat meals was examined in healthy subjects and metastatic castration‐resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) patients. Healthy subjects (n = 36) were randomized to abiraterone acetate (single dose, 1000 mg) + low‐fat meal, + high‐fat meal, and fasted state. mCRPC patients received repeated doses (abiraterone acetate 1000 mg + 5 mg prednisone twice daily; days 1–7) in a modified fasting state followed by abiraterone acetate plus prednisone within 0.5 hours post–low‐fat (n = 6) or high‐fat meal (n = 18; days 8–14). In healthy subjects, geometric mean (GM) abiraterone area under plasma concentration–time curve (AUC) increased ∼5‐ and ∼10‐fold, respectively, with low‐fat and high‐fat meals versus fasted state (GM [coefficient of variation], 1942 [48] and 4077 [37] ng · h/mL vs 421 [67] ng · h/mL, respectively). In mCRPC patients, abiraterone AUC was ∼2‐fold higher with a high‐fat meal and similar with a low‐fat meal versus modified fasting state (GM [coefficient of variation]: 1992 [34] vs 973 [58] ng · h/mL and 1264 [65] vs 1185 [90] ng · h/mL, respectively). Adverse events (all grade ≤ 3) were similar, with high‐fat/low‐fat meals or fasted/modified fasting state. Short‐term dosing with food did not alter abiraterone acetate safety.

1050OPHASE I STUDY OF NIVOLUMAB IN COMBINATION WITH IPILIMUMAB IN METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (MRCC)

ABSTRACT Aim: Nivolumab, a fully human IgG4 PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, has shown durable responses and encouraging overall survival (OS) data in mRCC. IPI, a fully human monoclonal antibody to CTLA-4, improved OS in melanoma and has antitumor activity in mRCC. The combination of these agents showed encouraging antitumor activity and an acceptable safety profile in advanced melanoma. We report preliminary results of this combination in mRCC. Methods: Patients (pts) with mRCC were randomized to nivolumab 3 mg/kg + IPI 1 mg/kg (arm N3 + I1) or nivolumab 1 mg/kg + IPI 3 mg/kg (N1 + I3) IV every 3 wk for 4 doses then nivolumab 3 mg/kg IV every 2 wk until progression/toxicity (protocol-defined post-progression treatment allowed). The primary objective was to assess safety; secondary objective was to assess efficacy (RECIST 1.1). Results: 21 and 23 pts were randomized to the N3 + I1 and N1 + I3 arms, respectively. Most pts (n = 35; 80%) had prior systemic therapy (N3 + I1: 17; N1 + I3: 18). Treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were seen in 39 pts (89%); 8 pts (18%; N3 + I1: 2; N1 + I3: 6) discontinued due to related AEs. Grade 3-4-related AEs occurred in 20 pts (46%; N3 + I1: 6; N1 + I3: 14), most commonly ↑ lipase (21%, n = 9), ↑ ALT (14%, n = 6), diarrhea (9%, n = 4), and ↑ AST (7%, n = 3). No grade 3-4 pneumonitis was seen. Objective response rate (ORR) was 43% (N3 + I1) and 48% (N1 + I3); median duration of response (DOR) was 31.1 wk (7 ongoing) in N3 + I1 and not reached (9 ongoing) in N1 + I3 (Table). Responses occurred by first tumor assessment (wk 6) in 44% of pts in the N3 + I1 arm and 55% of pts in the N1 + I3 arm. Stable disease (SD) as best overall response was seen in 5 (24%) (N3 + I1) and 8 (35%) (N1 + I3) pts. Arm N3 + I1 n = 21 Arm N1 + I3 n = 23 ORR, n (%) 9 (43) 11 (48) SD, n (%) 5 (24) 8 (35) DOR, range (wk) 4.1+ - 42.1+ 12.1+ - 35.1 + Median progression-free survival, wk (95% CI) 36.6 (6.0, ) 38.3 (18.3, ) CI, confidence interval Conclusions: Nivolumab + IPI showed acceptable safety and encouraging antitumor activity in mRCC, with most responses ongoing. Studies are ongoing to explore this combination in a Phase III trial. Disclosure: H. Hammers: Has received Honoraria from Ono Pharma USA; E.R. Plimack: Has received grants and/or personal fees from: BMS, GSK, Dendreon, Astellas, Pfizer, Amgen, Acceleron, MedImmune, Merck, Lilly, AZ; M. Ernstoff: I have received funding for research from Bristol Myers Squibb, and hold stocks in BMS; B.I. Rini: I have consulted for the following companies: Pfizer, BMS, Merck, GSK; received funding for research from: Pfizer, BMS, Immatics, GSK, Roche, Acceleron; D.F. McDermott: I have received honoraria from and worked as a consultant/ in an advisory capacity to Bristol-Myers Squibb; M. Voss: Dr. Voss reports grants from BMS, outside the submitted work; P. Sharma: I have served as a consultant for: MedImmune, GSK, BMS, Jounce, Janssen, Pfizer, and Helsinn Therapeutics. I also own stock in Jounce; D. Heng: I have worked as a consultant for the following: BMS, Bayer, Pfizer, Novartis; Y. Shen: I am an employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb, and immediate family member employed at BM.; J. Kurland: I am an employee of and have stock or other ownership interest in BMS; P. Gagnier: I am an employee of and have stock or other ownership interest in BMS; A. Amin: I have worked as a consultant/ in an advisory capacity to: Bristol Myers Squibb. I have received Honoraria from: Bristol Myers Squibb. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Global, multicenter, randomized, phase II trial of gemcitabine and gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 in patients with previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic cancer

BACKGROUND We evaluated AGS-1C4D4, a fully human monoclonal antibody to prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA), with gemcitabine in a randomized, phase II study of metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0/1 and previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned 1:2 to gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 weekly seven times, 1 week rest, weekly three times q4weeks) or gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 (48 mg/kg loading dose, then 24 mg/kg q3weeks IV). The primary end point was 6-month survival rate (SR). Archived tumor samples were collected for pre-planned analyses by PSCA expression. RESULTS Between April 2009 and May 2010, 196 patients were randomly assigned to gemcitabine (n = 63) or gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 (n = 133). The 6-month SR was 44.4% (95% CI, 31.9-57.5) in the gemcitabine arm and 60.9% (95% CI, 52.1-69.2) in the gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 arm (P = 0.03), while the median survival was 5.5 versus 7.6 months and the response rate was 13.1% versus 21.6% in the two arms, respectively. The 6-month SR was 57.1% in the gemcitabine arm versus 79.5% in the gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 arm among the PSCA-positive subgroup and 31.6% versus 46.2% among the PSCA-negative subgroup. CONCLUSIONS This randomized, phase II study achieved its primary end point, demonstrating an improved 6-month SR with addition of AGS-1C4D4 to gemcitabine among patients with previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00902291.BACKGROUND We evaluated AGS-1C4D4, a fully human monoclonal antibody to prostate stem cell antigen (PSCA), with gemcitabine in a randomized, phase II study of metastatic pancreatic cancer. PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status 0/1 and previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma were randomly assigned 1:2 to gemcitabine (1000 mg/m(2) weekly seven times, 1 week rest, weekly three times q4weeks) or gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 (48 mg/kg loading dose, then 24 mg/kg q3weeks IV). The primary end point was 6-month survival rate (SR). Archived tumor samples were collected for pre-planned analyses by PSCA expression. RESULTS Between April 2009 and May 2010, 196 patients were randomly assigned to gemcitabine (n = 63) or gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 (n = 133). The 6-month SR was 44.4% (95% CI, 31.9-57.5) in the gemcitabine arm and 60.9% (95% CI, 52.1-69.2) in the gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 arm (P = 0.03), while the median survival was 5.5 versus 7.6 months and the response rate was 13.1% versus 21.6% in the two arms, respectively. The 6-month SR was 57.1% in the gemcitabine arm versus 79.5% in the gemcitabine plus AGS-1C4D4 arm among the PSCA-positive subgroup and 31.6% versus 46.2% among the PSCA-negative subgroup. CONCLUSIONS This randomized, phase II study achieved its primary end point, demonstrating an improved 6-month SR with addition of AGS-1C4D4 to gemcitabine among patients with previously untreated, metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma. ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00902291.

Association of Proton Pump Inhibitors and Capecitabine Efficacy in Advanced Gastroesophageal Cancer: Secondary Analysis of the TRIO-013/LOGiC Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance Capecitabine is an oral cytotoxic chemotherapeutic commonly used across cancer subtypes. As with other oral medications though, it may suffer from drug interactions that could impair its absorption. Objective To determine if gastric acid suppressants such as proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) may impair capecitabine efficacy. Design, Setting, and Participants This secondary analysis of TRIO-013, a phase III randomized trial, compares capecitabine and oxaliplatin (CapeOx) with or without lapatinib in 545 patients with ERBB2/HER2-positive metastatic gastroesophageal cancer (GEC); patients were randomized 1:1 between CapeOx with or without lapatinib. Proton pump inhibitor use was identified by medication records. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients treated with PPIs vs patients who were not. Specific subgroups were accounted for, such as younger age (<60 years), Asian ethnicity, female sex, and disease stage (metastatic/advanced) in multivariate Cox proportional hazards modeling. The TRIO-013 trial accrued and randomized patients between June 2008 and January 2012; this analysis took place in January 2014. Interventions Patients were divided based on PPI exposure. Main Outcomes and Measures Primary study outcome was PFS and OS between patients treated with PPIs vs patients who were not. Secondary outcomes included disease response rates and toxicities. Results Of the 545 patients with GEC (median age, 60 years; 406 men [74%]) included in the study, 229 received PPIs (42.0%) and were evenly distributed between arms. In the placebo arm, PPI-treated patients had poorer median PFS, 4.2 vs 5.7 months (hazard ratio [HR], 1.55; 95% CI, 1.29-1.81, P < .001); OS, 9.2 vs 11.3 months (HR, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.06-1.62; P = .04); and disease control rate (83% vs 72%; P = .02) vs patients not treated with PPIs. In multivariate analysis considering age, race, disease stage, and sex, PPI-treated patients had poorer PFS (HR, 1.68; 95% CI, 1.42-1.94; P < .001) and OS (HR, 1.41; 95% CI, 1.11-1.71; P = .001). In patients treated with CapeOx and lapatinib, PPIs had less effect on PFS (HR, 1.08; P = .54) and OS (HR, 1.26; P = .10); however, multivariate analysis in this group demonstrated a significant difference in OS (HR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.06-1.66; P = .03). Conclusions and Relevance Proton pump inhibitors negatively effected capecitabine efficacy by possibly raising gastric pH levels, leading to altered dissolution and absorption. These results are consistent with previous erlotinib and sunitinib studies. Whether PPIs affected lapatinib is unclear given concurrent capecitabine. Given capecitabine’s prevalence in treatment breast cancer and colon cancer, further studies are under way. Trial Registration clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00680901

1052PDNIVOLUMAB (N) (ANTI-PD-1; BMS-936558, ONO-4538) IN COMBINATION WITH SUNITINIB (S) OR PAZOPANIB (P) IN PATIENTS (PTS) WITH METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA (MRCC)

ABSTRACT Aim: Antiangiogenic agents S and P are standard of care in mRCC, but effects are not durable. N, a fully human IgG4 PD-1 immune checkpoint inhibitor antibody, has clinical activity in mRCC. VEGF TKIs have been shown to suppress Tregs and MDSCs making the immune environment more conducive for T cell-mediated antitumor activity. Combining VEGF TKIs with positive immune modulation may result in greater and more durable therapeutic benefit. We report preliminary results of a phase I trial of N in combination with S or P in mRCC. Methods: mRCC pts received N in combination with S (50 mg, 4 wk on/2 wk off; arm S) or P (800 mg daily; arm P) until progression/unacceptable toxicity. Starting dose of N was 2 mg/kg IV every 3 wk (N2), with planned escalation to 5 mg/kg IV every 3 wk (N5). Based on tolerability, arm S N5 was expanded to treatment-naive pts. Primary objectives were safety/tolerability and determination of maximum tolerated dose (MTD) for the combinations; secondary objective was antitumor activity. Results: 7 pts each were treated on arms S N2 and N5. No dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed and MTD was not reached; thus N5 was expanded by 19 pts (total n = 33). Arm P had 20 pts at N2; 4 DLTs (elevated ALT/AST [n = 3], fatigue [n = 1]) were observed, leading to closure of the arm. Grade 3-4-related adverse events (AEs) were observed in 27/33 pts (82%) in arm S and 14/20 pts (70%) in arm P. Most common related grade 3-4 AEs were elevated ALT and hypertension (18% each), hyponatremia and lymphocyte count decreased (15% each) in arm S, and elevated ALT and AST, and diarrhea (20% each) and fatigue (15%) in arm P. Grade 3 pneumonitis occurred in 1 pt (arm S, N5). Grade 3-4-related AEs led to discontinuation in 10/33 pts (30%; 2 N2, 8 N5) in arm S and 4/20 pts (20%) in arm P. Objective response rate was 52% (17/33) in arm S and 45% (9/20) in arm P. Responses occurred by first assessment (6 wk) in 41% (arm S) and 56% (arm P) of pts. Duration of response (wk) was 18.1-80+ in arm S and 12.1-90.1+ in arm P. Progression-free survival rate at 24 wk was 79% for arm S and 55% for arm P. Conclusions: N plus S showed encouraging antitumor activity and a manageable safety profile in pts with mRCC. Arm P was closed due to DLTs. Disclosure: A. Amin: I have worked as a consultant/ in an advisory capacity to: Bristol Myers Squibb I have received Honoraria from: Bristol Myers Squibb; E.R. Plimack: I have received grants and/or personal fees from: BMS, GSK, Dendreon, Astellas, Pfizer, Amgen, Acceleron, MedImmune, Merck, Lilly, AZ; M. Ernstoff: I have received funding for research from Bristol Myers Squibb, and hold stocks in BMS; B.I. Rini: I have consulted for the following companies: Pfizer, BMS, Merck, GSK; received funding for research from: Pfizer, BMS, Immatics, GSK, Roche, Acceleron; D.F. McDermott: I have received honoraria from and worked as a consultant/ in an advisory capacity to Bristol-Myers Squibb; M. Voss: Dr. Voss reports grants from BMS, outside the submitted work; P. Sharma: I have served as a consultant for: MedImmune, GSK, BMS, Jounce, Janssen, Pfizer, and Helsinn Therapeutics. I also own stock in Jounce; D. Heng: Has worked as a consultant for the following: BMS, Bayer, Pfizer, Novartis; Y. Shen: I am an employee of Bristol-Myers Squibb, and immediate family member employed at BMS; J. Kurland: I am an employee of and have stock or other ownership interest in BMS; P. Gagnier: I am an employee of and have stock or other ownership interest in BMS; H. Hammers: Has received Honoraria from Ono Pharma USA. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.