nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.08.2014 | Original Article

Phase II trial of vatalanib in patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma after first-line gemcitabine therapy (PCRT O4-001)

verfasst von: T. Dragovich, D. Laheru, F. Dayyani, V. Bolejack, L. Smith, J. Seng, H. Burris, P. Rosen, M. Hidalgo, P. Ritch, A. F. Baker, N. Raghunand, J. Crowley, D. D. Von Hoff

Erschienen in: Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology | Ausgabe 2/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose

Vatalanib (PTK 787/ZK22584) is an oral poly-tyrosine kinase inhibitor with strong affinity for platelet-derived growth factor and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors. We conducted an open-label, phase II multicenter therapeutic trial investigating the efficacy and tolerability of vatalanib in patients with metastatic or advanced pancreatic cancer who failed first-line gemcitabine-based therapy.

Methods

Vatalanib treatment consisted of a twice daily oral dosing using a “ramp-up schedule,” beginning with 250 mg bid during week 1,500 mg bid during week 2, and 750 mg bid on week three and thereafter. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the 6-month survival rate.

Results

Sixty-seven patients were enrolled. The median age was 64, and 66 % (N = 43) had only one prior regimen. Common grade 3/4 adverse events included hypertension (20 %; N = 13), fatigue (17 %; N = 11), abdominal pain (17 %; N = 11), and elevated alkaline phosphatase (15 %; N = 10). Among the 65 evaluable patients, the 6-month survival rate was 29 % (95 % CI 18–41 %) and the median progression-free survival was 2 months. Fifteen patients survived 6 months or more. Two patients had objective partial responses, and 28 % of patients had stable disease. Changes in biomarkers including soluble VEGF and vascular endothelial growth factor receptor did not correlate with response to drug.

Conclusion

Vatalanib was well tolerated as a second-line therapy and resulted in favorable 6-month survival rate in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, compared with historic controls.

Siegel R, Naishadham D, Jemal A (2013) Cancer statistics, 2013. CA Cancer J Clin 63(1):11–30PubMedCrossRef

Warshaw AL, Lillemoe KD, Castillo CF (2012) Pancreatic surgery for adenocarcinoma. Curr Opin Gastroenterol 28(5):488–493PubMedCrossRef

Von Hoff DD et al (2011) Gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel is an active regimen in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase I/II trial. J Clin Oncol 29(34):4548–4554CrossRef

Conroy T et al (2011) FOLFIRINOX versus gemcitabine for metastatic pancreatic cancer. N Engl J Med 364(19):1817–1825PubMedCrossRef

Campen CJ, Dragovich T, Baker AF (2011) Management strategies in pancreatic cancer. Am J Health Syst Pharm 68(7):573–584PubMedCrossRef

Abdelrahim M et al (2010) Angiogenesis: an update and potential drug approaches (review). Int J Oncol 36(1):5–18PubMed

Kleeff J et al (2007) Pancreatic cancer microenvironment. Int J Cancer 121(4):699–705PubMedCrossRef

Whipple C, Korc M (2008) Targeting angiogenesis in pancreatic cancer: rationale and pitfalls. Langenbecks Arch Surg 393(6):901–910PubMedCrossRef

Garcea G et al (2006) Hypoxia and angiogenesis in pancreatic cancer. ANZ J Surg 76(9):830–842PubMedCrossRef

10.

Bold G et al (2000) New anilinophthalazines as potent and orally well absorbed inhibitors of the VEGF receptor tyrosine kinases useful as antagonists of tumor-driven angiogenesis. J Med Chem 43(12):2310–2323PubMedCrossRef

11.

Baker CH, Solorzano CC, Fidler IJ (2002) Blockade of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor and epidermal growth factor receptor signaling for therapy of metastatic human pancreatic cancer. Cancer Res 62(7):1996–2003PubMed

12.

Solorzano CC et al (2001) Inhibition of growth and metastasis of human pancreatic cancer growing in nude mice by PTK 787/ZK222584, an inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases. Cancer Biother Radiopharm 16(5):359–370PubMedCrossRef

13.

Thomas AL et al (2005) Phase I study of the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of PTK787/ZK 222584 administered twice daily in patients with advanced cancer. J Clin Oncol 23(18):4162–4171PubMedCrossRef

14.

Drevs J et al (2005) Soluble markers for the assessment of biological activity with PTK787/ZK 222584 (PTK/ZK), a vascular endothelial growth factor receptor (VEGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor in patients with advanced colorectal cancer from two phase I trials. Ann Oncol 16(4):558–565PubMedCrossRef

15.

Drevs J et al (2010) A phase IA, open-label, dose-escalating study of PTK787/ZK 222584 administered orally on a continuous dosing schedule in patients with advanced cancer. Anticancer Res 30(6):2335–2339PubMed

16.

Hecht JR et al (2011) Randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III study of first-line oxaliplatin-based chemotherapy plus PTK787/ZK 222584, an oral vascular endothelial growth factor receptor inhibitor, in patients with metastatic colorectal adenocarcinoma. J Clin Oncol 29(15):1997–2003. doi:10.1200/JCO.2010.29.4496 PubMedCrossRef

17.

Morgan B et al (2003) Dynamic contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging as a biomarker for the pharmacological response of PTK787/ZK 222584, an inhibitor of the vascular endothelial growth factor receptor tyrosine kinases, in patients with advanced colorectal cancer and liver metastases: results from two phase I studies. J Clin Oncol 21(21):3955–3964PubMedCrossRef

18.

Schwartz LH et al (2009) Evaluation of lymph nodes with RECIST 1.1. Eur J Cancer 45(2):261–267PubMedCrossRef

19.

Tofts PS (1997) Modeling tracer kinetics in dynamic Gd-DTPA MR imaging. J Magn Reson Imaging 7(1):91–101PubMedCrossRef

20.

Rajaraman S et al (2011) Automated registration of sequential breath-hold dynamic contrast-enhanced MR images: a comparison of three techniques. Magn Reson Imaging 29(5):668–682PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

21.

Moore MJ et al (2007) Erlotinib plus gemcitabine compared with gemcitabine alone in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III trial of the National Cancer Institute of Canada Clinical Trials Group. J Clin Oncol 25(15):1960–1966PubMedCrossRef

22.

Rahma OE et al (2013) Second-line treatment in advanced pancreatic cancer: a comprehensive analysis of published clinical trials. Ann Oncol 24(8):1972–1979PubMedCrossRef

23.

Hoos WA et al (2013) Pancreatic cancer clinical trials and accrual in the United States. J Clin Oncol 31(27):3432–3438PubMedCrossRef

24.

Pelzer U et al (2011) Best supportive care (BSC) versus oxaliplatin, folinic acid and 5-fluorouracil (OFF) plus BSC in patients for second-line advanced pancreatic cancer: a phase III-study from the German CONKO-study group. Eur J Cancer 47(11):1676–1681PubMedCrossRef

25.

Saif MW (2008) New developments in the treatment of pancreatic cancer. Highlights from the “44th ASCO Annual Meeting”. Chicago, IL, USA. May 30–June 3, 2008. JOP 9(4):391–397PubMed

26.

Bafeta A et al (2012) Impact of single centre status on estimates of intervention effects in trials with continuous outcomes: meta-epidemiological study. BMJ 344:e813PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

27.

Morabito A et al (2006) Tyrosine kinase inhibitors of vascular endothelial growth factor receptors in clinical trials: current status and future directions. Oncologist 11(7):753–764PubMedCrossRef

28.

Armstrong AJ, George DJ, Halabi S (2012) Serum lactate dehydrogenase predicts for overall survival benefit in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with inhibition of mammalian target of rapamycin. J Clin Oncol 30(27):3402–3407PubMedCrossRef

29.

Weide B et al (2012) Serum markers lactate dehydrogenase and S100B predict independently disease outcome in melanoma patients with distant metastasis. Br J Cancer 107(3):422–428PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

30.

Ebrahimi B et al (2004) Cytokines in pancreatic carcinoma: correlation with phenotypic characteristics and prognosis. Cancer 101(12):2727–2736PubMedCrossRef

31.

Jain RK et al (2009) Biomarkers of response and resistance to antiangiogenic therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol 6(6):327–338PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

32.

Jones S et al (2008) Core signaling pathways in human pancreatic cancers revealed by global genomic analyses. Science 321(5897):1801–1806PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

33.

Kindler HL et al (2010) Gemcitabine plus bevacizumab compared with gemcitabine plus placebo in patients with advanced pancreatic cancer: phase III trial of the Cancer and Leukemia Group B (CALGB 80303). J Clin Oncol 28(22):3617–3622PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

34.

Van Cutsem E et al (2009) Phase III trial of bevacizumab in combination with gemcitabine and erlotinib in patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer. J Clin Oncol 27(13):2231–2237PubMedCrossRef

35.

Iyer G et al (2012) Genome sequencing identifies a basis for everolimus sensitivity. Science 338(6104):221PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

36.

Reni M et al (2013) Maintenance sunitinib or observation in metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma: a phase II randomised trial. Eur J Cancer 49(17):3609–3615PubMedCrossRef

Titel: Phase II trial of vatalanib in patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma after first-line gemcitabine therapy (PCRT O4-001)
verfasst von: T. Dragovich
D. Laheru
F. Dayyani
V. Bolejack
L. Smith
J. Seng
H. Burris
P. Rosen
M. Hidalgo
P. Ritch
A. F. Baker
N. Raghunand
J. Crowley
D. D. Von Hoff
Publikationsdatum: 01.08.2014
Verlag: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Erschienen in: Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology / Ausgabe 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0344-5704
Elektronische ISSN: 1432-0843
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-014-2499-4

Springer Medizin

Phase II trial of vatalanib in patients with advanced or metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma after first-line gemcitabine therapy (PCRT O4-001)