PURPOSE: This phase I, open-label, randomized, 2-part crossover study assessed the safety, pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of single doses of the anticancer MET inhibitor foretinib (formerly known as GSK1363089, EXEL-2880 and XL-880) free base tablet formulation compared to a bisphosphate salt capsule formulation (Part 1), and assessed the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of the bisphosphate salt capsule administered 3 times a week in cancer patients (Part 2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In Part 1, patients were randomized in a crossover manner to receive a single oral dose of foretinib formulated as a bisphosphate salt capsule (240 mg; 183 mg free base equivalent) followed one week later by a single dose of a free base tablet (180 mg), or vice versa where the treatment sequence was reversed. In Part 2, patients self-administered oral doses of bisphosphate salt capsules (200 mg) 3 times a week until disease progression. RESULTS:Twelve patients with solid tumors were enrolled and completed Part 1, and 10 patients continued into Part 2. Most AEs were mild or moderate in severity. The most common drug-related AEs were fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. The least-squares (LS) mean total area under the curve was 3144 and 3514 ng*h/mL for the free base tablet and bisphosphate salt capsule, respectively, with a ratio of 0.89 (90% confidence interval, CI: 0.69, 1.16). The LS mean maximal concentration (Cmax) was 81.6 and 98.5 ng/mL for the free base and bisphosphate salt, respectively, with a ratio of 0.83 (90% confidence interval, CI: 0.67, 1.02). The time to reach Cmax was ∼4 h for both formulations. The pharmacokinetics of foretinib were not clinically different between the 2 formulations. Of the 10 patients assessed for efficacy, 3 patients achieved stable disease. CONCLUSIONS: Foretinib was well tolerated as single doses of both the free base and bisphosphate salt formulations. The pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of the 2 formulations were not clinically different. The bisphosphate salt formulation was well tolerated on a 3-times a week dosing schedule, and reached steady-state plasma concentration after 2 weeks.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: This phase I, open-label, randomized, 2-part crossover study assessed the safety, pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of single doses of the anticancer MET inhibitor foretinib (formerly known as GSK1363089, EXEL-2880 and XL-880) free base tablet formulation compared to a bisphosphate salt capsule formulation (Part 1), and assessed the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of the bisphosphate salt capsule administered 3 times a week in cancerpatients (Part 2). PATIENTS AND METHODS: In Part 1, patients were randomized in a crossover manner to receive a single oral dose of foretinib formulated as a bisphosphate salt capsule (240 mg; 183 mg free base equivalent) followed one week later by a single dose of a free base tablet (180 mg), or vice versa where the treatment sequence was reversed. In Part 2, patients self-administered oral doses of bisphosphate salt capsules (200 mg) 3 times a week until disease progression. RESULTS: Twelve patients with solid tumors were enrolled and completed Part 1, and 10 patients continued into Part 2. Most AEs were mild or moderate in severity. The most common drug-related AEs were fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. The least-squares (LS) mean total area under the curve was 3144 and 3514 ng*h/mL for the free base tablet and bisphosphate salt capsule, respectively, with a ratio of 0.89 (90% confidence interval, CI: 0.69, 1.16). The LS mean maximal concentration (Cmax) was 81.6 and 98.5 ng/mL for the free base and bisphosphate salt, respectively, with a ratio of 0.83 (90% confidence interval, CI: 0.67, 1.02). The time to reach Cmax was ∼4 h for both formulations. The pharmacokinetics of foretinib were not clinically different between the 2 formulations. Of the 10 patients assessed for efficacy, 3 patients achieved stable disease. CONCLUSIONS:Foretinib was well tolerated as single doses of both the free base and bisphosphate salt formulations. The pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of the 2 formulations were not clinically different. The bisphosphate salt formulation was well tolerated on a 3-times a week dosing schedule, and reached steady-state plasma concentration after 2 weeks.
Authors: P Therasse; S G Arbuck; E A Eisenhauer; J Wanders; R S Kaplan; L Rubinstein; J Verweij; M Van Glabbeke; A T van Oosterom; M C Christian; S G Gwyther Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 2000-02-02 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Joseph Paul Eder; Geoffrey I Shapiro; Leonard J Appleman; Andrew X Zhu; Dale Miles; Harold Keer; Belinda Cancilla; Felix Chu; Suzanne Hitchcock-Bryan; Laurie Sherman; Stewart McCallum; Elisabeth I Heath; Scott A Boerner; Patricia M LoRusso Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2010-05-14 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: X Xin; S Yang; G Ingle; C Zlot; L Rangell; J Kowalski; R Schwall; N Ferrara; M E Gerritsen Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2001-03 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: James Bean; Cameron Brennan; Jin-Yuan Shih; Gregory Riely; Agnes Viale; Lu Wang; Dhananjay Chitale; Noriko Motoi; Janos Szoke; Stephen Broderick; Marissa Balak; Wen-Cheng Chang; Chong-Jen Yu; Adi Gazdar; Harvey Pass; Valerie Rusch; William Gerald; Shiu-Feng Huang; Pan-Chyr Yang; Vincent Miller; Marc Ladanyi; Chih-Hsin Yang; William Pao Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-12-18 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Monika A Davare; Anna Saborowski; Christopher A Eide; Cristina Tognon; Rebecca L Smith; Johannes Elferich; Anupriya Agarwal; Jeffrey W Tyner; Ujwal P Shinde; Scott W Lowe; Brian J Druker Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-11-11 Impact factor: 11.205