BACKGROUND: Few options are available after taxane-based therapy in men with CRPC. Genetic alterations involving the mTOR pathway have been associated with CRPC development, raising the hypothesis that blocking mTOR signaling may be an effective targeted approach to treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label phase II study, the mTOR inhibitor Ridaforolimus was administered at a dose of 50 mg intravenous once weekly to 38 patients with taxane-treated CRPC. The primary end point was best overall response according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors guidelines. Serum prostate-specific antigen levels were prospectively monitored as a biomarker for cancer activity. RESULTS: No objective responses were observed, but 18 patients (47.4%) had stable disease as their best response. Based on progression-free survival analysis, median time to progression with Ridaforolimus was 28 days (95% confidence interval, 27-29). Eight patients (21.1%) had stable disease as their best overall prostate-specific antigen response. The median number of days from first to last dose was 109.5 days (range, 1-442 days). Ridaforolimus was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that observed in patients with advanced malignancies. The most common side effects were typically mild or moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS: Ridaforolimus was generally well tolerated. Treatment did not produce objective responses, but stable disease was observed in some patients with taxane-treated CRPC. Alternative treatment regimens, such as combination therapy with a taxane or in a maintenance treatment paradigm, should be considered for further evaluation in this patient population.
BACKGROUND: Few options are available after taxane-based therapy in men with CRPC. Genetic alterations involving the mTOR pathway have been associated with CRPC development, raising the hypothesis that blocking mTOR signaling may be an effective targeted approach to treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In this open-label phase II study, the mTOR inhibitor Ridaforolimus was administered at a dose of 50 mg intravenous once weekly to 38 patients with taxane-treated CRPC. The primary end point was best overall response according to modified Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors guidelines. Serum prostate-specific antigen levels were prospectively monitored as a biomarker for cancer activity. RESULTS: No objective responses were observed, but 18 patients (47.4%) had stable disease as their best response. Based on progression-free survival analysis, median time to progression with Ridaforolimus was 28 days (95% confidence interval, 27-29). Eight patients (21.1%) had stable disease as their best overall prostate-specific antigen response. The median number of days from first to last dose was 109.5 days (range, 1-442 days). Ridaforolimus was generally well tolerated, with a safety profile similar to that observed in patients with advanced malignancies. The most common side effects were typically mild or moderate in severity. CONCLUSIONS:Ridaforolimus was generally well tolerated. Treatment did not produce objective responses, but stable disease was observed in some patients with taxane-treated CRPC. Alternative treatment regimens, such as combination therapy with a taxane or in a maintenance treatment paradigm, should be considered for further evaluation in this patient population.
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: Barry S Taylor; Nikolaus Schultz; Haley Hieronymus; Anuradha Gopalan; Yonghong Xiao; Brett S Carver; Vivek K Arora; Poorvi Kaushik; Ethan Cerami; Boris Reva; Yevgeniy Antipin; Nicholas Mitsiades; Thomas Landers; Igor Dolgalev; John E Major; Manda Wilson; Nicholas D Socci; Alex E Lash; Adriana Heguy; James A Eastham; Howard I Scher; Victor E Reuter; Peter T Scardino; Chris Sander; Charles L Sawyers; William L Gerald Journal: Cancer Cell Date: 2010-06-24 Impact factor: 31.743
Authors: Ian F Tannock; Ronald de Wit; William R Berry; Jozsef Horti; Anna Pluzanska; Kim N Chi; Stephane Oudard; Christine Théodore; Nicholas D James; Ingela Turesson; Mark A Rosenthal; Mario A Eisenberger Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-10-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Christine M Hartford; Apurva A Desai; Linda Janisch; Theodore Karrison; Victor M Rivera; Lori Berk; John W Loewy; Hedy Kindler; Walter M Stadler; Heather L Knowles; Camille Bedrosian; Mark J Ratain Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-02-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Weisheng Zhang; Joe Zhu; Clay L Efferson; Chris Ware; Jennifer Tammam; Minilik Angagaw; Jason Laskey; Kimberly A Bettano; Shailaja Kasibhatla; John F Reilly; Cyrille Sur; Pradip K Majumder Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2009-09-08 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Pradip K Majumder; Phillip G Febbo; Rachel Bikoff; Raanan Berger; Qi Xue; Louis M McMahon; Judith Manola; James Brugarolas; Timothy J McDonnell; Todd R Golub; Massimo Loda; Heidi A Lane; William R Sellers Journal: Nat Med Date: 2004-05-23 Impact factor: 53.440
Authors: Mitchell E Gross; Tanya B Dorff; David I Quinn; Patricia M Diaz; Olga O Castellanos; David B Agus Journal: Clin Genitourin Cancer Date: 2017-07-14 Impact factor: 2.872
Authors: S A Piha-Paul; P N Munster; A Hollebecque; G Argilés; O Dajani; J D Cheng; R Wang; A Swift; A Tosolini; S Gupta Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2015-07-18 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Pedro Barata; Matthew Cooney; Allison Tyler; John Wright; Robert Dreicer; Jorge A Garcia Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2018-02-23 Impact factor: 3.850