A Jo Chien1, Pamela N Munster, Michelle E Melisko, Hope S Rugo, John W Park, Andrei Goga, Glenna Auerback, Elham Khanafshar, Karen Ordovas, Kevin M Koch, Mark M Moasser. 1. A. Jo Chien, Pamela N. Munster, Michelle E. Melisko, Hope S. Rugo, John W. Park, Andrei Goga, Glenna Auerback, Elham Khanafshar, and Mark M. Moasser, Helen Diller Family Comprehensive Cancer Center; A. Jo Chien, Pamela N. Munster, Michelle E. Melisko, Hope S. Rugo, John W. Park, Andrei Goga, Glenna Auerback, Elham Khanafshar, Karen Ordovas, and Mark M. Moasser, University of California San Francisco, San Francisco, CA; and Kevin M. Koch, GlaxoSmithKline, Research Triangle Park, NC.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The highly effective treatment of human epidermal growth factor receptor (HER) 2-amplified breast cancer has proven challenging because of a signal buffering capacity inherent in the functionally relevant HER2-HER3 target. HER2-HER3 signaling can be inactivated by doses of lapatinib that fully inactivate the HER2 kinase. In mouse models, such doses are not tolerable in continuous administration, but they are tolerable and highly effective in intermittent dosing. We pursued the clinical translation of this treatment hypothesis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase I dose-escalation study in women with advanced HER2-overexpressing breast cancer. Lapatinib was administered on days 1 through 5 of repeating 14-day cycles. Dose escalation was conducted using a 3+3 design with plasma lapatinib level monitoring. RESULTS: Forty patients were evaluable for toxicity, and 34 patients were evaluable for dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Lapatinib dose was escalated to 7,000 mg per day in twice-daily dosing with no DLTs; however, plasma lapatinib concentrations plateaued in this dose range. Additional cohorts evaluated strategies to increase lapatinib exposure, including the food effect, CYP3A4 inhibition, and dose fractionation. Of these, only ketoconazole was able to increase lapatinib exposure, despite highly variable lapatinib bioavailability. Intolerable exposure levels were not encountered. Eight patients (20%) experienced grade 3 diarrhea. Six patients achieved a response, and dramatic responses were seen in three patients with lapatinib concentrations approaching 10,000 ng/mL. CONCLUSION: Lapatinib exposure can be safely and significantly increased through intermittent dosing but reaches a ceiling that currently impedes clinical translation of the treatment hypothesis. Preliminary efficacy data suggest that exposures approaching those seen in mouse models can result in highly significant tumor responses.
PURPOSE: The highly effective treatment of humanepidermal growth factor receptor (HER) 2-amplified breast cancer has proven challenging because of a signal buffering capacity inherent in the functionally relevant HER2-HER3 target. HER2-HER3 signaling can be inactivated by doses of lapatinib that fully inactivate the HER2 kinase. In mouse models, such doses are not tolerable in continuous administration, but they are tolerable and highly effective in intermittent dosing. We pursued the clinical translation of this treatment hypothesis. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We conducted a phase I dose-escalation study in women with advanced HER2-overexpressing breast cancer. Lapatinib was administered on days 1 through 5 of repeating 14-day cycles. Dose escalation was conducted using a 3+3 design with plasma lapatinib level monitoring. RESULTS: Forty patients were evaluable for toxicity, and 34 patients were evaluable for dose-limiting toxicity (DLT). Lapatinib dose was escalated to 7,000 mg per day in twice-daily dosing with no DLTs; however, plasma lapatinib concentrations plateaued in this dose range. Additional cohorts evaluated strategies to increase lapatinib exposure, including the food effect, CYP3A4 inhibition, and dose fractionation. Of these, only ketoconazole was able to increase lapatinib exposure, despite highly variable lapatinib bioavailability. Intolerable exposure levels were not encountered. Eight patients (20%) experienced grade 3 diarrhea. Six patients achieved a response, and dramatic responses were seen in three patients with lapatinib concentrations approaching 10,000 ng/mL. CONCLUSION:Lapatinib exposure can be safely and significantly increased through intermittent dosing but reaches a ceiling that currently impedes clinical translation of the treatment hypothesis. Preliminary efficacy data suggest that exposures approaching those seen in mouse models can result in highly significant tumor responses.
Authors: Harold J Burstein; Yan Sun; Luc Y Dirix; Zefei Jiang; Robert Paridaens; Antoinette R Tan; Ahmad Awada; Anantbhushan Ranade; Shunchang Jiao; Gary Schwartz; Richat Abbas; Christine Powell; Kathleen Turnbull; Jennifer Vermette; Charles Zacharchuk; Rajendra Badwe Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-02-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kimberly L Blackwell; Harold J Burstein; Anna Maria Storniolo; Hope Rugo; George Sledge; Maria Koehler; Catherine Ellis; Michelle Casey; Svetislava Vukelja; Joachim Bischoff; Jose Baselga; Joyce O'Shaughnessy Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-02-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: H J Burstein; A M Storniolo; S Franco; J Forster; S Stein; S Rubin; V M Salazar; K L Blackwell Journal: Ann Oncol Date: 2008-02-17 Impact factor: 32.976
Authors: Stephen Johnston; John Pippen; Xavier Pivot; Mikhail Lichinitser; Saeed Sadeghi; Veronique Dieras; Henry Leonidas Gomez; Gilles Romieu; Alexey Manikhas; M John Kennedy; Michael F Press; Julie Maltzman; Allison Florance; Lisa O'Rourke; Cristina Oliva; Steven Stein; Mark Pegram Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-09-28 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Howard A Burris; Charles W Taylor; Suzanne F Jones; Kevin M Koch; Melissa J Versola; Niki Arya; Ronald A Fleming; Deborah A Smith; Lini Pandite; Neil Spector; George Wilding Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2009-10-13 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Si Tuen Lee-Hoeflich; Lisa Crocker; Evelyn Yao; Thinh Pham; Xander Munroe; Klaus P Hoeflich; Mark X Sliwkowski; Howard M Stern Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2008-07-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: M Toi; H Iwata; Y Fujiwara; Y Ito; S Nakamura; Y Tokuda; T Taguchi; Y Rai; K Aogi; T Arai; J Watanabe; T Wakamatsu; K Katsura; C E Ellis; R C Gagnon; K E Allen; Y Sasaki; S Takashima Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2009-10-20 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Aki Morikawa; Elisa de Stanchina; Elena Pentsova; Margaret M Kemeny; Bob T Li; Kendrick Tang; Sujata Patil; Martin Fleisher; Catherine Van Poznak; Larry Norton; Andrew D Seidman Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2019-04-15 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Aki Morikawa; David M Peereboom; Helen R Thorsheim; Ramakrishna Samala; Rajiv Balyan; Conleth G Murphy; Paul R Lockman; Ahkeem Simmons; Robert J Weil; Viviane Tabar; Patricia S Steeg; Quentin R Smith; Andrew D Seidman Journal: Neuro Oncol Date: 2014-07-11 Impact factor: 12.300
Authors: Mariana Segovia-Mendoza; María E González-González; David Barrera; Lorenza Díaz; Rocío García-Becerra Journal: Am J Cancer Res Date: 2015-08-15 Impact factor: 6.166
Authors: Maria Rovithi; Richard R de Haas; Richard J Honeywell; Dennis Poel; Godefridus J Peters; Arjan W Griffioen; Henk M W Verheul Journal: J Exp Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-09-07
Authors: Neil L Spector; Faith C Robertson; Sarah Bacus; Kimberly Blackwell; Deborah A Smith; Kelli Glenn; Leanne Cartee; Jennifer Harris; Carie L Kimbrough; Mark Gittelman; Eli Avisar; Peter Beitsch; Kevin M Koch Journal: PLoS One Date: 2015-11-16 Impact factor: 3.240