BACKGROUND: Ganetespib (STA-9090) is an Hsp90 inhibitor that downregulates VEGFR, c-MET, HER2, IGF-IR, EGFR, and other Hsp90 client proteins involved in hepatocarcinogenesis, thereby making it an attractive therapy for HCC. This Phase I study was performed to establish the safety, tolerability, recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), and preliminary clinical activity of ganetespib in previously treated patients with advanced HCC. METHODS: Patients with advanced HCC, Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, progression on or intolerance to sorafenib, and ECOG PS ≤ 1 were enrolled in a standard 3x3 dose escalation study at doses of 100 mg/m(2), 150 mg/m(2), and 200 mg/m(2) IV given on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle. Objective response by RECIST version 1.1 criteria was evaluated by CT/MRI every 8 weeks. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were enrolled in this trial and received at least one dose of the study drug. Of the 14 patients: median age, 57 years old; male 71 %; Asian 36 %; HCC etiology (HBV 36 %, HCV 43 %, Hemachromatosis 7 %, unknown 21 %); Child Pugh Class (A 93 %, B 7 %); median number of prior treatments 2; median baseline AFP 70.1 ng/mL. The RP2D was determined to be 200 mg/m(2). The most commonly seen AEs were diarrhea (93 %), fatigue (71 %), AST elevation (64 %), and hyperglycemia (64 %). The most common Gr 3/4 AEs were hyperglycemia (21 %) and lipasemia (21 %). One (7 %) patient had a fatal AE, septic shock, within 30 days of receiving the study drug. One dose-limiting toxicity, grade 3 lipasemia, was observed at the 100 mg/m(2) dose. Pharmacokinetics studies showed a t1/2, CL, Tmax, and Vss of 6.45 h, 48.28 L/h (25.56 L/h/m(2)), 0.76 h, and 191 L (100.4 L/m(2)), respectively. No objective responses were seen; one patient (7 %) had stable disease at 16 weeks. Median time to progression was 1.8 months, and median overall survival was 7.2 months. CONCLUSION: Ganetespib had a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced HCC who had progressed on at least one line of systemic therapy. The pharmacokinetic profile showed that ganetespib exposure in patients with mild hepatic dysfunction is similar to that seen in patients with normal liver function. Ganetespib showed limited clinical benefit in patients with advanced HCC in this phase I trial.
BACKGROUND:Ganetespib (STA-9090) is an Hsp90 inhibitor that downregulates VEGFR, c-MET, HER2, IGF-IR, EGFR, and other Hsp90 client proteins involved in hepatocarcinogenesis, thereby making it an attractive therapy for HCC. This Phase I study was performed to establish the safety, tolerability, recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D), and preliminary clinical activity of ganetespib in previously treated patients with advanced HCC. METHODS:Patients with advanced HCC, Child-Pugh A cirrhosis, progression on or intolerance to sorafenib, and ECOG PS ≤ 1 were enrolled in a standard 3x3 dose escalation study at doses of 100 mg/m(2), 150 mg/m(2), and 200 mg/m(2) IV given on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle. Objective response by RECIST version 1.1 criteria was evaluated by CT/MRI every 8 weeks. RESULTS: Fourteen patients were enrolled in this trial and received at least one dose of the study drug. Of the 14 patients: median age, 57 years old; male 71 %; Asian 36 %; HCC etiology (HBV 36 %, HCV 43 %, Hemachromatosis 7 %, unknown 21 %); Child Pugh Class (A 93 %, B 7 %); median number of prior treatments 2; median baseline AFP 70.1 ng/mL. The RP2D was determined to be 200 mg/m(2). The most commonly seen AEs were diarrhea (93 %), fatigue (71 %), AST elevation (64 %), and hyperglycemia (64 %). The most common Gr 3/4 AEs were hyperglycemia (21 %) and lipasemia (21 %). One (7 %) patient had a fatal AE, septic shock, within 30 days of receiving the study drug. One dose-limiting toxicity, grade 3 lipasemia, was observed at the 100 mg/m(2) dose. Pharmacokinetics studies showed a t1/2, CL, Tmax, and Vss of 6.45 h, 48.28 L/h (25.56 L/h/m(2)), 0.76 h, and 191 L (100.4 L/m(2)), respectively. No objective responses were seen; one patient (7 %) had stable disease at 16 weeks. Median time to progression was 1.8 months, and median overall survival was 7.2 months. CONCLUSION:Ganetespib had a manageable safety profile in patients with advanced HCC who had progressed on at least one line of systemic therapy. The pharmacokinetic profile showed that ganetespib exposure in patients with mild hepatic dysfunction is similar to that seen in patients with normal liver function. Ganetespib showed limited clinical benefit in patients with advanced HCC in this phase I trial.
Authors: Jim Sang; Jaime Acquaviva; Julie C Friedland; Donald L Smith; Manuel Sequeira; Chaohua Zhang; Qin Jiang; Liquan Xue; Christine M Lovly; John-Paul Jimenez; Alice T Shaw; Robert C Doebele; Suqin He; Richard C Bates; D Ross Camidge; Stephan W Morris; Iman El-Hariry; David A Proia Journal: Cancer Discov Date: 2013-03-26 Impact factor: 39.397
Authors: Mark A Socinski; Jonathan Goldman; Iman El-Hariry; Marianna Koczywas; Vojo Vukovic; Leora Horn; Eugene Paschold; Ravi Salgia; Howard West; Lecia V Sequist; Philip Bonomi; Julie Brahmer; Lin-Chi Chen; Alan Sandler; Chandra P Belani; Timothy Webb; Harry Harper; Mark Huberman; Suresh Ramalingam; Kwok-Kin Wong; Florentina Teofilovici; Wei Guo; Geoffrey I Shapiro Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2013-04-03 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Josep M Llovet; Sergio Ricci; Vincenzo Mazzaferro; Philip Hilgard; Edward Gane; Jean-Frédéric Blanc; Andre Cosme de Oliveira; Armando Santoro; Jean-Luc Raoul; Alejandro Forner; Myron Schwartz; Camillo Porta; Stefan Zeuzem; Luigi Bolondi; Tim F Greten; Peter R Galle; Jean-François Seitz; Ivan Borbath; Dieter Häussinger; Tom Giannaris; Minghua Shan; Marius Moscovici; Dimitris Voliotis; Jordi Bruix Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2008-07-24 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Robert G Gish; Camillo Porta; Lucian Lazar; Paul Ruff; Ronald Feld; Adina Croitoru; Lynn Feun; Krzysztof Jeziorski; John Leighton; José Gallo; Gerard T Kennealey Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: David S Huang; Emmanuelle V LeBlanc; Tanvi Shekhar-Guturja; Nicole Robbins; Damian J Krysan; Juan Pizarro; Luke Whitesell; Leah E Cowen; Lauren E Brown Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2019-09-26 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Dana B Cardin; Ramya Thota; Laura W Goff; Jordan D Berlin; Clyde M Jones; Gregory D Ayers; Jennifer G Whisenant; Emily Chan Journal: Am J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-08 Impact factor: 2.339
Authors: Bin Chen; Wei Wei; Li Ma; Bin Yang; Ryan M Gill; Mei-Sze Chua; Atul J Butte; Samuel So Journal: Gastroenterology Date: 2017-03-08 Impact factor: 22.682
Authors: Paul T Marcyk; Emmanuelle V LeBlanc; Douglas A Kuntz; Alice Xue; Francisco Ortiz; Richard Trilles; Stephen Bengtson; Tristan M G Kenney; David S Huang; Nicole Robbins; Noelle S Williams; Damian J Krysan; Gilbert G Privé; Luke Whitesell; Leah E Cowen; Lauren E Brown Journal: J Med Chem Date: 2021-01-14 Impact factor: 7.446
Authors: Sivarajan T Chettiar; Reem Malek; Anvesh Annadanam; Katriana M Nugent; Yoshinori Kato; Hailun Wang; Jessica A Cades; Kekoa Taparra; Zineb Belcaid; Matthew Ballew; Sarah Manmiller; David Proia; Michael Lim; Robert A Anders; Joseph M Herman; Phuoc T Tran Journal: Cancer Biol Ther Date: 2016-04-02 Impact factor: 4.742