PURPOSE: To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination of linsitinib (OSI-906), a dual inhibitor of IGFR and IR tyrosine kinase activity, and everolimus as treatment for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: Eligible adult patients with refractory mCRC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate end-organ function received escalating doses of OSI-906 and everolimus in a 3 + 3 design. Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, with response evaluations every 8 weeks. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with metastatic CRC were treated. There were no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in the first dose level (DL, OSI-906 50 mg BID; everolimus 5 mg QD). At DL2 (OSI-906 100 mg BID; everolimus 10 mg QD, n =6), three patients had DLTs considered related to everolimus (grade 3 mucositis, 2; grade 3 thrombocytopenia, 1). An amendment introduced DL2a (OSI-906 100 mg BID; everolimus 5 mg QD, n =5); DLTs were seen in two patients (one patient each: grade 3 thrombocytopenia with bleeding; inability to receive 75 % of doses due to neutropenia/thrombocytopenia). DL1 was the MTD; a total of 7 patients were treated at this dose. Common adverse events across all DLs included grade 1/2 fatigue (50 %) and anorexia (50 %). There were no objective responses to treatment; median time of study treatment was 7.6 weeks (range: 3.9-53 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of OSI-906 and everolimus was 50 mg BID and 5 mg QD, respectively. No indications of clinical activity were observed in refractory mCRC patients.
PURPOSE: To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the combination of linsitinib (OSI-906), a dual inhibitor of IGFR and IR tyrosine kinase activity, and everolimus as treatment for patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). METHODS: Eligible adult patients with refractory mCRC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0 or 1, and adequate end-organ function received escalating doses of OSI-906 and everolimus in a 3 + 3 design. Treatment continued until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity, with response evaluations every 8 weeks. RESULTS: Eighteen patients with metastatic CRC were treated. There were no dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) in the first dose level (DL, OSI-906 50 mg BID; everolimus 5 mg QD). At DL2 (OSI-906 100 mg BID; everolimus 10 mg QD, n =6), three patients had DLTs considered related to everolimus (grade 3 mucositis, 2; grade 3 thrombocytopenia, 1). An amendment introduced DL2a (OSI-906 100 mg BID; everolimus 5 mg QD, n =5); DLTs were seen in two patients (one patient each: grade 3 thrombocytopenia with bleeding; inability to receive 75 % of doses due to neutropenia/thrombocytopenia). DL1 was the MTD; a total of 7 patients were treated at this dose. Common adverse events across all DLs included grade 1/2 fatigue (50 %) and anorexia (50 %). There were no objective responses to treatment; median time of study treatment was 7.6 weeks (range: 3.9-53 weeks). CONCLUSIONS: The MTD of OSI-906 and everolimus was 50 mg BID and 5 mg QD, respectively. No indications of clinical activity were observed in refractory mCRC patients.
Authors: José Baselga; Mario Campone; Martine Piccart; Howard A Burris; Hope S Rugo; Tarek Sahmoud; Shinzaburo Noguchi; Michael Gnant; Kathleen I Pritchard; Fabienne Lebrun; J Thaddeus Beck; Yoshinori Ito; Denise Yardley; Ines Deleu; Alejandra Perez; Thomas Bachelot; Luc Vittori; Zhiying Xu; Pabak Mukhopadhyay; David Lebwohl; Gabriel N Hortobagyi Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-12-07 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Shi-Yong Sun; Laura M Rosenberg; Xuerong Wang; Zhongmei Zhou; Ping Yue; Haian Fu; Fadlo R Khuri Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2005-08-15 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: Jerome Tamburini; Nicolas Chapuis; Valérie Bardet; Sophie Park; Pierre Sujobert; Lise Willems; Norbert Ifrah; François Dreyfus; Patrick Mayeux; Catherine Lacombe; Didier Bouscary Journal: Blood Date: 2007-09-18 Impact factor: 22.113
Authors: E A Eisenhauer; P Therasse; J Bogaerts; L H Schwartz; D Sargent; R Ford; J Dancey; S Arbuck; S Gwyther; M Mooney; L Rubinstein; L Shankar; L Dodd; R Kaplan; D Lacombe; J Verweij Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Brian M Wolpin; Esther K Wei; Kimmie Ng; Jeffrey A Meyerhardt; Jennifer A Chan; Jacob Selhub; Edward L Giovannucci; Charles S Fuchs Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-07-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kseniya Glinkina; Arwin Groenewoud; Amina F A S Teunisse; B Ewa Snaar-Jagalska; Aart G Jochemsen Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2022-06-29 Impact factor: 6.575
Authors: Valentine M Macaulay; Mark R Middleton; S Gail Eckhardt; Charles M Rudin; Rosalyn A Juergens; Richard Gedrich; Sven Gogov; Sean McCarthy; Srinivasu Poondru; Andrew W Stephens; Shirish M Gadgeel Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2016-02-01 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Miriam Molina-Arcas; Christopher Moore; Sareena Rana; Febe van Maldegem; Edurne Mugarza; Pablo Romero-Clavijo; Eleanor Herbert; Stuart Horswell; Lian-Sheng Li; Matthew R Janes; David C Hancock; Julian Downward Journal: Sci Transl Med Date: 2019-09-18 Impact factor: 17.956
Authors: Laura W Bowers; Emily L Rossi; Ciara H O'Flanagan; Linda A deGraffenried; Stephen D Hursting Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2015-05-15 Impact factor: 5.555
Authors: Gary K Schwartz; Mark A Dickson; Patricia M LoRusso; Edward A Sausville; Yoshimi Maekawa; Yasuo Watanabe; Naomi Kashima; Daisuke Nakashima; Shiro Akinaga Journal: Cancer Sci Date: 2016-03-28 Impact factor: 6.716
Authors: S Lindsey Davis; S Gail Eckhardt; Jennifer R Diamond; Wells A Messersmith; Arvind Dasari; Colin D Weekes; Christopher H Lieu; Madeline Kane; Aik Choon Tan; Todd M Pitts; Stephen Leong Journal: Oncologist Date: 2018-08-23