BACKGROUND: Alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS), a rare vascular sarcoma with a clinically indolent course, frequently presents with metastases. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a promising therapeutic target. In a phase-II trial of the VEGF receptor inhibitor cediranib for adults with ASPS, the partial response (PR) rate (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors [RECIST] v1.0) was 35% (15/43; 95% confidence interval: 21-51%). We evaluated cediranib in the pediatric population. PROCEDURE: Patients <16 years old with metastatic, unresectable ASPS received cediranib at the pediatric maximum tolerated dose of 12 mg/m2 (≈70% of the fixed adult phase-II dose orally daily). Tumor response was assessed every two cycles (RECIST v1.0). A Simon two-stage optimal design (target response rate 35%, rule out 5%) was used. RESULTS: Seven patients (four females), with a median age of 13 years, (range 9-15), were enrolled on stage 1. The most frequent grade 2 or 3 adverse events were neutropenia, diarrhea, hypertension, fatigue, and proteinuria. The best response was stable disease (SD) (median cycle number = 34). Three patients were removed from the study treatment for disease progression (cycles 4, 5, and 36). Five of seven patients had SD for ≥14 months. Two patients with SD remain on study (34-57+ cycles). CONCLUSIONS: Cediranib did not reach the target response rate in this small pediatric cohort, in contrast to the adult 35% PR rate. The pediatric dosing was 30% lower compared to the adult dosing, which may have contributed to response differences. Prolonged SD was observed in five patients, but given the indolent nature of ASPS, SD cannot be clearly attributed to cediranib. Cediranib has an acceptable safety profile.
BACKGROUND:Alveolar soft-part sarcoma (ASPS), a rare vascular sarcoma with a clinically indolent course, frequently presents with metastases. Vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) is a promising therapeutic target. In a phase-II trial of the VEGF receptor inhibitor cediranib for adults with ASPS, the partial response (PR) rate (response evaluation criteria in solid tumors [RECIST] v1.0) was 35% (15/43; 95% confidence interval: 21-51%). We evaluated cediranib in the pediatric population. PROCEDURE: Patients <16 years old with metastatic, unresectable ASPS received cediranib at the pediatric maximum tolerated dose of 12 mg/m2 (≈70% of the fixed adult phase-II dose orally daily). Tumor response was assessed every two cycles (RECIST v1.0). A Simon two-stage optimal design (target response rate 35%, rule out 5%) was used. RESULTS: Seven patients (four females), with a median age of 13 years, (range 9-15), were enrolled on stage 1. The most frequent grade 2 or 3 adverse events were neutropenia, diarrhea, hypertension, fatigue, and proteinuria. The best response was stable disease (SD) (median cycle number = 34). Three patients were removed from the study treatment for disease progression (cycles 4, 5, and 36). Five of seven patients had SD for ≥14 months. Two patients with SD remain on study (34-57+ cycles). CONCLUSIONS:Cediranib did not reach the target response rate in this small pediatric cohort, in contrast to the adult 35% PR rate. The pediatric dosing was 30% lower compared to the adult dosing, which may have contributed to response differences. Prolonged SD was observed in five patients, but given the indolent nature of ASPS, SD cannot be clearly attributed to cediranib. Cediranib has an acceptable safety profile.
Authors: P Argani; C R Antonescu; P B Illei; M Y Lui; C F Timmons; R Newbury; V E Reuter; A J Garvin; A R Perez-Atayde; J A Fletcher; J B Beckwith; J A Bridge; M Ladanyi Journal: Am J Pathol Date: 2001-07 Impact factor: 4.307
Authors: Elizabeth Fox; Richard Aplenc; Rochelle Bagatell; Meredith K Chuk; Eva Dombi; Wendy Goodspeed; Anne Goodwin; Marie Kromplewski; Nalini Jayaprakash; Marcelo Marotti; Kathryn H Brown; Barbara Wenrich; Peter C Adamson; Brigitte C Widemann; Frank M Balis Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2010-11-08 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Masumi Tsuda; Ian J Davis; Pedram Argani; Neerav Shukla; Gael G McGill; Makoto Nagai; Tsuyoshi Saito; Marick Laé; David E Fisher; Marc Ladanyi Journal: Cancer Res Date: 2007-02-01 Impact factor: 12.701
Authors: C A Portera ; V Ho; S R Patel; K K Hunt; B W Feig; P M Respondek; A W Yasko; R S Benjamin; R E Pollock; P W Pisters Journal: Cancer Date: 2001-02-01 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Neil R Smith; Neil H James; Ian Oakley; Anna Wainwright; Clive Copley; Jane Kendrew; Lynsey M Womersley; Juliane M Jürgensmeier; Stephen R Wedge; Simon T Barry Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2007-08 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Shivaani Kummar; Deborah Allen; Anne Monks; Eric C Polley; Curtis D Hose; S Percy Ivy; Ismail B Turkbey; Scott Lawrence; Robert J Kinders; Peter Choyke; Richard Simon; Seth M Steinberg; James H Doroshow; Lee Helman Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2013-04-29 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Joachim Drevs; Patrizia Siegert; Michael Medinger; Klaus Mross; Ralph Strecker; Ute Zirrgiebel; Jan Harder; Hubert Blum; Jane Robertson; Juliane M Jürgensmeier; Thomas A Puchalski; Helen Young; Owain Saunders; Clemens Unger Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2007-07-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Ricardo J Flores; Douglas J Harrison; Noah C Federman; Wayne L Furman; Winston W Huh; Emily G Broaddus; Mehmet F Okcu; Rajkumar Venkatramani Journal: Pediatr Blood Cancer Date: 2018-01-19 Impact factor: 3.167
Authors: Joleen M Hubbard; Jun Yin; Erin L Schenk; Rui Qin; Joel M Reid; Carrie Strand; Jack Fiskum; Michael Menefee; Grace Lin; L Austin Doyle; Percy Ivy; Charles Erlichman; Alex Adjei; Paul Haluska; Brian A Costello Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2021-09-13 Impact factor: 3.850