Nikolay Grechko1, Viera Skarbova2, Monika Tomaszewska-Kiecana3, Rodryg Ramlau4, Piotr Centkowski5, Yvette Drew6, Rafal Dziadziuszko7, Milada Zemanova8, Jeri Beltman9, Eileen Nash10, Jenn Habeck11, Mingxiang Liao12, Jim Xiao13. 1. Clinical Science, Clovis Oncology UK Ltd., Cambridge, UK. 2. Department of Internal Medicine and Clinical Pharmacology, Summit Clinical Research, Bratislava, Slovakia. 3. BioVirtus Centrum Medyczne, Jozefow, Poland. 4. Department of Oncology and Pulmonology, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poznan, Poland. 5. Department of Oncology, Provincial Specialist Hospital in Biała Podlaska, Biała Podlaska, Poland. 6. Clinical and Translational Institute, Newcastle University, Newcastle Upon Tyne, UK. 7. Department of Oncology and Radiotherapy and Early Clinical Trials Unit, Medical University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland. 8. Department of Oncology, First Faculty of Medicine, Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic. 9. Regulatory Affairs, Clovis Oncology, Inc., Boulder, CO, USA. 10. Clinical Operations, Clovis Oncology, Inc., Boulder, CO, USA. 11. Biostatistics, Clovis Oncology, Inc., Boulder, CO, USA. 12. Clinical Pharmacology, Clovis Oncology, Inc., 5500 Flatiron Pkwy, Boulder, CO, 80301, USA. 13. Clinical Pharmacology, Clovis Oncology, Inc., 5500 Flatiron Pkwy, Boulder, CO, 80301, USA. jxiao@clovisoncology.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib is approved for the treatment of patients with recurrent ovarian and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; however, limited data are available on its use in patients with hepatic dysfunction. This study investigated whether hepatic impairment affects the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of rucaparib in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS: Patients with normal hepatic function or moderate hepatic impairment according to the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group (NCI-ODWG) criteria were enrolled and received a single oral dose of rucaparib 600 mg. Concentrations of rucaparib and its metabolite M324 in plasma and urine were measured. Pharmacokinetic parameters were compared between hepatic function groups, and safety and tolerability were assessed. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were enrolled (n = 8 per group). Rucaparib maximum concentration (Cmax) was similar, while the area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-inf) was mildly higher in the moderate hepatic impairment group than in the normal control group (geometric mean ratio, 1.446 [90% CI 0.668-3.131]); similar trends were observed for M324. Eight (50%) patients experienced ≥ 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE); 2 had normal hepatic function and 6 had moderate hepatic impairment. CONCLUSION: Patients with moderate hepatic impairment showed mildly increased AUC0-inf for rucaparib compared to patients with normal hepatic function. Although more patients with moderate hepatic impairment experienced TEAEs, only 2 TEAEs were considered treatment related. These results suggest no starting dose adjustment is necessary for patients with moderate hepatic impairment; however, close safety monitoring is warranted.
PURPOSE: The poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor rucaparib is approved for the treatment of patients with recurrent ovarian and metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer; however, limited data are available on its use in patients with hepatic dysfunction. This study investigated whether hepatic impairment affects the pharmacokinetics, safety, and tolerability of rucaparib in patients with advanced solid tumors. METHODS:Patients with normal hepatic function or moderate hepatic impairment according to the National Cancer Institute Organ Dysfunction Working Group (NCI-ODWG) criteria were enrolled and received a single oral dose of rucaparib 600 mg. Concentrations of rucaparib and its metabolite M324 in plasma and urine were measured. Pharmacokinetic parameters were compared between hepatic function groups, and safety and tolerability were assessed. RESULTS: Sixteen patients were enrolled (n = 8 per group). Rucaparib maximum concentration (Cmax) was similar, while the area under the concentration-time curve from time 0 to infinity (AUC0-inf) was mildly higher in the moderate hepatic impairment group than in the normal control group (geometric mean ratio, 1.446 [90% CI 0.668-3.131]); similar trends were observed for M324. Eight (50%) patients experienced ≥ 1 treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE); 2 had normal hepatic function and 6 had moderate hepatic impairment. CONCLUSION:Patients with moderate hepatic impairment showed mildly increased AUC0-inf for rucaparib compared to patients with normal hepatic function. Although more patients with moderate hepatic impairment experienced TEAEs, only 2 TEAEs were considered treatment related. These results suggest no starting dose adjustment is necessary for patients with moderate hepatic impairment; however, close safety monitoring is warranted.
Authors: Rebecca Kristeleit; Geoffrey I Shapiro; Howard A Burris; Amit M Oza; Patricia LoRusso; Manish R Patel; Susan M Domchek; Judith Balmaña; Yvette Drew; Lee-May Chen; Tamar Safra; Ana Montes; Heidi Giordano; Lara Maloney; Sandra Goble; Jeff Isaacson; Jim Xiao; Jen Borrow; Lindsey Rolfe; Ronnie Shapira-Frommer Journal: Clin Cancer Res Date: 2017-03-06 Impact factor: 12.531
Authors: Mingxiang Liao; Sarah Jaw-Tsai; Jeri Beltman; Andrew D Simmons; Thomas C Harding; Jim J Xiao Journal: Xenobiotica Date: 2020-03-18 Impact factor: 1.908
Authors: Huw D Thomas; Christopher R Calabrese; Michael A Batey; Stacie Canan; Zdenek Hostomsky; Suzanne Kyle; Karen A Maegley; David R Newell; Donald Skalitzky; Lan-Zhen Wang; Stephen E Webber; Nicola J Curtin Journal: Mol Cancer Ther Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 6.261
Authors: Christian Rolfo; Nicolas Isambert; Antoine Italiano; L Rhoda Molife; Jan H M Schellens; Jean-Yves Blay; Thomas Decaens; Rebecca Kristeleit; Olivier Rosmorduc; Regina Demlova; Myung-Ah Lee; Alain Ravaud; Katerina Kopeckova; Maria Learoyd; Wendy Bannister; Gershon Locker; Judith de Vos-Geelen Journal: Br J Clin Pharmacol Date: 2020-04-05 Impact factor: 4.335
Authors: Richard H Wilson; Tr Jeffry Evans; Mark R Middleton; L Rhoda Molife; James Spicer; Veronique Dieras; Patricia Roxburgh; Heidi Giordano; Sarah Jaw-Tsai; Sandra Goble; Ruth Plummer Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2017-02-21 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Mingxiang Liao; Simon Watkins; Eileen Nash; Jeff Isaacson; Jeff Etter; Jeri Beltman; Rong Fan; Li Shen; Abdul Mutlib; Vendel Kemeny; Zsuzsanna Pápai; Pascal van Tilburg; Jim J Xiao Journal: Invest New Drugs Date: 2019-06-27 Impact factor: 3.850
Authors: Geoffrey I Shapiro; Rebecca S Kristeleit; Howard A Burris; Patricia LoRusso; Manish R Patel; Yvette Drew; Heidi Giordano; Lara Maloney; Simon Watkins; Sandra Goble; Sarah Jaw-Tsai; Jim J Xiao Journal: Clin Pharmacol Drug Dev Date: 2018-05-25