No abstract

Amrubicin shows promising activity, with an ORR of 44% compared with an ORR of 15% for topotecan as second-line treatment in patients with SCLC sensitive to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy. In addition, the safety profiles were comparable; however, a trend was noted for more frequent grade 3 or worse neutropenia and thrombocytopenia in the topotecan group as compared with the amrubicin group. Additional studies are ongoing.

Single-agent amrubicin showed promising activity with a 21.3% ORR and an acceptable safety profile when used as second-line therapy patients with platinum-refractory SCLC. Amrubicin did not induce early cardiotoxicity, but its long-term effects are unknown.

No abstract

Purpose: Overexpression of C-X-C motif receptor 4 (CXCR4) is implicated in tumor progression. LY2510924 is a peptide antagonist, which blocks stromal cell-derived factor-1 (SDF1) from CXCR4 binding.Experimental Design: This phase I study included two parts: a 3þ3 dose escalation (part A) and dose confirmation (part B). LY2510924 was administered as a daily subcutaneous injection on a 28-day cycle. The primary objective was to determine the recommended phase II dose. Secondary objectives included safety, pharmacokinetics, efficacy, and pharmacodynamic response, including mobilization of CD34 þ hematopoietic stem cells into the peripheral blood. Results: Forty-five patients were enrolled, 25 in part A and 20 in part B. Patients were administered increasing doses of LY2510924: 1.0, 2.5, 5.0, 10, 20, and 30 mg/day for part A and 2.5 or 20 mg/day for part B. Two patients (30-mg/day cohort) experienced dose-limiting toxicities of grade 3 increased neutrophil count. The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was 20 mg/day. The most common drug-related treatmentemergent adverse events were fatigue (9%), injection-site reaction (9%), injection site pruritus (7%), and nausea (7%). The best response was stable disease for nine patients (20%). At the end of cycle 1, mean peak LY2510924 plasma concentration and the 24-hour area under the plasma concentration versus time curve increased slightly more than dose proportionally. LY2510924 dose dependently increased CD34 þ cell counts in peripheral blood up to 18-fold. Conclusions: LY2510924 demonstrated CD34 þ cell mobilization at doses !2.5 mg/day with a tolerable safety profile up to an MTD of 20 mg/day. Clin Cancer Res; 20(13);

No abstract

developing intellectual property for cellular immunotherapy with BioCytics; and ongoing discussions with potential future biopharma and biotech for Human Applications Lab sponsored projects. L.C. Harshman reports personal fees for consultancy roles from Genentech, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Dendreon,

PURPOSE This phase I study (RAD1901-005; NCT02338349) evaluated elacestrant, an investigational oral selective estrogen receptor degrader (SERD), in heavily pretreated women with estrogen receptor–positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative metastatic breast cancer, including those with estrogen receptor gene alpha ( ESR1) mutation. The primary objective was to determine the maximum tolerated dose and/or recommended phase II dose (RP2D). METHODS The study consisted of a 3 + 3 design (elacestrant capsules) followed by expansion at RP2D (400-mg capsules, then 400-mg tablets) for the evaluation of safety and antitumor activity. Elacestrant was taken once daily until progression or intolerability. RESULTS Of 57 postmenopausal women enrolled, 50 received RP2D (400 mg once daily): median age, 63 years; median three prior anticancer therapies, including cyclin-dependent kinase 4,6 inhibitors (CDK4/6i; 52%), SERD (52%), and ESR1 mutation (circulating tumor DNA; 50%). No dose-limiting toxicities occurred; the most common adverse events at RP2D (400-mg tablet; n = 24) were nausea (33.3%) and increased blood triglycerides and decreased blood phosphorus (25.0% each). Most adverse events were grade 1-2 in severity. The objective response rate was 19.4% (n = 31 evaluable patients receiving RP2D), 15.0% in patients with prior SERD, 16.7% in patients with prior CDK4/6i, and 33.3% in patients with ESR1 mutation (n = 5/15). The clinical benefit rate (24-week) was 42.6% overall (n = 47 patients receiving RP2D), 56.5% (n = 23, ESR1 mutation), and 30.4% (n = 23, prior CDK4/6i). Elacestrant clinical benefit was associated with decline in ESR1 mutant allele fraction. CONCLUSION Elacestrant 400 mg orally once daily has an acceptable safety profile and demonstrated single-agent activity with confirmed partial responses in heavily pretreated patients with estrogen receptor–positive metastatic breast cancer. Notably, responses were observed in patients with ESR1 mutation as well as those with prior CDK4/6i and prior SERD. A phase III trial investigating elacestrant versus standard endocrine therapy is ongoing.