Cargando…

Phase II Study of Everolimus in Metastatic Malignant Melanoma (NCCTG‐N0377, Alliance)

LESSONS LEARNED. Everolimus does not have sufficient activity to justify its use as single agent in metastatic melanoma. Patients treated with 10 mg per day dose were most likely to require dose reductions. Everolimus appeared to reduce the numbers of regulatory T cells in approximately half of the...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vera Aguilera, Jesus, Rao, Ravi D., Allred, Jacob B., Suman, Vera J., Windschitl, Harold E., Kaur, Judith S., Maples, William J., Lowe, Val J., Creagan, Edward T., Erickson, Lori A., Markovic, Svetomir
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: AlphaMed Press 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6156180/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29666297
http://dx.doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0100
_version_ 1783358049947222016
author Vera Aguilera, Jesus
Rao, Ravi D.
Allred, Jacob B.
Suman, Vera J.
Windschitl, Harold E.
Kaur, Judith S.
Maples, William J.
Lowe, Val J.
Creagan, Edward T.
Erickson, Lori A.
Markovic, Svetomir
author_facet Vera Aguilera, Jesus
Rao, Ravi D.
Allred, Jacob B.
Suman, Vera J.
Windschitl, Harold E.
Kaur, Judith S.
Maples, William J.
Lowe, Val J.
Creagan, Edward T.
Erickson, Lori A.
Markovic, Svetomir
author_sort Vera Aguilera, Jesus
collection PubMed
description LESSONS LEARNED. Everolimus does not have sufficient activity to justify its use as single agent in metastatic melanoma. Patients treated with 10 mg per day dose were most likely to require dose reductions. Everolimus appeared to reduce the numbers of regulatory T cells in approximately half of the treated patients; unfortunately, these effects were not correlated with clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND. Everolimus (RAD‐001) is an orally active rapamycin analogue shown in preclinical data to produce cytostatic cell inhibition, which may be potentially beneficial in treating melanoma. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of everolimus in patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma (MM). METHODS. This study included two cohorts; cohort 1 received 30 mg of everolimus by mouth (PO) weekly, and cohort 2 was dosed with 10 mg of everolimus PO daily. The endpoints of the study were safety, 16‐week progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and measures of immunomodulatory/antiangiogenic properties with therapy. Tumor samples before therapy and at week 8 of treatment were analyzed. Peripheral blood plasma or mononuclear cell isolates collected prior to therapy and at weeks 8 and 16 and at time of tumor progression were analyzed for vascular endothelial growth factor and regulatory T‐cell (Treg) measurements. RESULTS. A total of 53 patients were enrolled in cohort 1 (n = 24) and cohort 2 (n = 29). Only 2 patients of the first 20 patients enrolled in cohort 2 had treatment responses (25%; 95% confidence interval, 8.6%–49.1%); this result did not allow full accrual to cohort 2, as the study was terminated for futility. Median OS was 12.2 months for cohort 1 versus 8.1 months in cohort 2; no PFS advantage was seen in either group (2.1 months vs. 1.8 months). Dose‐limiting toxicities included grade 4 myocardial ischemia (3.4%); grade 3 fatigue, mucositis, and hyperglycemia (10.3%); and anorexia and anemia (6.9%). Everolimus significantly reduced the number of Tregs in approximately half of the treated patients; however, these effects were not correlated with clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION. Everolimus does not have sufficient single‐agent activity in MM; however, we have identified evidence of biological activity to provide a potential rationale for future combination studies.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6156180
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher AlphaMed Press
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-61561802018-09-26 Phase II Study of Everolimus in Metastatic Malignant Melanoma (NCCTG‐N0377, Alliance) Vera Aguilera, Jesus Rao, Ravi D. Allred, Jacob B. Suman, Vera J. Windschitl, Harold E. Kaur, Judith S. Maples, William J. Lowe, Val J. Creagan, Edward T. Erickson, Lori A. Markovic, Svetomir Oncologist Clinical Trial Results LESSONS LEARNED. Everolimus does not have sufficient activity to justify its use as single agent in metastatic melanoma. Patients treated with 10 mg per day dose were most likely to require dose reductions. Everolimus appeared to reduce the numbers of regulatory T cells in approximately half of the treated patients; unfortunately, these effects were not correlated with clinical outcomes. BACKGROUND. Everolimus (RAD‐001) is an orally active rapamycin analogue shown in preclinical data to produce cytostatic cell inhibition, which may be potentially beneficial in treating melanoma. We conducted a phase II study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of everolimus in patients with unresectable metastatic melanoma (MM). METHODS. This study included two cohorts; cohort 1 received 30 mg of everolimus by mouth (PO) weekly, and cohort 2 was dosed with 10 mg of everolimus PO daily. The endpoints of the study were safety, 16‐week progression‐free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and measures of immunomodulatory/antiangiogenic properties with therapy. Tumor samples before therapy and at week 8 of treatment were analyzed. Peripheral blood plasma or mononuclear cell isolates collected prior to therapy and at weeks 8 and 16 and at time of tumor progression were analyzed for vascular endothelial growth factor and regulatory T‐cell (Treg) measurements. RESULTS. A total of 53 patients were enrolled in cohort 1 (n = 24) and cohort 2 (n = 29). Only 2 patients of the first 20 patients enrolled in cohort 2 had treatment responses (25%; 95% confidence interval, 8.6%–49.1%); this result did not allow full accrual to cohort 2, as the study was terminated for futility. Median OS was 12.2 months for cohort 1 versus 8.1 months in cohort 2; no PFS advantage was seen in either group (2.1 months vs. 1.8 months). Dose‐limiting toxicities included grade 4 myocardial ischemia (3.4%); grade 3 fatigue, mucositis, and hyperglycemia (10.3%); and anorexia and anemia (6.9%). Everolimus significantly reduced the number of Tregs in approximately half of the treated patients; however, these effects were not correlated with clinical outcomes. CONCLUSION. Everolimus does not have sufficient single‐agent activity in MM; however, we have identified evidence of biological activity to provide a potential rationale for future combination studies. AlphaMed Press 2018-04-17 2018-08 /pmc/articles/PMC6156180/ /pubmed/29666297 http://dx.doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0100 Text en © AlphaMed Press; the data published online to support this summary are the property of the authors
spellingShingle Clinical Trial Results
Vera Aguilera, Jesus
Rao, Ravi D.
Allred, Jacob B.
Suman, Vera J.
Windschitl, Harold E.
Kaur, Judith S.
Maples, William J.
Lowe, Val J.
Creagan, Edward T.
Erickson, Lori A.
Markovic, Svetomir
Phase II Study of Everolimus in Metastatic Malignant Melanoma (NCCTG‐N0377, Alliance)
title Phase II Study of Everolimus in Metastatic Malignant Melanoma (NCCTG‐N0377, Alliance)
title_full Phase II Study of Everolimus in Metastatic Malignant Melanoma (NCCTG‐N0377, Alliance)
title_fullStr Phase II Study of Everolimus in Metastatic Malignant Melanoma (NCCTG‐N0377, Alliance)
title_full_unstemmed Phase II Study of Everolimus in Metastatic Malignant Melanoma (NCCTG‐N0377, Alliance)
title_short Phase II Study of Everolimus in Metastatic Malignant Melanoma (NCCTG‐N0377, Alliance)
title_sort phase ii study of everolimus in metastatic malignant melanoma (ncctg‐n0377, alliance)
topic Clinical Trial Results
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6156180/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29666297
http://dx.doi.org/10.1634/theoncologist.2018-0100
work_keys_str_mv AT veraaguilerajesus phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT raoravid phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT allredjacobb phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT sumanveraj phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT windschitlharolde phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT kaurjudiths phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT mapleswilliamj phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT lowevalj phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT creaganedwardt phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT ericksonloria phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance
AT markovicsvetomir phaseiistudyofeverolimusinmetastaticmalignantmelanomancctgn0377alliance