MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2985698126 · doi:10.1182/blood-2019-124291

Pharmacodynamic Responses to CC-90009, a Novel Cereblon E3 Ligase Modulator, in a Phase I Dose-Escalation Study in Relapsed or Refractory Acute Myeloid Leukemia (R/R AML)

2019· article· en· W2985698126 sur OpenAlexaff
Jinhong Fan, Hongbin Wang, Suzana S. Couto, Tsun-Wen Sheena Yao, Geoffrey L. Uy, Amer M. Zeidan, Mark D. Minden, Pau Montesinos, Daniel J. DeAngelo, Jessica K. Altman, Jamie Koprivnikar, Paresh Vyas, Yngvar Fløisand, María‐Belén Vídriales, Bjørn Tore Gjertsen, Tonia J. Buchholz, Michael Pourdehnad, Daniel W. Pierce

Notice bibliographique

RevueBlood · 2019
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
ThématiqueProtein Degradation and Inhibitors
Établissements canadiensPrincess Margaret Cancer Centre
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésMedicinePharmacodynamicsRefractory (planetary science)CereblonPhases of clinical researchPharmacologyInternal medicineUbiquitin ligasePharmacokineticsChemistryClinical trialBiology

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Background: CC-90009 is a novel cereblon E3 ligase modulator (CELMoD), which is currently under investigation in a first-in-human, phase I study (CC-90009-AML-001; NCT02848001) in patients with R/R AML. In preclinical models, CC-90009 drives the binding of the target protein, translation termination factor G1 to S phase transition 1 (GSPT1), to cereblon and induces its ubiquitination and proteasome-dependent degradation. Loss of GSPT1 results in activation of the integrated stress response (ISR), inhibition of nonsense-mediated decay (NMD), and induction of apoptosis. Deep degradation of GSPT1, mediated by CC-90009, led to AML cell death in vitro and potent antitumor activity in patient-derived AML xenograft models. In the ongoing phase I study, CC-90009 has demonstrated antileukemic activity. Here, we characterize the pharmacodynamic responses using a suite of novel assays to support CC-90009 dose and schedule optimization. Methods: Adult patients with R/R AML received intravenous CC-90009 daily on Days 1-5 (D1-5 schedule) or on Days 1-3 and 8-10 (D1-3/8-10 schedule) of a 28-day cycle. Peripheral blood samples taken before, during, and after dosing in the first treatment cycle were analyzed. Levels of intracellular GSPT1 in blasts and normal blood cell types were quantitated by flow cytometry analysis. Transcript levels of ISR and NMD variants in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC) were measured by qPCR. Bone marrow (BM) core biopsies at screening, Cycle 1 Day 5 and 28, and Cycle 2 and 4 Day 28, were analyzed for GSPT1, cleaved caspase 3, and CD34 protein expression by immunohistochemistry. ATF3 and DDIT3 mRNA levels were assessed in BM samples by RNA in situ hybridization. Results: The rate and depth of GSPT1 loss in T cells and in circulating AML blasts increased with dose. A marked reduction in GSPT1 was observed in T cells and blast cells of most patients after the first dose of CC-90009 at all dose levels, and GSPT1 levels approached the assay floor between Days 2 and 5 at doses of 1.2 mg and higher on the D1-5 schedule. At 2.4 mg and higher on the D1-5 schedule, a reduction in GSPT1 levels of > 90% was observed in T cells (19 of 29 patients) and in blast cells (11 of 29 patients), with stronger GSPT1 reductions detected in AML blasts and normal T cells compared with B cells or granulocytes. In the 3 mg D1-5 cohort, patients with sustained GSPT1 reduction in peripheral blasts in the days following treatment had more persistent blast suppression compared with patients showing an earlier rebound of GSPT1. At 3 mg and 3.6 mg dose levels, continuous treatment (D1-5) resulted in slower kinetics of GSPT1 rebound and conferred superior antileukemic activity compared with the intermittent dosing schedule (D1-3/D8-10). In addition to measuring the direct target of CC-90009, GSPT1, we also investigated markers downstream of GSPT1 degradation. Several patients with deep and sustained GSPT1 loss in the high-dose cohorts (2.4 mg and above) showed increased levels of ISR-related transcripts (ATF3 and DDIT3) and NMD-associated splice variants (SRSF3 and SRSF6) in on-treatment PBMC samples. Similarly, in BM, deep GSPT1 loss coincided with induction of ATF3 and DDIT3 mRNA, increased cleaved caspase 3 expression, and reduced CD34+ blasts. These clinical findings are consistent with our preclinical studies in which GSPT1 loss culminated in apoptosis, which may be mediated through activation of ISR and inhibition of NMD pathways. Conclusions: CC-90009 is a novel CELMoD and a first-in-class GSPT1 degrader. A suite of novel pharmacodynamic assays performed on patient-derived peripheral blood cells and BM demonstrated a dose-dependent modulation of GSPT1, and showed that the preclinical mechanisms of ISR induction, NMD inhibition, and apoptosis can be confirmed in AML cells in patients. Deeper and more rapid GSPT1 degradation as well as delayed rebound were associated with more rapid, deeper, and more persistent blast reductions. Characterization of these pharmacodynamic responses in ongoing dose-schedule explorations will help identify the optimal scheme for the expansion phase and provide further insight into the mechanism of clinical response. Disclosures Fan: Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Wang:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Couto:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership, Patents & Royalties. Yao:Celgene Corporation: Employment. Uy:Astellas: Consultancy; Pfizer: Consultancy; Curis: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Consultancy. Zeidan:Pfizer: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Boehringer-Ingelheim: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Trovagene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; ADC Therapeutics: Research Funding; Jazz: Honoraria; Ariad: Honoraria; Agios: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Astellas: Honoraria; Daiichi Sankyo: Honoraria; Cardinal Health: Honoraria; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; BeyondSpring: Honoraria; Otsuka: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Acceleron Pharma: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Medimmune/AstraZeneca: Research Funding; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Montesinos:Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Karyopharm: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Teva: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Incyte: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. DeAngelo:Jazz Pharmaceuticals, Inc.: Consultancy; Takeda Pharmaceuticals: Consultancy; Shire: Consultancy; GlycoMimetics: Research Funding; Pfizer, Inc.: Consultancy; Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation: Consultancy, Research Funding; Incyte Corporation: Consultancy; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy; AbbVie, Inc.: Research Funding; Blue print Medicines: Consultancy, Research Funding; Amgen: Consultancy. Altman:Novartis: Consultancy; Cancer Expert Now: Consultancy; Biosight: Other: US Lead; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Agios: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; France Foundation: Speakers Bureau; prIME Oncology: Speakers Bureau; PeerView: Speakers Bureau; Theradex: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Data Safety and Monitoring Committee. Koprivnikar:Amgen: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Honoraria; Novartis: Speakers Bureau. Vyas:Astellas: Speakers Bureau; Pfizer: Speakers Bureau; Abbvie: Speakers Bureau; Daiichi Sankyo: Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Forty Seven, Inc.: Research Funding. Fløisand:Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene Corporation: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria. Gjertsen:Astellas: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; EU Horizon 2020: Research Funding; KinN Therapeutics AS: Equity Ownership; Pfizer: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; BerGenBio: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ERA PerMed: Research Funding; The Norwegian Cancer Society: Research Funding; Helse Vest Health Trust: Research Funding; Seattle Genetics: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Research Council of Norway: Research Funding; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; ACTII AS: Equity Ownership. Buchholz:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pourdehnad:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership. Pierce:Celgene Corporation: Employment, Equity Ownership.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Expérimental (laboratoire) · Signal consensuel: Expérimental (laboratoire)
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,099
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,946

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,014
Tête enseignante GPT0,300
Écart entre enseignants0,286 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeExpérimental (laboratoire)
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations8
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBloodMême sujetProtein Degradation and InhibitorsTravaux en français237 207