Abstract CT012: Open-label, multicenter, Phase Ib study to assess safety, tolerability and efficacy of adavosertib monotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumors: Expansion cohorts
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BackgroundAdavosertib (AZD1775) is a first-in-class, selective, small-molecule inhibitor of Wee1. Previously we reported safety and efficacy of adavosertib monotherapy in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors (NCT02482311; Bauer et al Cancer Res 2016;76[14 Suppl]); here we report safety and efficacy data from expansion cohorts based on tumor type.MethodsA total of 80 pts grouped into 6 biomarker-matched cohorts (Table) received adavosertib (175 mg PO bid; days 1–3 and 8–10 per 21-day cycle). Eligible pts had: confirmed diagnosis of ovarian cancer (OC), small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) or triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC); prior treatment (Tx) for metastatic/recurrent disease (≥3 prior Tx for pts with BRCAwt OC; progression following PARPi Tx for BRCA1/2m OC pts; ≤1 chemotherapy-based Tx for SCLC and ≥1 chemotherapy-based Tx for TNBC); measurable disease. Primary objective assessments: ORR; DCR; PFS (RECIST v1.1); safety. Tumor assessments were performed every 6 weeks in year 1 and every 12 weeks thereafter until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. Blood and tumor samples were collected for correlative biomarker and pharmacokinetic (PK) analyses.ResultsMedian total Tx duration was 2.4 months. Most frequently reported adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (61%), nausea (50%) and fatigue (43%). Most commonly reported grade ≥3 AEs were diarrhea (7.5%), nausea, fatigue and small intestine obstruction (6%). AEs leading to dose interruptions (22.5%), reductions (11.3%) or discontinuations (16.3%) were reported. The study showed preliminary antitumor activity, particularly in BRCAwt as well as PARPi-failure BRCAm OC pts (Table). PK and biomarker analyses will be presented.ConclusionsAdavosertib was generally well tolerated and showed preliminary antitumor activity. DCR was modest across all patient cohorts.Patient cohortParameterOC, BRCAwtOC, BRCAm, PARPi failureTNBC, CCNE1/MYC/MYCL1/ MYCN non-amplifiedTNBC, CCNE1/MYC/MYCL1/ MYCN amplifiedSCLC, CCNE1/MYC/MYCL1/ MYCN non-amplifiedSCLC, CCNE1/MYC/MYCL1/MYCN amplifiedTotalPatients who received treatment, n163013612380Median age, years (range)62.5 (47–83)59.5 (44–73)58.0 (35–81)54.0 (43–78)64.5 (54–74)63.0 (56–69)60.0(35–83)Prior regimens, n (%) 1 2 3 4 5 6 >6 Median0 0 1 (6) 3 (19) 2 (13) 1 (6) 9 (56) 70 0 2 (7) 3 (10) 7 (23) 8 (27) 10 (33) 60 3 (23) 2 (15) 1 (8) 2 (15) 3 (23) 2 (15) 50 0 1 (17) 2 (33) 2 (33) 1 (17) 0 4.53 (25) 5 (42) 3 (25) 0 1 (8) 0 0 20 1 (33) 2 (67) 0 0 0 0 33 (4) 9 (11) 11 (14) 9 (11) 14 (18) 13 (16) 21 (26) 5ECOG PS, n (%) 0 18 (50) 8 (50)10 (33) 20 (67)4 (31) 9 (69)1 (17) 5 (83)2 (17) 10 (83)1 (33) 2 (67)26 (33)54 (68)ORR, n (%) CR* PR* SD ≥5 weeks PD NE1 (6) 0 1 (6) 10 (63) 4 (25) 1 (6)1 (3) 0 1 (3) 22 (73) 5 (17) 2 (7)0 0 0 9 (69) 3 (23) 1 (8)0 0 0 3 (50) 3 (50) 01 (8) 0 1 (8) 3 (25) 7 (58) 1 (8)0 0 0 1 (33) 2 (67) 03 (4) 0 3 (4) 48 (60) 24 (30) 5 (6)DCR, n (%)†11 (69)23 (77)9 (69)3 (50)4 (33)1 (33)51 (64)Median PFS, months4.53.93.12.01.31.23.0*Confirmed CR/PR; †DCR determined by CR + PR + SD. BRCA1/2m, BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutated; BRCAwt, BRCA1 and BRCA2 wild type; CR, complete response; DCR, disease control rate; ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; NE, not evaluable; ORR, objective response rate; PARPi, PARP inhibitor; PD, progressive disease; PFS, progression-free survival; PR, partial response; SD, stable diseaseCitation Format: Todd M. Bauer, Kathleen Moore, Janet S. Rader, Fiona Simpkins, Alain Mita, J Thaddeus Beck, Lowell Hart, Quincy Chu, Amit Oza, Anna V. Tinker, Karen So, Esteban Rodrigo Imedio, Sanjeev Kumar, Ganesh M. Mugundu, Suzanne Jenkins, Juliann Chmielecki, Suzanne Jones, David R. Spigel, Siqing Fu. Open-label, multicenter, Phase Ib study to assess safety, tolerability and efficacy of adavosertib monotherapy in patients with advanced solid tumors: Expansion cohorts [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2019; 2019 Mar 29-Apr 3; Atlanta, GA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2019;79(13 Suppl):Abstract nr CT012.
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 enseignantsNi 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.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,002 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».