MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A phase I dose-escalation study of the MDM2-p53 antagonist BI 907828 in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors.

2021· article· en· W3168075620 on OpenAlexaff
Patricia LoRusso, Mrinal M. Gounder, Manish R. Patel, Noboru Yamamoto, Todd M. Bauer, Scott A. Laurie, Rolf Grempler, Teffany Davenport, Junxian Geng, Maren Rohrbacher, Mehdi Lahmar

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicCancer Genomics and Diagnostics
Canadian institutionsOttawa Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineNeutropeniaTolerabilityPharmacokineticsNauseaPharmacodynamicsDosingInternal medicineGastroenterologyPharmacologyToxicityAdverse effect

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3016 Background: BI 907828, a highly potent and orally administered MDM2-p53 antagonist, showed antitumor efficacy in vivo, especially in TP53 wild-type MDM2-amplified de-differentiated liposarcoma (DDLPS) patient-derived xenografts and syngeneic models. Methods: NCT03449381 is a phase I study of BI 907828 in pts with solid tumors. The objectives of the dose-escalation part were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) based on the frequency of pts with dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) during cycle 1, determine the recommended dose for expansion, and evaluate the safety and tolerability of two dosing schedules: BI 907828 given on day 1 of 21-day cycles (Arm A) or days 1 and 8 of 28-day cycles (Arm B). Dose escalation was guided by a Bayesian logistic regression model. The secondary objectives include pharmacokinetics (PK), pharmacodynamics and antitumor activity. Results: At January 15, 2021, 54 pts with advanced solid tumors (median of 2 lines of prior systemic therapies; range 0–11) were treated with BI 907828 (Arm A, 29 pts, dose range 10–80 mg; Arm B, 25 pts, dose range 5–60 mg). In Arm A, 5 pts experienced DLTs in cycle 1, including one Grade (Gr) 3 Nausea and one Gr 3 Thrombocytopenia at 45 mg, one Gr 3 Enterocolitis at 60 mg, and one Gr 4 Neutropenia and one Gr 4 Thrombocytopenia at 80 mg. In Arm B, 3 DLTs were reported: one Gr 4 Thrombocytopenia at 45 mg, one Gr 4 Neutropenia associated with Gr 4 Thrombocytopenia, and one Gr 3 Neutropenia at 60 mg. The most common Gr 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were Thrombocytopenia (28.6%), Neutropenia (10.7%) and Nausea (10.7%) in Arm A, and Thrombocytopenia (16.6%) and Neutropenia (12.5%) in Arm B. Preliminary PK data indicate that BI 907828 reaches Tmax at 4–6 h. Mean plasma exposures (Cmax and AUC0-inf) increased with dose. The geometric mean (gMean) Clearance/F was 5–19 mL/min and the gMean apparent volume of distribution was 23–57 L. The gMean half-lives estimated after the 1st dose were 26–55 h. Inter-patient variability in exposure was moderate. An increase in the target engagement biomarker GDF-15 in plasma was observed. The mean fold-change from baseline ranged from 8 to 49. Antitumor activity was seen in both schedules. In Arm A, a confirmed PR was seen in 2 pts with MDM2-amplified LPS (one PR lasted > 2 years) and SD in 17 pts. In Arm B, 2 pts had PR (one confirmed in MDM2-amplified LPS and one not yet confirmed in MDM2-amplified pancreatic adenocarcinoma) and 14 had SD. Of note, 5 of 10 pts with DDLPS were progression-free for ≥9 months. Conclusions: BI 907828 showed a manageable safety profile, favorable PK properties and early signs of efficacy, especially in MDM2-amplified tumors. With both dosing regimens, DLTs were Neutropenia and Thrombocytopenia. Non-hematologic AEs, mainly gastrointestinal, were mostly low-grade and not dose-limiting. The MTD of 60 mg in Arm A (day 1 of 21-day cycles) and 45 mg in Arm B (days 1 and 8 of 28-day cycles) are awaiting confirmation. Clinical trial information: NCT03449381.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Non-randomized trial · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.377 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNon-randomized trial
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Genomics and DiagnosticsFrench-language works237,207