MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Long-term efficacy, safety and PK data of TH1902 (sudocetaxel zendusortide) in solid tumors: A novel SORT1-targeting peptide-drug-conjugate (PDC).

2024· article· en· W4400274087 on OpenAlexaff
Ira Winer, Minal Barve, Satish Shah, Manish Sharma, Christian Marsolais, Michel Demeule, Kathya Daigle, Lynn Marie Douglas, Funda Meric‐Bernstam

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Clinical Oncology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCancer Treatment and Pharmacology
Canadian institutionsTheratechnologies (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedicineConjugateDrugPeptideSolid tumorCancer researchPharmacologyTerm (time)Safety profileOncologyInternal medicineCancerAdverse effectBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

3081 Background: TH1902 is a novel SORT1 targeting PDC. It exploits the natural function of SORT1, a scavenger receptor, which rapidly internalizes its natural ligands via endocytosis (internalization half-life ≤4 min). SORT1 is highly expressed in multiple solid tumors compared to normal healthy tissues making it an attractive target for rapid delivery of anti-cancer therapeutics. In this updated analysis, further data on long-term efficacy, safety and PK is presented from Parts 1&2 of Ph1 with focus on the 300 mg/m 2 q3w. Due to safety observations in 6 patients (pts) enrolled at 420 mg/m 2 dose level (Gr 3 neuropathy [n=2], Gr 4 neutropenia [n=2], Gr 3 ocular [n=1] and Gr 2 skin [n=3] toxicities, the dose was reduced to 300 mg/m 2 in Part 2. Methods: Primary objective of the study was to characterize the safety/tolerability of TH1902. Part 1 (modified intrapatient dose escalation) included pts with recurrent/refractory advanced solid tumors (all comers) with no limit on number of previous therapies, including taxanes. Part 2 (dose expansion) included pts with known high SORT1 expression (e.g. OVC, endometrial, TNBC, melanoma). Results: Twenty-five heavily pretreated pts were enrolled in the 300 mg/m 2 group. At least one TRAE was observed in 80% of pts. Grade 3 (Gr 3) events of interest were neuropathy (12%), keratitis (8%), anemia (8%), and neutropenia (4%), for an overall incidence of 32%. All grade neuropathy was 28%. Most TRAEs were mild to moderate severity and manageable with standard supportive care or dose reductions. Safety profile of TH1902 was different from that of docetaxel. PK measures of Cmax and AUC showed that exposure to free docetaxel was much lower than that of TH1902; Cmax = 0.58 μM for free docetaxel vs 30.4 μM for TH1902 and AUC24 = 3.1 h.nmol/mL for free docetaxel vs 74.8 h.nmol/mL for TH1902. Three pts exhibited RECIST 1.1 confirmed long-term stabilizations of disease, even after drug discontinuation, which ranged from 8 to 19 mos from treatment initiation, of which one OvC pt had overall PR (with RECIST 1.1 confirmed CR in target lesions) and remained on treatment for a total of 5 months. In addition, one endometrial cancer (part 1) was dose escalated from 60-360 mg/m 2 and completed 11 cycles in total. Pt remained in SD during the 8 mos of treatment, up to time of consent withdrawal. All 4 pts had prior taxane exposure. Conclusions: TH1902 induces durable disease stabilization that lasts beyond treatment completion, suggesting a unique, multimodal mechanism of action (MOA) that differs from other cancer therapeutics. TH1902 has a manageable safety profile at 300mg/m 2 with few Gr3 AEs. Low levels of free docetaxel in human plasma may in part explain the low rate of taxane related AEs (i.e. neutropenia, no alopecia). Next phase of the study involves dose optimization to further limit toxicity and improve efficacy. Clinical trial information: NCT04706962 .

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.177
GPT teacher head0.513
Teacher spread0.335 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Clinical OncologySame topicCancer Treatment and PharmacologyFrench-language works237,207