Breast Cancer Clinical Trial
Official title:
Foreseeing the Moments of Occurrence of Everolimus Long-term Side Effects by Follow up of Trough Blood Concentrations
Metastatic (HR-positive, HER2-negative) breast cancer (BC), advanced or unresectable
neuroendocrine tumours of pancreatic (pNET), gastrointestinal or lung origin and metastatic
renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are diseases with poor outcome. Everolimus increases patients'
median progression-free survival (PFS) with 4.6 months in metastatic BC (mBC), 7 months in
(p)NET and 3 months in mRCC. However, serious adverse events (AEs) occur frequently. This
reduces effectiveness of everolimus, because AEs are managed with dose reductions, treatment
interruptions or even complete discontinuation of everolimus.
Therapeutic-drug-monitoring (TDM) is used to adjust the prescribed daily dose, to maintain
effective everolimus whole blood concentrations, with the lowest possible risk of AEs. While
everolimus TDM has been common in transplantation medicine, it has not been implemented in
oncology.
The importance of TDM in oncology is supported by previous research which showed that a
2-fold increased everolimus whole blood trough concentration was associated with a
short-term risk of grade ≥ 3 pneumonitis, stomatitis and metabolic events. Moreover, an
exposure-toxicity relationship of everolimus in patients with thyroid cancer was observed,
since initial everolimus concentrations could be associated with early toxicity (< 12 weeks,
e.g. stomatitis). However, the association between initial everolimus measurements and
long-term AEs (≥12 weeks, e.g. pneumonitis, anorexia and anemia) of any grade and the need
for everolimus dose reductions could not be made. Since levels ±>18 µg/L were associated
with toxicity, the investigators assume that the upper therapeutic window of everolimus in
the oncologic setting will be ±18 µg/L. Similarly, a tendency to improved PFS and overall
survival was observed when Cmin in steady state was above 14.1 μg/L. This seems to be the
lower limit of the therapeutic window.
Before consensus about the feasibility of everolimus TDM in the oncologic setting can be
achieved, a number of questions (the knowledge gaps) need to be answered: 1. It is unknown
whether everolimus whole blood trough levels (over time) predict long-term AEs. 2. The
optimal concentration range for everolimus, with the treatment of mBC, mRCC, or (p)NET is
unknown, especially the upper limit associated with toxicity. 3. It is unknown what
everolimus concentration level is associated with the need for everolimus dose reductions.
Everolimus is an oral inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), a key signal
transduction molecule of the phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase/Akt pathway. This pathway, which
regulates cellular growth, proliferation, metabolism, survival and angiogenesis, is
frequently dysregulated in human cancers and thus is a rational target for anticancer
therapy. Everolimus is currently approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and U.S.
Food and Drug administration (FDA) for the treatment of different solid malignancies.
Metastatic (Hormone-Receptor [HR]-positive, HER2-negative) breast cancer (BC), advanced or
unresectable neuroendocrine tumours of pancreatic (pNET), gastrointestinal or lung origin
and metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) are diseases with poor outcome. Everolimus is
part of palliative treatment and increases patients' median progression-free survival (PFS)
with 4.6 months in metastatic BC (mBC), 7 months in pNET and 3 months in mRCC. However,
serious adverse events (AEs) occur frequently; stomatitis up to 67%, non-infectious
pneumonitis (NIP) up to 15%. This reduces effectiveness of everolimus, because AEs are
managed with dose reductions, treatment interruptions or even complete discontinuation of
everolimus.
Everolimus shows a large inter-individual pharmacokinetic variation in whole blood
concentrations, due to variability in oral drug availability, patient non-compliance (e.g.
due to drug-related toxicity, forgetting and/or overuse), drug-drug interactions with
co-medication and many other factors. Furthermore, variation in the population
pharmacokinetics of everolimus is caused by everolimus' hematocrit effect. This effect is
present at high everolimus concentrations in combination with low hematocrit values, which
is likely to be the case in the oncologic population. High incidences of anemia in oncologic
patients treated with everolimus have been described, respectively being 32.1%
(CI=17.5-51.3%) for all-grade (grades 1-4) toxicities and 6.9% (95% CI=4.1-11.3%) for
high-grade (grades 3-4) toxicities. Therefore, studies have recommended to correct the
everolimus whole blood concentrations for hematocrit determination.
The very different whole blood concentrations between individuals can result in
supratherapeutic or subtherapeutic exposure levels and consequently in over- or
undertreatment, respectively. Despite the inter-patient variability in systemic exposure,
everolimus is currently prescribed at a fixed dose. Given the narrow therapeutic index and a
positive exposure-efficacy relationship, there is a rationale for pharmacokinetically guided
dosing also known as therapeutic drug monitoring (TDM) of everolimus. Such an approach could
theoretically contribute to a tailor-made everolimus treatment with improved therapeutic
efficacy and decreased risk for toxicity. Since daily everolimus dosing demonstrates dose
proportionality and linear pharmacokinetics, this seems to be easily applicable.
Furthermore, requirements for dose reduction at physicians discretion can be supported when
it is known at what everolimus trough level a dose reduction is recommended.
Therapeutic-drug-monitoring (TDM) (i.e. measurement of everolimus whole blood levels after
venipuncture) is used to adjust the prescribed daily dose, to maintain effective everolimus
whole blood concentrations, with the lowest possible risk of AEs. In addition, TDM is a
useful tool for early detection of non-adherence, and might also be used to monitor the
effects of drug-drug interactions and food effects. While TDM, according to international
consensus, has been common in transplantation medicine for 10 years, it has not been
implemented in oncology. The importance of TDM in oncology is, however, supported by
previous research that showed a 2-fold increased trough concentration (Cmin) of everolimus
whole blood with a short-term risk of grade ≥ 3 pulmonary events (relative risk [RR] 1.9;
95% CI 1.1-3.3], stomatitis events (RR 1.5; 95% CI 1.1-2.1) and metabolic events (RR 1.3 95%
1.0-1.7). Moreover, an exposure-toxicity relationship of everolimus in patients with thyroid
cancer was observed, since initial everolimus concentrations could be associated with early
toxicity (< 12 weeks), i.e. stomatitis. However, the association between initial everolimus
measurements and long-term AEs (≥ 12 weeks, e.g. pneumonitis, anorexia and anemia) of any
grade and the need for everolimus dose reductions could not be made. Since a trough
concentration of approximately 18 µg/L was associated with toxicity, the investigators
assume that the upper therapeutic window of everolimus in the oncologic setting will be ±18
µg/L. Therefore, an upper threshold of >18 µg/L was considered for this study.Similarly, a
tendency to improved PFS and overall survival (OS) was noted when CminSS was above 14.1
μg/L. This might be the lower limit of the therapeutic window.
However, the following knowledge gaps exist: 1. It is unknown whether everolimus trough
whole blood levels (over time) predict for long-term AEs (≥12 weeks, e.g. pneumonitis,
anorexia and anemia). 2. The optimal concentration range for everolimus, for the treatment
of mBC, mRCC, or (p)NET is unknown, especially the upper limit associated with toxicity. 3.
It is unknown what everolimus concentration level is associated with the need for everolimus
dose reductions.
In order to quantitate the outcome toxicity, the number of dose reductions can be
investigated as this is the sum of all different toxicities experienced by patients and
these are also the toxicities that lead to clinical action by the treating physician.
Furthermore, especially all NCI-CTCAE v4.0 grade ≥2 are important, and special attention
should be focused on AEs that are highly prevalent, objectively measurable, clinically
relevant and/or untreatable. These AEs will be leading to dose reductions or discontinuation
of therapy.
Dose individualization based on the measured drug concentration could theoretically result
in less toxicity and more efficacy. Further studies are required to determine the clinical
utility of TDM for everolimus in oncology settings. Determination of everolimus
concentrations at the onset of severe AEs (dose interruptions or reductions) and disease
progression may enable better understanding of pathophysiology, permitting dose reduction at
the right moment rather than drug withdrawal in patients with high everolimus
concentrations. The clinical impact of this approach can be large, since everolimus
treatment optimization is better than unnecessary switching to the next line of palliative
treatment in these oncologic patients. This is supported by the study by Generali et al.,
finding the combination of everolimus plus exemestaan as first- or second-line therapy for
mBC patients more efficacious than several chemotherapy regimens that were reported in the
literature. Furthermore, it is important to realise that the initial concentration (< 12
weeks) does not reflect a change in steady-state trough concentration over time (≥12 weeks)
due to various reasons. Some of them being drug-drug interactions, high-fat food effects, a
change in haematocrit, non-adherence, dose-reductions and interruptions of the everolimus
treatment.
Follow up of the everolimus concentration over time implies frequent pharmacokinetic
sampling (blood draws). Nowadays everolimus exposure is determined by everolimus
concentration measurement in whole blood. Therefore, a venipuncture is always necessary.
This is invasive and requires patients to come to the hospital. It would be convenient for
patients to have their everolimus concentration determined by dried blood spot (DBS)
analysis. With DBS only a single drop of blood from the finger is necessary, which can be
done at home and send by regular mail for analysis. Previous studies have showed the
feasibility of the DBS approach in the oncologic setting. The physician may benefit from the
ease of the DBS sampling method providing results timely before the patient visits the
clinic for their (routine) check-up.
Previous methods for the measurement of everolimus by means of DBS have been developed. In
the past, emphasis has been put on the development and analytical validation of the assay
while the clinical validation was of minor importance. Some information has been gathered in
transplantation medicine. However, in patients with cancer, the correlation between
everolimus DBS concentrations and whole blood concentration is unknown. Furthermore,
information regarding the important everolimus hematocrit effect in DBS at high
concentration levels common in the oncology population is lacking. Therefore, the secondary
objective is to determine the everolimus concentration collected with DBS from a finger
prick and DBS paper spiked with a drop of venipunctured whole blood containing everolimus.
;
Status | Clinical Trial | Phase | |
---|---|---|---|
Recruiting |
NCT04681911 -
Inetetamab Combined With Pyrotinib and Chemotherapy in the Treatment of HER2 Positive Metastatic Breast Cancer
|
Phase 2 | |
Terminated |
NCT04066790 -
Pyrotinib or Trastuzumab Plus Nab-paclitaxel as Neoadjuvant Therapy in HER2-positive Breast Cancer
|
Phase 2 | |
Completed |
NCT04890327 -
Web-based Family History Tool
|
N/A | |
Completed |
NCT03591848 -
Pilot Study of a Web-based Decision Aid for Young Women With Breast Cancer, During the Proposal for Preservation of Fertility
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT03954197 -
Evaluation of Priming Before in Vitro Maturation for Fertility Preservation in Breast Cancer Patients
|
N/A | |
Terminated |
NCT02202746 -
A Study to Assess the Safety and Efficacy of the VEGFR-FGFR-PDGFR Inhibitor, Lucitanib, Given to Patients With Metastatic Breast Cancer
|
Phase 2 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT01472094 -
The Hurria Older PatiEnts (HOPE) With Breast Cancer Study
|
||
Completed |
NCT06049446 -
Combining CEM and Magnetic Seed Localization of Non-Palpable Breast Tumors
|
||
Withdrawn |
NCT06057636 -
Hypnosis for Pain in Black Women With Advanced Breast Cancer: A Feasibility Study
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT05560334 -
A Single-Arm, Open, Exploratory Clinical Study of Pemigatinib in the Treatment of HER2-negative Advanced Breast Cancer Patients With FGFR Alterations
|
Phase 2 | |
Active, not recruiting |
NCT05501769 -
ARV-471 in Combination With Everolimus for the Treatment of Advanced or Metastatic ER+, HER2- Breast Cancer
|
Phase 1 | |
Recruiting |
NCT04631835 -
Phase I Study of the HS-10352 in Patients With Advanced Breast Cancer
|
Phase 1 | |
Completed |
NCT04307407 -
Exercise in Breast Cancer Survivors
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT03544762 -
Correlation of 16α-[18F]Fluoro-17β-estradiol PET Imaging With ESR1 Mutation
|
Phase 3 | |
Terminated |
NCT02482389 -
Study of Preoperative Boost Radiotherapy
|
N/A | |
Enrolling by invitation |
NCT00068003 -
Harvesting Cells for Experimental Cancer Treatments
|
||
Completed |
NCT00226967 -
Stress, Diurnal Cortisol, and Breast Cancer Survival
|
||
Recruiting |
NCT06019325 -
Rhomboid Intercostal Plane Block on Chronic Pain Incidence and Acute Pain Scores After Mastectomy
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT06037954 -
A Study of Mental Health Care in People With Cancer
|
N/A | |
Recruiting |
NCT06006390 -
CEA Targeting Chimeric Antigen Receptor T Lymphocytes (CAR-T) in the Treatment of CEA Positive Advanced Solid Tumors
|
Phase 1/Phase 2 |