32
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      A Review of Targeted Therapies Evaluated by the Pediatric Preclinical Testing Program for Osteosarcoma

      review-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Osteosarcoma, the most common malignant bone tumor of childhood, is a high-grade primary bone sarcoma that occurs mostly in adolescence. Standard treatment consists of surgery in combination with multi-agent chemotherapy regimens. The development and approval of imatinib for Philadelphia chromosome-positive acute lymphoblastic leukemia in children and the fully human monoclonal antibody, anti-GD2, as part of an immune therapy for high-risk neuroblastoma patients have established the precedent for use of targeted inhibitors along with standard chemotherapy backbones. However, few targeted agents tested have achieved traditional clinical endpoints for osteosarcoma. Many biological agents demonstrating anti-tumor responses in preclinical and early-phase clinical testing have failed to reach response thresholds to justify randomized trials with large numbers of patients. The development of targeted therapies for pediatric cancer remains a significant challenge. To aid in the prioritization of new agents for clinical testing, the Pediatric Preclinical Testing Program (PPTP) has developed reliable and robust preclinical pediatric cancer models to rapidly screen agents for activity in multiple childhood cancers and establish pharmacological parameters and effective drug concentrations for clinical trials. In this article, we examine a range of standard and novel agents that have been evaluated by the PPTP, and we discuss the preclinical and clinical development of these for the treatment of osteosarcoma. We further demonstrate that committed resources for hypothesis-driven drug discovery and development are needed to yield clinical successes in the search for new therapies for this pediatric disease.

          Related collections

          Most cited references95

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Biology and therapeutic advances for pediatric osteosarcoma.

          Osteosarcoma is the most common malignant bone tumor in children and adolescents. Survival for these patients was poor with the use of surgery and/or radiotherapy. The introduction of multi-agent chemotherapy dramatically improved the outcome for these patients and the majority of modern series report 3-year disease-free survival of 60%-70%. This paper describes current strategies for treating patients with osteosarcoma as well as review of the clinical features, radiologic and diagnostic work-up, and pathology. The authors review the state of the art management for patients with osteosarcoma in North America and Europe including the use of limb-salvage procedures and reconstruction as well as discuss the etiologic and biologic factors associated with tumor development. Therapy-related sequelae and future directions in the biology and therapy for these patients are also discussed. Copyright AlphaMed Press
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Sorafenib: a review of its use in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma.

            Sorafenib (Nexavar) is an orally active multikinase inhibitor that is approved in the EU for the treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma. Monotherapy with sorafenib prolongs overall survival and delays the time to progression in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who are not candidates for potentially curative treatment or transarterial chemoembolization. Sorafenib is generally well tolerated in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Thus, sorafenib represents an important advance in the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and is the new standard of care for this condition. The bi-aryl urea sorafenib is an oral multikinase inhibitor that inhibits cell surface tyrosine kinase receptors (e.g. vascular endothelial growth factor receptors and platelet-derived growth factor receptor-beta) and downstream intracellular serine/threonine kinases (e.g. Raf-1, wild-type B-Raf and mutant B-Raf); these kinases are involved in tumour cell proliferation and tumour angiogenesis. In vitro, dose-dependent inhibition of cell proliferation and induction of apoptosis was seen with sorafenib in human hepatocellular carcinoma cells lines. Sorafenib demonstrated dose-dependent antitumour activity in a murine xenograft model of human hepatocellular carcinoma. Steady-state plasma concentrations were reached within 7 days in patients with advanced, refractory solid tumours who received twice-daily oral sorafenib. Metabolism of sorafenib occurs primarily in the liver and is mediated via cytochrome P450 (CYP) 3A4 and uridine diphosphate glucuronosyltransferase 1A9. In advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, differences in sorafenib pharmacokinetics between Child-Pugh A and B patients were not considered clinically significant. Sorafenib may be associated with drug interactions. For example, sorafenib exposure was reduced by an average 37% with concomitant administration of the CYP3A4 inducer rifampicin (rifampin); sorafenib concentrations may also be decreased by other CYP3A4 inducers. Monotherapy with oral sorafenib 400 mg twice daily prolonged median overall survival and delayed the median time to progression in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, according to the results of two randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre, phase III trials (the SHARP trial and the Asia-Pacific trial). There was no significant difference between sorafenib and placebo recipients in the median time to symptomatic progression in either trial. The vast majority of patients included in these trials were Child-Pugh A. Combination therapy with sorafenib plus doxorubicin did not delay the median time to progression to a significant extent compared with doxorubicin alone in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, according to the results of a randomized, double-blind, phase II trial. However, the median durations of overall survival and progression-free survival were significantly longer in patients receiving sorafenib plus doxorubicin than in those receiving doxorubicin alone. Combination therapy with sorafenib plus tegafur/uracil or mitomycin also showed potential in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, according to the results of noncomparative trials. Monotherapy with oral sorafenib was generally well tolerated in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma, with a manageable adverse effect profile; diarrhoea and hand-foot skin reaction were consistently the most commonly occurring drug-related adverse events in clinical trials. In the SHARP trial, drug-related adverse events of any grade occurring in significantly more sorafenib than placebo recipients included diarrhoea, hand-foot skin reaction, anorexia, alopecia, weight loss, dry skin, abdominal pain, voice changes and 'other' dermatological events. A similar tolerability profile was seen in the Asia-Pacific trial. As expected given the addition of a chemotherapy agent, the adverse event profile in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma who received combination therapy with sorafenib plus doxorubicin differed somewhat to that seen with sorafenib monotherapy in the SHARP trial. In patients receiving sorafenib plus doxorubicin, the most commonly occurring all-cause adverse events (all grades) included fatigue, neutropenia, diarrhoea, elevated bilirubin levels, abdominal pain, hand-foot skin reaction, left ventricular dysfunction, hypertension and febrile neutropenia.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              R1507, a monoclonal antibody to the insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor, in patients with recurrent or refractory Ewing sarcoma family of tumors: results of a phase II Sarcoma Alliance for Research through Collaboration study.

              The type 1 insulin-like growth factor 1 receptor (IGF-1R) has been implicated in the pathogenesis of the Ewing sarcoma family of tumors (ESFT). We conducted a multicenter phase II study of the fully human IGF-1R monoclonal antibody R1507 in patients with recurrent or refractory ESFT. Patients ≥ 2 years of age with refractory or recurrent ESFT received R1507 at doses of 9 mg/kg intravenously one a week or 27 mg/kg intravenously every three weeks. Response was measured by using WHO criteria. Tumor imaging was performed every 6 weeks for 24 weeks and then every 12 weeks. From December 2007 through April 2010, 115 eligible patients from 31 different institutions were enrolled. The median age was 25 years (range, 8 to 78 years). The location of the primary tumor was bone in 57% of patients and extraskeletal in 43% of patients. A total of 109 patients were treated with R1507 9 mg/kg/wk, and six patients were treated with 27 mg/kg/3 wk. The overall complete response/partial response rate was 10% (95% CI, 4.9% to 16.5%). The median duration of response was 29 weeks (range, 12 to 94 weeks), and the median overall survival was 7.6 months (95% CI, 6 to 9.7 months). Ten of 11 responses were observed in patients who presented with primary bone tumors (P = .016). The most common adverse events of grades 3 to 4 were pain (15%), anemia (8%), thrombocytopenia (7%), and asthenia (5%). R1507 was a well-tolerated agent that had meaningful and durable benefit in a subgroup of patients with ESFT. The identification of markers that are predictive of a benefit is necessary to fully capitalize on this approach.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Front Oncol
                Front Oncol
                Front. Oncol.
                Frontiers in Oncology
                Frontiers Media S.A.
                2234-943X
                31 May 2013
                2013
                : 3
                : 132
                Affiliations
                [1] 1Nemours Center for Childhood Cancer and Blood Disorders, Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children , Wilmington, DE, USA
                [2] 2The Albert Einstein College of Medicine , Bronx, NY, USA
                Author notes

                Edited by: Stephen Lessnick, University of Utah, USA

                Reviewed by: David Loeb, Johns Hopkins University, USA; Steven DuBois, UCSF School of Medicine, USA

                *Correspondence: E. Anders Kolb, Nemours Center for Childhood Cancer and Blood Disorders, Alfred I. duPont Hospital for Children, 1701 Rockland Road, Wilmington, DE 19803, USA e-mail: eakolb@ 123456nemours.org

                This article was submitted to Frontiers in Pediatric Oncology, a specialty of Frontiers in Oncology.

                Article
                10.3389/fonc.2013.00132
                3668267
                23755370
                7158207f-2fbb-41bd-abf0-05db5cea9e11
                Copyright © 2013 Sampson, Gorlick, Kamara and Kolb.

                This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in other forums, provided the original authors and source are credited and subject to any copyright notices concerning any third-party graphics etc.

                History
                : 06 February 2013
                : 12 May 2013
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 2, Equations: 0, References: 110, Pages: 12, Words: 11577
                Categories
                Oncology
                Review Article

                Oncology & Radiotherapy
                pediatric preclinical testing program,osteosarcoma,event-free survival,complete response,maintained complete response,partial response,progressive disease with growth delay,progressive disease

                Comments

                Comment on this article