10
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Phase 1 study of selinexor plus carfilzomib and dexamethasone for the treatment of relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma

      research-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.

          Summary

          Selinexor, an oral Selective Inhibitor of Nuclear Export, targets Exportin 1 ( XPO1, also termed CRM1). Non‐clinical studies support combining selinexor with proteasome inhibitors ( PIs) and corticosteroids to overcome resistance in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma ( RRMM). We conducted a phase I dose‐escalation trial of twice‐weekly selinexor in combination with carfilzomib and dexamethasone ( SKd) to determine maximum tolerated dose in patients with RRMM ( N = 21), with an expansion cohort to assess activity in carfilzomib‐refractory disease and identify a recommended phase II dose ( RP2D). During dose escalation, there was one dose‐limiting toxicity (cardiac failure). The RP2D of twice‐weekly SKd was selinexor 60 mg, carfilzomib 20/27 mg/m 2 and dexamethasone 20 mg. The most common grade 3/4 treatment‐emergent adverse events included thrombocytopenia (71%), anaemia (33%), lymphopenia (33%), neutropenia (33%) and infections (24%). Rates of ≥minimal response, ≥partial response and very good partial response were 71%, 48% and 14%, respectively; similar response outcomes were observed for dual‐class refractory ( PI and immunomodulatory drug)/quad‐exposed (carfilzomib, bortezomib, lenalidomide and pomalidomide) patients ( n = 17), and patients refractory to carfilzomib in last line of therapy ( n = 13). Median progression‐free survival was 3·7 months, and overall survival was 22·4 months in the overall population. SKd was tolerable and re‐established disease control in RRMM patients, including carfilzomib‐refractory patients.

          Registered at ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02199665)

          Related collections

          Most cited references29

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: found
          Is Open Access

          Nucleo-cytoplasmic transport as a therapeutic target of cancer

          Shuttling of specific proteins out of the nucleus is essential for the regulation of the cell cycle and proliferation of both normal and malignant tissues. Dysregulation of this fundamental process may affect many other important cellular processes such as tumor growth, inflammatory response, cell cycle, and apoptosis. It is known that XPO1 (Exportin-1/Chromosome Region Maintenance 1/CRM1) is the main mediator of nuclear export in many cell types. Nuclear proteins exported to the cytoplasm by XPO1 include the drug targets topoisomerase IIα (topo IIα) and BCR-ABL and tumor suppressor proteins such as Rb, APC, p53, p21, and p27. XPO1 can mediate cell proliferation through several pathways: (i) the sub-cellular localization of NES-containing oncogenes and tumor suppressor proteins, (ii) the control of the mitotic apparatus and chromosome segregation, and (iii) the maintenance of nuclear and chromosomal structures. The XPO1 protein is elevated in ovarian carcinoma, glioma, osteosarcoma, pancreatic and cervical cancer. There is a growing body of research indicating that XPO1 may have an important role as a prognostic marker in solid tumors. Because of this, nuclear export inhibition through XPO1 is a potential target for therapeutic intervention in many cancers. The best understood XPO1 inhibitors are the small molecule nuclear export inhibitors (NEIs; Leptomycin B and derivatives, ratjadones, PKF050-638, valtrate, ACA, CBS9106, selinexor/KPT-330, and verdinexor/KPT-335). Selinexor and verdinexor are orally bioavailable, highly potent, small molecules that are classified as Selective Inhibitors of Nuclear Export (SINE). KPT-330 is the only NEI currently in Phase I/II human clinical trials in hematological and solid cancers. Of all the potential targets in nuclear cytoplasmic transport, the nuclear export receptor XPO1 remains the best understood and most advanced therapeutic target for the treatment of cancer.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Carfilzomib, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone for relapsed or refractory myeloma.

            Treatment options for patients with heavily pretreated relapsed and/or refractory multiple myeloma remain limited. We evaluated a novel therapeutic regimen consisting of carfilzomib, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (CPD) in an open-label, multicenter, phase 1, dose-escalation study. Patients who relapsed after prior therapy or were refractory to the most recently received therapy were eligible. All patients were refractory to prior lenalidomide. Patients received carfilzomib IV on days 1, 2, 8, 9, 15, and 16 (starting dose of 20/27 mg/m(2)), pomalidomide once daily on days 1 to 21 (4 mg as the initial dose level), and dexamethasone (40 mg oral or IV) on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 of 28-day cycles. The primary objective was to evaluate the safety and determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) of the regimen. A total of 32 patients were enrolled. The MTD of the regimen was dose level 1 (carfilzomib 20/27 mg/m(2), pomalidomide 4 mg, dexamethasone 40 mg). Hematologic adverse events (AEs) occurred in ≥60% of all patients, including 11 patients with grade ≥3 anemia. Dyspnea was limited to grade 1/2 in 10 patients. Peripheral neuropathy was uncommon and limited to grade 1/2. Eight patients had dose reductions during therapy, and 7 patients discontinued treatment due to AEs. Two deaths were noted on study due to pneumonia and pulmonary embolism (n = 1 each). The combination of CPD is well-tolerated and highly active in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma. This trial was registered at www.clinicaltrials.gov as #NCT01464034.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Validation Study of the American Joint Committee on Cancer Eighth Edition Prognostic Stage Compared With the Anatomic Stage in Breast Cancer

              Question Does the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition breast cancer prognostic stage provide more refined stratification with respect to disease-specific survival than the anatomic stage? Findings Patients with breast cancer treated with surgery as an initial intervention were identified in a database from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (n = 3327, years of treatment 2007-2013, median follow-up of 5 years) and the California Cancer Registry (n = 54 727, years of treatment 2005-2009, median follow-up of 7 years). In both cohorts, the prognostic stage was significantly more accurate than the anatomic stage. Meaning The newly introduced prognostic stage is more accurate than the anatomic stage, supporting its use in clinical practice. Importance The American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) eighth edition staging manual introduced a new prognostic stage for breast cancer incorporating biologic factors in addition to traditional anatomic factors. Objective To perform a validation study of the AJCC eighth edition prognostic stage in a single-institution cohort and a large population database. Design, Setting, and Participants Patients with breast cancer treated with surgery as an initial intervention were identified in a prospective institutional database from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and the California Cancer Registry. Vital status data were complete through December 31, 2016, in The University of Texas MD Anderson cohort and through December 31, 2014, in the California Cancer Registry cohort. Patients receiving neoadjuvant systemic therapy, those with inflammatory or rare breast cancers, and those with unknown clinicopathologic factors were excluded. Factors evaluated included T, N, and M categories and tumor grade, as well as estrogen receptor, progesterone receptor, and HER2 status. Main Outcomes and Measures Disease-specific survival was calculated by the Kaplan-Meier method. The Harrell concordance index (C index) was used to quantify models’ predictive performance, and the Akaike information criterion (AIC) was used to compare model fits. Results A total of 3327 patients with stage I to IIIC breast cancer treated between 2007 and 2013 at The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center (median follow-up of 5 years) with complete clinicopathologic data were identified. Compared with the AJCC anatomic stage, the prognostic stage upstaged 29.5% of patients and downstaged 28.1%. The prognostic stage (C index, 0.8357 and AIC, 816.8) provided more accurate stratification with respect to disease-specific survival than the anatomic stage (C index, 0.737 and AIC, 1039.8) ( P  < .001 for the C index). A total of 54 727 patients with stage I to IV breast cancer treated between 2005 and 2009 were identified in the California Cancer Registry (median follow-up of 7 years). The prognostic stage upstaged 31.0% of patients and downstaged 20.6%. The prognostic stage (C index, 0.8426 and AIC, 80 661.68) performed better than the anatomic stage (C index, 0.8097 and AIC, 81 577.89) ( P  < .001 for the C index). Conclusions and Relevance The prognostic stage provided more accurate prognostic information than the anatomic stage alone in both a single-institution cohort and a large population database, thereby supporting its use in breast cancer staging. This validation study compares the American Joint Committee on Cancer eighth edition prognostic stage with the anatomic stage among patients with breast cancer in a single-institution cohort and a large population database.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                ajakubowiak@medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu
                Journal
                Br J Haematol
                Br. J. Haematol
                10.1111/(ISSN)1365-2141
                BJH
                British Journal of Haematology
                John Wiley and Sons Inc. (Hoboken )
                0007-1048
                1365-2141
                24 May 2019
                August 2019
                : 186
                : 4 ( doiID: 10.1111/bjh.v186.4 )
                : 549-560
                Affiliations
                [ 1 ] University of Chicago Medical Center Chicago IL USA
                [ 2 ] Weill Cornell Medical College New York NY USA
                [ 3 ] Department of Medicine Division of Hematology/Oncology University of Michigan School of Medicine Ann Arbor MI USA
                [ 4 ] Tisch Cancer Institute/Multiple Myeloma Program Mount Sinai School of Medicine New York NY USA
                [ 5 ] Mayo Clinic, Phoenix, AZ, and International Myeloma Foundation Los Angeles CA USA
                [ 6 ] Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute Wayne State University Detroit MI USA
                [ 7 ]Present address: Translational Genomics Research Institute City of Hope Cancer Center Phoenix AZ USA
                Author notes
                [*] [* ] Correspondence: Professor Andrzej J. Jakubowiak, Section of Hematology/Oncology University of Chicago Medical Center, 5841 S Maryland Ave, MC 2115, Chicago, IL 60637‐6613, USA.

                E‐mail: ajakubowiak@ 123456medicine.bsd.uchicago.edu

                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4550-4726
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3576-9106
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1741-2795
                Article
                BJH15969
                10.1111/bjh.15969
                6772147
                31124580
                79ff1c4f-c84c-4fb5-bbbb-ae2fe5488339
                © 2019 The Authors. British Journal of Haematology published by British Society for Haematology and John Wiley & Sons Ltd

                This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 26 November 2018
                : 22 March 2019
                Page count
                Figures: 3, Tables: 4, Pages: 12, Words: 9039
                Funding
                Funded by: University of Chicago
                Categories
                Research Paper
                Haematological Malignancy
                Custom metadata
                2.0
                bjh15969
                August 2019
                Converter:WILEY_ML3GV2_TO_NLMPMC version:5.6.9 mode:remove_FC converted:01.10.2019

                Hematology
                relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma,selinexor,carfilzomib,dexamethasone
                Hematology
                relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma, selinexor, carfilzomib, dexamethasone

                Comments

                Comment on this article