Phase I study of nintedanib in Japanese patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and liver impairment

Takuji Okusaka, Taiga Otsuka, Hideki Ueno, Shuichi Mitsunaga, Rie Sugimoto, Kei Muro, Isao Saito, Yusuke Tadayasu, Kohei Inoue, Arsene-Bienvenu Loembé, Masafumi Ikeda, Takuji Okusaka, Taiga Otsuka, Hideki Ueno, Shuichi Mitsunaga, Rie Sugimoto, Kei Muro, Isao Saito, Yusuke Tadayasu, Kohei Inoue, Arsene-Bienvenu Loembé, Masafumi Ikeda

Abstract

This phase I, dose-escalation study evaluated the safety, preliminary efficacy and pharmacokinetics of nintedanib, a triple angiokinase inhibitor, in Japanese patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma and mild/moderate liver impairment. Thirty patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma were enrolled to groups, depending on whether liver impairment was mild (group I, aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase ≤2× upper limit of normal and Child-Pugh score 5 [n = 14] or 6 [n = 2]) or moderate (group II, Child-Pugh score 5-6 and aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase >2× to ≤5× upper limit of normal [n = 7] or Child-Pugh score 7 [n = 7]); 22 patients had prior sorafenib treatment. Nintedanib was given twice daily in 28-day cycles until disease progression or unacceptable adverse events, starting at 150 mg (group I) or 100 mg (group II) and escalating to 200 mg. The primary objective was to define the maximum tolerated dose based on occurrence of dose-limiting toxicities during cycle 1 (grade ≥3 non-hematological and grade 4 hematological adverse events). No dose-limiting toxicities were reported during cycle 1 and the maximum tolerated dose for both groups was 200 mg twice daily. The most frequent adverse events were gastrointestinal (diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, and decreased appetite). No patients discontinued nintedanib due to adverse events; 31% of group I and 21% of group II had dose reductions. Median time to progression was 2.8 months (95% confidence interval, 1.05-5.52) for group I and 3.2 months (95% confidence interval, 0.95-6.70) for group II. Nintedanib showed a manageable safety profile and efficacy signals, including in patients previously treated with sorafenib. Clinical trial registration NCT01594125; 1199.120 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

Keywords: Hepatocellular carcinoma; Japanese; maximum tolerated dose; nintedanib; phase I.

© 2016 The Authors. Cancer Science published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Cancer Association.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Design of the phase I study of nintedanib in Japanese patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) and liver impairment. †Group I included patients with mild liver impairment (aspartate aminotransferase [AST] and alanine aminotransferase [ALT] ≤2× upper limit of normal [ULN] and Child–Pugh score 5–6). ‡Group II included patients with moderate liver impairment (AST or ALT >2× to ≤5× ULN, or Child–Pugh score 7). §Dose escalation took place if incidence of dose‐limiting toxicities in cycle 1 was ≤33.3% (0/3, 1/6, or 2/9). ¶Replacement of one patient due to withdrawal of informed consent during cycle 1. ††Replacement of one patient due to discontinuation of trial treatment for >7 days. ECOG PS, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status; MTD, maximum tolerated dose; PK, pharmacokinetics.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Arithmetic mean plasma concentration–time profiles of nintedanib after multiple doses b.i.d. to Japanese patients with hepatocellular carcinoma (semi‐log scale). Left panel, group I with mild liver impairment (aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase ≤2× upper limit of normal and Child–Pugh score 5 or 6). Right panel, group II with moderate liver impairment (Child–Pugh score 5–6 and aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase >2× to ≤5× ULN or Child–Pugh score 7).
Figure 3
Figure 3
Time to progression in Japanese patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and liver impairment treated with nintedanib, who had received prior sorafenib treatment. Left panel, group I with mild liver impairment (aspartate aminotransferase and alanine aminotransferase ≤2× upper limit of normal and Child–Pugh score 5 or 6). Right panel, group II with moderate liver impairment (Child–Pugh score 5–6 and aspartate aminotransferase or alanine aminotransferase >2× to ≤5× ULN or Child–Pugh score 7).
Figure 4
Figure 4
(a, b) Alpha‐fetoprotein levels in Japanese patients with hepatocellular carcinoma and liver impairment, prior to and following 12 weeks of treatment with nintedanib. Patients were grouped according to liver impairment. Individual patients’ responses (yes or no) are shown in group I (mild liver impairment) (a) and group II (moderate liver impairment) (b). (c, d) Computed tomography images of tumor necrosis with nintedanib treatment, from an 80‐year‐old patient with multiple hepatocellular carcinoma tumors after transcatheter arterial chemoembolization and sorafenib that had progressed in 2 months. This patient is indicated by an ‘A’ on graph (a). Metastatic lesions in the lymph node (c) showed tumor necrosis (d) after 1 month of nintedanib treatment.

References

    1. Forner A, Llovet JM, Bruix J. Hepatocellular carcinoma. Lancet 2012; 379: 1245–55.
    1. Kudo M. Surveillance, diagnosis, treatment, and outcome of liver cancer in Japan. Liver Cancer 2015; 4: 39–50.
    1. de Martel C, Maucort‐Boulch D, Plummer M, Franceschi S. World‐wide relative contribution of hepatitis B and C viruses in hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology (Baltimore, MD) 2015; 62: 1190–200.
    1. International Agency for Research on Cancer . GLOBOCAN 2012.
    1. Frenette C, Gish R. Targeted systemic therapies for hepatocellular carcinoma: clinical perspectives, challenges and implications. World J Gastroenterol 2012; 18: 498–506.
    1. Semela D, Dufour JF. Angiogenesis and hepatocellular carcinoma. J Hepatol 2004; 41: 864–80.
    1. Miyahara K, Nouso K, Yamamoto K. Chemotherapy for advanced hepatocellular carcinoma in the sorafenib age. World J Gastroenterol 2014; 20: 4151–9.
    1. Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V et al Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 2008; 359: 378–90.
    1. Cheng AL, Kang YK, Chen Z et al Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia‐Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2009; 10: 25–34.
    1. National Comprehensive Cancer Network . NCCN clinical practive guidelines in oncology (NCCN Guidelines®): hepatobiliary cancers, version 2.2015. 2015.
    1. Thomas MB, Jaffe D, Choti MM et al Hepatocellular carcinoma: consensus recommendations of the National Cancer Institute Clinical Trials Planning Meeting. J Clin Oncol 2010; 28: 3994–4005.
    1. Hilberg F, Roth GJ, Krssak M et al BIBF 1120: triple angiokinase inhibitor with sustained receptor blockade and good antitumor efficacy. Cancer Res 2008; 68: 4774–82.
    1. Cheng A‐L, Yen C‐Y, Kim T‐Y et al Efficacy and safety of nintedanib versus sorafenib in Asian patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC): a randomized phase II trial. J Clin Oncol 2015; 33(Suppl 3): Abstract 339.
    1. Palmer D, Ting Ma Y, Peck Radosavljevic M et al Randomized phase II trial comparing the efficacy and safety of nintedanib versus sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). J Clin Oncol 2015; 33(Suppl 3): Abstract 238.
    1. Mross K, Stefanic M, Gmehling D et al Phase I study of the angiogenesis inhibitor BIBF 1120 in patients with advanced solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res 2010; 16: 311–9.
    1. Okamoto I, Kaneda H, Satoh T et al Phase I safety, pharmacokinetic, and biomarker study of BIBF 1120, an oral triple tyrosine kinase inhibitor in patients with advanced solid tumors. Mol Cancer Ther 2010; 9: 2825–33.
    1. Ge PL, Du SD, Mao YL. Advances in preoperative assessment of liver function. Hepatobiliary Pancreat Dis Int 2014; 13: 361–70.
    1. El‐Serag HB, Rudolph KL. Hepatocellular carcinoma: epidemiology and molecular carcinogenesis. Gastroenterology 2007; 132: 2557–76.
    1. Tandon P, Garcia‐Tsao G. Prognostic indicators in hepatocellular carcinoma: a systematic review of 72 studies. Liver Int 2009; 29: 502–10.
    1. op den Winkel M, Nagel D, Sappl J et al Prognosis of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Validation and ranking of established staging‐systems in a large western HCC‐cohort. PLoS ONE 2012; 7: 5.
    1. Yamakado K, Miyayama S, Hirota S et al Prognosis of patients with intermediate‐stage hepatocellular carcinomas based on the Child‐Pugh score: subclassifying the intermediate stage (Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer stage B). Jpn J Radiol 2014; 32: 644–9.
    1. Yen C, Shen Y‐C, Shiah H‐S et al Early data from a phase I study of nintedanib (BIBF 1120) in Asian patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Oncol 2012; 23(Suppl 9): ix246 (Abstract 744P).
    1. Palmer D, Loembé A, Studeny M, Hocke J, Meyer T. Phase I study of nintedanib (BIBF 1120) in European patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Ann Oncol 2012; 23(Suppl 9): ix245 (Abstract 740P).
    1. Chan SL, Mo FK, Johnson PJ et al New utility of an old marker: serial alpha‐fetoprotein measurement in predicting radiologic response and survival of patients with hepatocellular carcinoma undergoing systemic chemotherapy. J Clin Oncol 2009; 27: 446–52.
    1. Gadgeel SM. Safety profile and tolerability of antiangiogenic agents in non‐small‐cell lung cancer. Clin Lung Cancer 2012; 13: 96–106.
    1. Reck M, Kaiser R, Mellemgaard A et al Docetaxel plus nintedanib versus docetaxel plus placebo in patients with previously treated non‐small‐cell lung cancer (LUME‐Lung 1): a phase 3, double‐blind, randomised controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 2014; 15: 143–55.
    1. Van Cutsem E, Prenen H, D'Haens G et al A phase I/II, open‐label, randomised study of nintedanib plus mFOLFOX6 versus bevacizumab plus mFOLFOX6 in first‐line metastatic colorectal cancer patients. Ann Oncol 2015; 26: 2085–91.
    1. Eisen T, Loembe AB, Shparyk Y et al A randomised, phase II study of nintedanib or sunitinib in previously untreated patients with advanced renal cell cancer: 3‐year results. Br J Cancer 2015; 113: 1140–7.
    1. Richeldi L, du Bois RM, Raghu G et al Efficacy and safety of nintedanib in idiopathic pulmonary fibrosis. N Engl J Med 2014; 370: 2071–82.
    1. du Bois A, Kristensen G, Ray‐Coquard I et al Standard first‐line chemotherapy with or without nintedanib for advanced ovarian cancer (AGO‐OVAR 12): a randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol 2016; 17: 78–89.
    1. Shomura M, Kagawa T, Shiraishi K et al Skin toxicity predicts efficacy to sorafenib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Hepatol 2014; 6: 670–6.
    1. Vincenzi B, Santini D, Russo A et al Early skin toxicity as a predictive factor for tumor control in hepatocellular carcinoma patients treated with sorafenib. Oncologist 2010; 15: 85–92.
    1. McLellan B, Ciardiello F, Lacouture ME, Segaert S, Van Cutsem E. Regorafenib‐associated hand‐foot skin reaction: practical advice on diagnosis, prevention, and management. Ann Oncol 2015; 26: 2017–26.
    1. Lacouture ME, Reilly LM, Gerami P, Guitart J. Hand foot skin reaction in cancer patients treated with the multikinase inhibitors sorafenib and sunitinib. Ann Oncol 2008; 19: 1955–61.
    1. Stopfer P, Rathgen K, Bischoff D et al Pharmacokinetics and metabolism of BIBF 1120 after oral dosing to healthy male volunteers. Xenobiotica 2011; 41: 297–311.
    1. Eisen T, Shparyk Y, Macleod N et al Effect of small angiokinase inhibitor nintedanib (BIBF 1120) on QT interval in patients with previously untreated, advanced renal cell cancer in an open‐label, phase II study. Invest New Drugs 2013; 31: 1283–93.

Source: PubMed

3
Abonneren