Phase I study of tomuzotuximab, a glycoengineered therapeutic antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor, in patients with advanced carcinomas

Walter Fiedler, Sara Cresta, Henning Schulze-Bergkamen, Sara De Dosso, Jens Weidmann, Anna Tessari, Hans Baumeister, Antje Danielczyk, Bruno Dietrich, Steffen Goletz, Alfredo Zurlo, Marc Salzberg, Cristiana Sessa, Luca Gianni, Walter Fiedler, Sara Cresta, Henning Schulze-Bergkamen, Sara De Dosso, Jens Weidmann, Anna Tessari, Hans Baumeister, Antje Danielczyk, Bruno Dietrich, Steffen Goletz, Alfredo Zurlo, Marc Salzberg, Cristiana Sessa, Luca Gianni

Abstract

Background: Changes in glycosylation of the constant domain (Fc) of monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) enhance antibody-dependent cell-mediated cytotoxicity independently of downstream effects following receptor blockade by the antibody, thus extending their indication. We investigated the safety, pharmacokinetics, pharmacodynamics and antitumour activity of tomuzotuximab, an IgG1 glycoengineered mAb against the epidermal growth factor receptor with enhanced tumour cytotoxicity in a phase I dose-escalation study (NTC01222637).

Patients and methods: Forty-one patients with advanced solid tumours refractory to standard therapies received tomuzotuximab weekly (12-1370 mg) or two-weekly (990 mg) on a three-plus-three dose escalation design.

Results: A maximum tolerated dose was not reached. The most frequent treatment-related adverse events were infusion-related reactions in 31 (76%) patients (grade 3, 12%), mainly confined to the first dose, and skin toxicities (grade 1 or 2) in 30 (73%) patients. Hypomagnesaemia was observed in 9 out of 23 evaluable patients (39%). Similar to cetuximab, tomuzotuximab concentrations increased proportionally to dose from doses≥480 mg with a median terminal half life (t½) of 82 hours, range 55-113 hours. Antitumour activity included one complete response ongoing since more than 4.5 years in a patient with non-small-cell lung cancer and one partial response lasting 353 days in a patient with colorectal cancer. Twelve patients achieved stable disease (median, 166 days, range, 71-414 days) and two patients had prolonged control (>1 year) of their non-measurable disease.

Conclusion: Tomuzotuximab was safe and showed promising antitumour activity in heavily pretreated patients with advanced metastatic disease. A phase IIb trial of chemotherapy and weekly tomuzotuximab or cetuximab followed with maintenance therapy with the corresponding mAb in patients with recurrent or metastatic head and neck squamous cell carcinoma is ongoing.

Keywords: egfr; glycoengineered; monoclonal antibody; phase I; tomuzotuximab.

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: Employment or leadership position: HB, BD, SG, AZ, AD. Stock ownership: HB, SG, AD. MS was employee of Pharma Brains AG, which received funding for the study from Glycotope GmbH. Other remuneration: WF, Meeting participation to present the data at the American Society of Clinical Oncology 2013 Annual Meeting.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Concentration-time profiles of repeated weekly infusions of (A) 720 mg and (B) 990 mg tomuzotuximab measured in individual patients before and at the end of infusion. The dotted line indicates the 50 µg/mL trough level. Tomuzotuximab serum levels were above 50 µg/mL 1 week after the second infusion in four out of five patients who received 720 mg and 1 week after the first infusion in all three patients who received 900 mg tomuzotuximab.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Waterfall plot of the best per cent change from baseline in SLD of target lesions in 33 patients. Baseline is defined as the last non-missing value before the first dose of tomuzotuximab. Only patients with valid baseline and postbaseline values are included. Tumour assessment was not performed in six patients because of early withdrawal from the study following clinical deterioration or AE; two patients had no measurable disease according to RECIST1.1 criteria. The dotted lines indicate the cut-off for partial response (−30%) and progressive disease (+20%). *Patients with stable target lesions but progression because of new lesions. †Patient (CRC, dose 1370 mg) had a best change from baseline of 32.2%, unconfirmed 50 days later (change from baseline 29.5%). ¶ Patient is still in complete remission (4.5 years) and received tomuzotuximab for 5.2 years. CRC, colorectal cancer; GCA, gastric cancer; NSCLC, non-small cell lung cancer; OVCA, ovarian cancer; PanC, pancreatic cancer; RCC, renal cell cancer; SLD, sum of longest diameters.

References

    1. Van Cutsem E, Köhne CH, Hitre E, et al. . Cetuximab and chemotherapy as initial treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer. N Engl J Med 2009;360:1408–17. 10.1056/NEJMoa0805019
    1. Vermorken JB, Mesia R, Rivera F, et al. . Platinum-based chemotherapy plus cetuximab in head and neck cancer. N Engl J Med 2008;359:1116–27. 10.1056/NEJMoa0802656
    1. Van Cutsem E, Köhne CH, Láng I, et al. . Cetuximab plus irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin as first-line treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer: updated analysis of overall survival according to tumor KRAS and BRAF mutation status. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:2011–9. 10.1200/JCO.2010.33.5091
    1. Kurai J, Chikumi H, Hashimoto K, et al. . Antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity mediated by cetuximab against lung cancer cell lines. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13:1552–61. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-1726
    1. Bibeau F, Lopez-Crapez E, Di Fiore F, et al. . Impact of Fc{gamma}RIIa-Fc{gamma}RIIIa polymorphisms and KRAS mutations on the clinical outcome of patients with metastatic colorectal cancer treated with cetuximab plus irinotecan. J Clin Oncol 2009;27:1122–9. 10.1200/JCO.2008.18.0463
    1. Rodríguez J, Zarate R, Bandres E, et al. . Fc gamma receptor polymorphisms as predictive markers of Cetuximab efficacy in epidermal growth factor receptor downstream-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer. Eur J Cancer 2012;48:1774–80. 10.1016/j.ejca.2012.01.007
    1. Gerdes CA, Nicolini VG, Herter S, et al. . GA201 (RG7160): a novel, humanized, glycoengineered anti-EGFR antibody with enhanced ADCC and superior in vivo efficacy compared with cetuximab. Clin Cancer Res 2013;19:1126–38. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-12-0989
    1. Shields RL, Lai J, Keck R, et al. . Lack of fucose on human IgG1 N-linked oligosaccharide improves binding to human Fcgamma RIII and antibody-dependent cellular toxicity. J Biol Chem 2002;277:26733–40. 10.1074/jbc.M202069200
    1. Chung CH, Mirakhur B, Chan E, et al. . Cetuximab-induced anaphylaxis and IgE specific for galactose-alpha-1,3-galactose. N Engl J Med 2008;358:1109–17. 10.1056/NEJMoa074943
    1. National Cancer Institute. Common terminology criteria for adverse events and common toxicity criteria version 3.0. .
    1. Fracasso PM, Burris H, Arquette MA, et al. . A phase 1 escalating single-dose and weekly fixed-dose study of cetuximab: pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic rationale for dosing. Clin Cancer Res 2007;13:986–93. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-1542
    1. Eisenhauer EA, Therasse P, Bogaerts J, et al. . New response evaluation criteria in solid tumours: revised RECIST guideline (version 1.1). Eur J Cancer 2009;45:228–47. 10.1016/j.ejca.2008.10.026
    1. Paz-Ares LG, Gomez-Roca C, Delord JP, et al. . Phase I pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic dose-escalation study of RG7160 (GA201), the first glycoengineered monoclonal antibody against the epidermal growth factor receptor, in patients with advanced solid tumors. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:3783–90. 10.1200/JCO.2011.34.8888
    1. Song X, Long SR, Barber B, et al. . Systematic review on infusion reactions associated with chemotherapies and monoclonal antibodies for metastatic colorectal cancer. Curr Clin Pharmacol 2012;7:56–65. 10.2174/157488412799218806
    1. Kimby E. Tolerability and safety of rituximab (MabThera). Cancer Treat Rev 2005;31:456–73. 10.1016/j.ctrv.2005.05.007
    1. Su X, Lacouture ME, Jia Y, et al. . Risk of high-grade skin rash in cancer patients treated with cetuximab–an antibody against epidermal growth factor receptor: systemic review and meta-analysis. Oncology 2009;77:124–33. 10.1159/000229752
    1. Fakih MG, Wilding G, Lombardo J. Cetuximab-induced hypomagnesemia in patients with colorectal cancer. Clin Colorectal Cancer 2006;6:152–6. 10.3816/CCC.2006.n.033
    1. Tan AR, Moore DF, Hidalgo M, et al. . Pharmacokinetics of cetuximab after administration of escalating single dosing and weekly fixed dosing in patients with solid tumors. Clin Cancer Res 2006;12:6517–22. 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-06-0705
    1. Seo Y, Ishii Y, Ochiai H, et al. . Cetuximab-mediated ADCC activity is correlated with the cell surface expression level of EGFR but not with the KRAS/BRAF mutational status in colorectal cancer. Oncol Rep 2014;31:2115–22. 10.3892/or.2014.3077
    1. Williams R. Discontinued in 2013: oncology drugs. Expert Opin Investig Drugs 2015;24:95–110. 10.1517/13543784.2015.971154

Source: PubMed

3
Se inscrever