An Adaptive Study to Determine the Optimal Dose of the Tablet Formulation of the PARP Inhibitor Olaparib

J Mateo, V Moreno, A Gupta, S B Kaye, E Dean, M R Middleton, M Friedlander, C Gourley, R Plummer, G Rustin, C Sessa, K Leunen, J Ledermann, H Swaisland, A Fielding, W Bannister, S Nicum, L R Molife, J Mateo, V Moreno, A Gupta, S B Kaye, E Dean, M R Middleton, M Friedlander, C Gourley, R Plummer, G Rustin, C Sessa, K Leunen, J Ledermann, H Swaisland, A Fielding, W Bannister, S Nicum, L R Molife

Abstract

Background: Olaparib is poorly soluble, requiring advanced drug delivery technologies for adequate bioavailability. Sixteen capsules/day are required for the approved 400 mg twice-daily dose; a tablet formulation was developed to reduce pill burden. This clinical trial evaluated the optimal dose and administration schedule of the tablet formulation.

Patients and methods: Two stages of sequentially enrolled cohorts: stage 1, pharmacokinetic properties of tablet and capsule formulations were compared in patients with advanced solid tumours; stage 2, tablet dose escalation with expansion cohorts at doses/schedules of interest in patients with solid tumours and BRCAm breast/ovarian cancers.

Results: Olaparib 200 mg tablets displayed similar Cmax,ss, but lower AUCss and Cmin,ss than 400 mg capsules. Following multiple dosing, steady-state exposure with tablets ≥300 mg matched or exceeded that of 400 mg capsules. After dose escalation, while 400 mg twice daily was the tablet maximum tolerated dose based on haematological toxicity, 65 % of patients in the randomized expansion phase eventually required dose reduction to 300 mg. Intermittent tablet administration did not significantly improve tolerability. Tumour shrinkage was similar for 300 and 400 mg tablet and 400 mg capsule cohorts.

Conclusions: The recommended monotherapy dose of olaparib tablet for Phase III trials was 300 mg twice daily, simplifying drug administration from 16 capsules to four tablets per day.

Clinical trial number: NCT00777582 (ClinicalTrials.gov).

References

    1. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2000 Feb 2;92 (3):205-16
    1. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Aug 1;28(22):3555-61
    1. J Clin Oncol. 2012 Feb 1;30(4):372-9
    1. Cancer Res. 2006 Aug 15;66(16):8109-15
    1. Lancet. 2009 Oct 17;374(9698):1371-82
    1. Nature. 2005 Apr 14;434(7035):913-7
    1. Lancet Oncol. 2014 Jul;15(8):852-61
    1. N Engl J Med. 2009 Jul 9;361(2):123-34
    1. Lancet. 2010 Jul 24;376(9737):235-44
    1. Nature. 2011 Jun 29;474(7353):609-15
    1. Cancer. 2012 Jun 1;118(11):2787-95
    1. Br J Cancer. 2014 Aug 12;111(4):651-9
    1. Cancer. 2005 Dec 15;104(12):2807-16
    1. J Clin Oncol. 2015 Jan 20;33(3):244-50
    1. Lancet Oncol. 2011 Sep;12(9):852-61
    1. Ann Oncol. 2014 Aug;25(8):1656-63
    1. Clin Cancer Res. 2011 Mar 1;17(5):1082-9
    1. Lancet Oncol. 2015 Jan;16(1):87-97
    1. Oncogene. 2014 Jul 24;33(30):3894-907
    1. Nature. 2005 Apr 14;434(7035):917-21
    1. Lancet. 2010 Jul 24;376(9737):245-51
    1. N Engl J Med. 2012 Apr 12;366(15):1382-92
    1. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2011 Feb;21(2):419-23

Source: PubMed

Подписаться