Abstract 4463
Background
Irinotecan is widely used, but also known for its severe toxicities neutropenia and diarrhea. Based on preclinical data, combined caloric and protein restriction (CCPR) might improve treatment tolerability without impairing antitumor effect. Therefore, we studied the influence of CCPR on irinotecan pharmacokinetics and toxicity.
Methods
In this cross-over trial, patients with liver metastases of solid tumors were included and randomized to treatment with irinotecan preceded by 5 days of CCPR (∼30% caloric and ∼70% protein restriction) during the 1st cycle and a 2nd cycle preceded by a normal diet (ND) or vice versa. During both cycles, 24-hours blood sampling was performed and 24-26 hours after infusion biopsies of both healthy liver (HL) and liver metastasis (LM) were taken. Primary endpoint was the relative difference in geometric means for the active metabolite SN-38 concentration in HL, as analyzed by a linear mixed model. Secondary endpoints included irinotecan and SN-38 concentrations in LM, plasma area under the curve (AUC0-24h), and toxicity.
Results
Interpatient variability (n = 19) in tissue irinotecan and SN-38 concentrations was high, showing no significant differences in irinotecan (+16.8%, 95% CI: -9.7-51.1%, P = 0.227) and SN-38 (+9.8%, 95% CI: -16.4-44.2%, P = 0.48) concentrations between CCPR and ND in HL, as well as in LM (irinotecan: -38.8%, 90% CI: -59.3:-7.9%, P = 0.05 and SN-38: -13.8%, 90% CI:-40.7-25.4%, P = 0.50). CCPR increased irinotecan plasma AUC0-24h with 7.1% (95% CI: 0.3-14.5%, P = 0.04) compared to ND, while the SN-38 plasma AUC0-24h increased with 50.3% (95% CI: 34.6-67.9%, P < 0.001). CCPR was well tolerated with low incidence of grade ≥3 therapy related toxicity. Grade ≥3 toxicity was not increased during CCPR vs ND (P = 0.69). No difference was seen in neutropenia grade ≥3 (47% vs 32% P = 0.38), diarrhea grade ≥3 (5% vs 21% P = 0.25), febrile neutropenia (5% vs 16% P = 0.50) and hospitalization (11% vs 21% P = 0.634) during CCPR vs ND.
Conclusions
CCPR resulted in a dramatically increased plasma SN-38 exposure, while toxicity did not change. CCPR did not result in altered irinotecan and SN-38 exposure in HL and LM. CCPR might therefore potentially improve the therapeutic window in patients treated with irinotecan.
Clinical trial identification
Netherlands Trial Register NL5624 (NTR5731) release date: 2016-03-04.
Editorial acknowledgement
Legal entity responsible for the study
A.H.J. Mathijssen.
Funding
Has not received any funding.
Disclosure
S.L. Koolen: Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Novartis; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Roche; Speaker Bureau / Expert testimony: Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Astellas; Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis; Research grant / Funding (institution): Cristal Therapeutics; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Ipsen. R.H.J. Mathijssen: Research grant / Funding (institution): Astellas; Research grant / Funding (institution): Bayer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Boehringer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Cristal Therapeutics; Research grant / Funding (institution): Novartis; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pamgene; Research grant / Funding (institution): Pfizer; Research grant / Funding (institution): Roche; Research grant / Funding (institution): Sanofi; Honoraria (institution): Servier; Honoraria (institution): Novartis; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Pfizer; Travel / Accommodation / Expenses: Astellas. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.
Resources from the same session
4370 - Continental differences in pathologic response with neoadjuvant ipilimumab (IPI) plus nivolumab (NIVO) in patients with macroscopic stage III melanoma in the phase 2 OpACIN-neo trial.
Presenter: Irene Reijers
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3230 - Comparable responses of melanoma at primary site and synchronous lymph node metastases upon neoadjuvant ipilimumab (IPI) and nivolumab (NIVO)
Presenter: Judith Versluis
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3171 - Adjuvant Therapies for Stage III Melanoma: Benchmarks for Bringing Clinical Trials to Clinical Practice
Presenter: Tina HIEKEN
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3493 - Mixture-cure modeling for resected stage III/IV melanoma in the phase 3 CheckMate 238 trial
Presenter: Jeffrey Weber
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
3036 - An open-label, non-randomized, phase IIIb study of trametinib in combination with dabrafenib for patients with unresectable advanced BRAFV600-mutant melanoma: a subgroup analysis of patients with brain metastasis
Presenter: Caroline Dutriaux
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2233 - Adverse event (AE) kinetics in patients (pts) treated with dabrafenib + trametinib (D + T) in the metastatic and adjuvant setting
Presenter: Jean Jacques Grob
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2435 - A Single Arm, Open Label, Phase II, Multicenter Study to Assess the Detection of the BRAF V600 Mutation on cfDNA from Plasma in Patients with Advanced Melanoma
Presenter: Piotr Rutkowski
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
1766 - Efficacy and Safety of Dabrafenib and Trametinib in Patients with Metastatic BRAFV600 Mutation-positive Melanoma in the Real-World Setting – Interim results of the non-interventional COMBI-r study
Presenter: Carola Berking
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
2131 - Trial update: A randomized Phase Ib/II study of the selective small molecule Axl inhibitor Bemcentinib (BGB324) in combination with either dabrafenib/trametinib (D/T) or pembrolizumab in patients with metastatic melanoma
Presenter: Oddbjørn Straume
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract
4074 - Analysis of pyrexia in patients (pts) treated with dabrafenib (D) and/or trametinib (T) across clinical trials
Presenter: Caroline Robert
Session: Poster Display session 3
Resources:
Abstract