- Phase I clinical study of the recombinant antibody toxin scFv(FRP5)-ETA specific for the ErbB2/HER2 receptor in patients with advanced solid malignomas (2005)
- Introduction: ScFv(FRP5)-ETA is a recombinant antibody toxin with binding specificity for ErbB2 (HER2). It consists of an N-terminal single-chain antibody fragment (scFv), genetically linked to truncated Pseudomonas exotoxin A (ETA). Potent antitumoral activity of scFv(FRP5)-ETA against ErbB2-overexpressing tumor cells was previously demonstrated in vitro and in animal models. Here we report the first systemic application of scFv(FRP5)-ETA in human cancer patients. Methods: We have performed a phase I dose-finding study, with the objective to assess the maximum tolerated dose and the dose-limiting toxicity of intravenously injected scFv(FRP5)-ETA. Eighteen patients suffering from ErbB2-expressing metastatic breast cancers, prostate cancers, head and neck cancer, non small cell lung cancer, or transitional cell carcinoma were treated. Dose levels of 2, 4, 10, 12.5, and 20 μg/kg scFv(FRP5)-ETA were administered as five daily infusions each for two consecutive weeks. Results: No hematologic, renal, and/or cardiovascular toxicities were noted in any of the patients treated. However, transient elevation of liver enzymes was observed, and considered dose limiting, in one of six patients at the maximum tolerated dose of 12.5 μg/kg, and in two of three patients at 20 μg/kg. Fifteen minutes after injection, peak concentrations of more than 100 ng/ml scFv(FRP5)-ETA were obtained at a dose of 10 μg/kg, indicating that predicted therapeutic levels of the recombinant protein can be applied without inducing toxic side effects. Induction of antibodies against scFv(FRP5)-ETA was observed 8 days after initiation of therapy in 13 patients investigated, but only in five of these patients could neutralizing activity be detected. Two patients showed stable disease and in three patients clinical signs of activity in terms of signs and symptoms were observed (all treated at doses ≥ 10 μg/kg). Disease progression occurred in 11 of the patients. Conclusion: Our results demonstrate that systemic therapy with scFv(FRP5)-ETA can be safely administered up to a maximum tolerated dose of 12.5 μg/kg in patients with ErbB2-expressing tumors, justifying further clinical development.
- New histone deacetylase inhibitors as potential therapeutic tools for advanced prostate carcinoma (2008)
- The anti-epileptic drug valproic acid is also under trial as an anti-cancer agent due to its histone deacetylase (HDAC) inhibitory properties. However, the effects of valproic acid (VPA) are limited and concentrations required for exerting anti-neoplastic effects in vitro may not be reached in tumour patients. In this study, we tested in vitro and in vivo effects of two VPA-derivatives (ACS2, ACS33) on pre-clinical prostate cancer models. PC3 and DU-145 prostate tumour cell lines were treated with various concentrations of ACS2 or ACS33 to perform in vitro cell proliferation 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide (MTT) assays and to evaluate tumour cell adhesion to endothelial cell monolayers. Analysis of acetylated histones H3 and H4 protein expression was performed by western blotting. In vivo tumour growth was conducted in subcutaneous xenograft mouse models. Tumour sections were assessed by immunohistochemistry for histone H3 acetylation and proliferation. ACS2 and ACS33 significantly up-regulated histone H3 and H4 acetylation in prostate cancer cell lines. In micromolar concentrations both compounds exerted growth arrest in PC3 and DU-145 cells and prevented tumour cell attachment to endothelium. In vivo, ACS33 inhibited the growth of PC3 in subcutaneous xenografts. Immunohistochemistry and western blotting confirmed increased histone H3 acetylation and reduced proliferation. ACS2 and ACS33 represent novel VPA derivatives with superior anti-tumoural activities, compared to the mother compound. This investigation lends support to the clinical testing of ACS2 or ACS33 for the treatment of prostate cancer.
- Phase I study of everolimus and mitomycin C for patients with metastatic esophagogastric adenocarcinoma (2013)
- This study aimed at determining the recommended dose of the mammalian target of rapamycin inhibitor everolimus in combination with mitomycin C (MMC) in patients with previously treated metastatic esophagogastric cancer. In this phase I trial, patients received escalated doses of oral everolimus (5, 7.5, and 10 mg/day) in combination with intravenous MMC 5 mg/m2 every 3 weeks. Endpoints were the dose-limiting toxicity (DLT), safety, and response rates. Tumor tissues were tested for HER2-status and mutations in the PTEN, PIK3CA, AKT1, CTNNB1, and E-cadherin type 1 genes. Sixteen patients (12 male, four female) with gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer were included. All patients were previously treated with a platinum-based chemotherapy. Treatment cohorts were: 5 mg/day, three patients; 7.5 mg/day, three patients; and 10 mg/day, 10 patients. No DLTs occurred during dose escalation. Most frequent grade 3 toxicities were leukopenia (18.8%) and neutropenia (18.8%). All other grade 3 toxicities were below 10%. No grade 4 toxicities occurred. Three (18.8%) patients experienced partial responses and four patients had stable disease (SD). Antitumor activity according to Response Evaluation Criteria In Solid Tumors (RECIST)-criteria was highest in the 10 mg/day cohort. No associations between HER2-status or detected mutations and response were observed. The recommended dose of everolimus combined with MMC is 10 mg/day. Encouraging signs of antitumor activity were seen (http://www.ClinicalTrials.gov; Clinical trial registration number: NCT01042782).
- Correction: Phase I clinical study of the recombinant antibody-toxin scFv(FRP5)-ETA specific for the ErbB2/HER2 receptor in patients with advanced solid malignomas (2006)
- Following publication of the data presented by von Minckwitz and colleagues  it has been brought to our attention that some patients should be scored differently. Stable disease was seen in three of the eighteen patients instead of two of the eighteen patients: one patient with transitional cell carcinoma treated at 4 micro g/kg scFv(FRP5)-ETA per day, and two breast cancer patients treated at 4 and 12.5 micro g/kg scFv(FRP5)-ETA per day. Disease progression occured in 9 of the eighteen patients evaluated (see corrected Table 2 overleaf). This does not affect the conclusions of our study. In addition we would like to correct the following errors: patient IDs for patients U01 and U02 in the original Table 2 were interchanged. In addition, patient N03 had a grade 3 elevation of gamma-glutamyl transferase, and not grade 2 (see corrected Table 2 overleaf). http://publikationen.ub.uni-frankfurt.de/volltexte/2005/1156/
- The prognostic impact of epidermal growth factor receptor in patients with metastatic gastric cancer (2012)
- Background: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is a potential target of anticancer therapy in gastric cancer. However, its prognostic role in metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GE) cancer has not been established yet. Methods: EGFR status was analyzed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) in paraffin-embedded samples from 357 patients who received chemotherapy in 4 first-line trials. Automated RNA extraction from paraffin and RT-quantitative PCR were additionally used to evaluate EGFR mRNA expression in 130 patients. Results: EGFR protein expression (any grade) and overexpression (3+) were observed in 43% and 11% of patients, respectively. EGFR positivity correlated with intestinal type histology (p = 0.05), but not with other clinicopathologic characteristics. Median follow-up was 18.2 months. Median overall survival (OS) was similar in patients with EGFR positive vs. those with EGFR negative tumors, regardless whether positivity was defined as ≥1+ (10.6 vs. 10.9 months, p = 0.463) or as 3+ (8.6 vs. 10.8 months, p = 0.377). The multivariate analysis indicated that EGFR status is not an independent prognostic factor (hazard ratio 0.85, 0.56 to 1.12, p = 0.247). There were also no significant differences in overall survival when patients were categorized according to median (p = 0.116) or quartile (p = 0.767) distribution of EGFR mRNA gene expression. Similar distributions of progression-free survival according to EGFR status were observed. Conclusions: Unlike different cancer types where EGFR-positive disease is associated with an adverse prognostic value, EGFR positivity is not prognostic of patient outcome in metastatic gastric or GE cancer.