throbber
Early Clinical Study of an Intermittent Schedule for Maytansine (NSC-153858): Brief
`Communication 1.2
`
`R. T. Eagan, M.D., 3 J. N. Ingle, M.D., 3 J. Rubin, M.D., 3 S. Frytak, M.D., 3 and C. G. Moertel, M.D. 3
`
`Downloaded from
`
`http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/
`
` by Kelley Martin on November 13, 2014
`
`ABSTRACT-Maytansine, an ansa macrolide, was evaluated in
`an early clinical
`trial
`in 40 adult patients with various solid
`tumors. Severe nausea and vomiting, sometimes associated
`with watery diarrhea and abdominal cramps, and Iiver function
`abnormalities, mainly elevation of serum glutamic-oxaloacetic
`transaminase levels, together constituted what we considered
`dose-Iimiting toxicity. Mild hematologic toxicity (mainly thrombo(cid:173)
`cytopenia), neurotoxicity, and possibly cardiac toxicity were also
`noted. No antitumor effect was seen. An iv dose of 0.750 mg/m 2
`on days 1, 3, and 5 (total dose, 2.25 mg/m 2
`) repeated every 4
`weeks is recommended for Phase 11 trials.-J Natl Cancer Inst
`60: 93-96, 1978.
`
`MA YT (NSC-153858) is a naturally occurring ansa
`macrolide originally isolated from the East African
`shrub Maytenus ovatus (l). MA YT belongs to a new class
`of compounds characterized by the presence of a large
`macrocyclic lactone ring, frequently N-heterocyclic, and
`incorporating within it an m- or p-bridged aromatic
`moiety.
`MA YT possesses stathmokinetic (mitosis-inhibiting)
`properties including metaphase arrest, an action similar
`to the vinca alkaloids vincristine and vinblastine (2).
`DNA synthesis is inhibited more than RNA or protein
`synthesis. DNA-dependent RNA polymerase is also not
`greatly affected. MA YT is active against a variety of in
`vivo tumor systems including P388 Ieukernia, B16 mela(cid:173)
`noma, and Lewis lung carcinoma as weIl as against KB,
`L1210, L51784, and P388 tumors in vitro (1).
`Drug-related toxicities in dogs and monkeys include
`enteritis and degeneration of intestinal mucosa, deple(cid:173)
`tion of lymphoid organs, e mesis , blood diarrhea, bone
`marrow hypoplasia , and liver disorder manifested by
`increased SeOT, serum glutamic-pyruvic transami(cid:173)
`nase
`and bromsulphalein-rctention levels. The inci(cid:173)
`dence and severity of toxicities were dose related in
`dogs and monkeys. Five-day pulses of drug with int~r­
`mittent 9-day rest periods suggest lack of cumulative
`toxicity. The reported toxicities were reversible with
`the exception of some histopathologic liver lesions (3).
`Rarer toxicities included hindlimb paralysis in MA YT(cid:173)
`treated mice. N eurotoxicity was not seen in other ani(cid:173)
`mals , but, because of the similarity of the drug's action
`to that of the vinca alkaloids, e.g., its effect on the size
`of the mitotic spindie believed to be secondary to the
`inhibition of the polymerization of tubulin (4), neuro(cid:173)
`toxicity was also a possibility. Also, 1 dog and 1 monkey
`treated with lethai doses showed degenerative myocar(cid:173)
`dial changes of questionable significance according to
`the authors.
`Our early clinical toxicity trial began with a dosage of
`
`0.045 mg MA YT/m 2 given as 0.015 rng/rn" on days 1, 3,
`and 5 with repeat cycles at 4-week intervals. That
`starting dose had already been studied at the NCI and
`represented one-fifth the highest nontoxic dose in the
`monkey.
`
`MATERIALS AND METHODS
`
`Eligible patients had to have histologic or cytologic
`evidence of unresectable or metastatic cancer beyond
`any reasonable hope of eure or significant palliation by
`more conventional
`therapy. Patients were excluded
`from study for any of the following reasons:
`recent
`major
`surgery,
`radiation therapy or chemothera~y
`within 4 weeks (8 wk for any nitrosourea), leukopema
`«4,100 cells/mrn"), thrombocytopenia «130,000 cells/
`mrn"), any elevation of the direct-reading serum biliru(cid:173)
`bin levels , aserum creatinine level greater than 1.5 mg/
`dl, or an Ecoe performance score of 4 (total disability).
`Entered into the study were 42 patients. Only 1 was a
`pediatric patient, a 3-year-old with an advanc~d ne~ro­
`blastoma treated at
`the initial dose level. This panent
`developed thrombocytopenia with a platelet nadir of
`52,000 cells/rnrn" on day 18. One adult
`treated with
`1.350 mg MAYT/m2 total dose died of tumor-related
`ca uses 1 day after her first injection. These 2 patien ts
`were not
`included in the subsequent analysis, which
`consisted of 40 adult patients with solid tumors. The
`clinical characteristics of these 40 patients were as fol(cid:173)
`lows: median age, 59 years (range, 23-78 yr); 65%
`males; 65% ECOG performance score of 2 or 3; 92%
`prior chemotherapy; 42% prior radiation therapy; and
`the lung (32%) and the colorectum (28%) being the
`most common primary tumor sites.
`Pretreatment (within 72 hr) and retreatment (day 29
`and every 4 wk thereafter) tests included a hemoglobin
`test: WBC count; PL T count and differential test; a 12(cid:173)
`test' chemistry group including electrolytes , creatinine,
`bilirubin, alkaline phosphatase , SeOT, calcium, phos(cid:173)
`phorus, uric acid, and total serum protein: an electro(cid:173)
`cardiogram; an electromyogram (first pauent at each
`
`ABBREVIATIONS USED: MAYT = maytansine; SGOT = serum glu(cid:173)
`tarnic-oxaloacetic transaminase; NCI = National Cancer Institute;
`ECOG = Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group; WBC = white blood
`cells; PL T = platelet(s).
`
`1 Received May 11, 1977; accepted August 23,1977.
`2 Supported by Public Health Service Phase I c~ntract N01(cid:173)
`CM53838 from the Division of Cancer Treatment, National Cancer
`Institute.
`3 Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn. 55901.
`
`VOL. 60, NO. 1, JANUARY 1978
`
`93
`
`J NATL CANCER INST
`
`IMMUNOGEN 2042, pg. 1
`Phigenix v. Immunogen
`IPR2014-00676
`
`

`

`Downloaded from
`
`http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/
`
` by Kelley Martin on November 13, 2014
`
`94
`
`EAGAN,
`
`INGLE, RUBIN, FRYTAK, AND MOERTEL
`
`total
`new dose level); urinalysis; 12-hour urine for
`protein; a short
`iothalamate renal clearance; anel a
`ehest X-ray. WBC anel PLT counts were also obtained
`on days 3 and 5 or 6 as well as once per week thereafter
`for PLT and twice per week for WBC. A repeat ehern(cid:173)
`istry group test was obtaineel on elay 5 or 6, anel serum
`creatinine or blood urea nitrogen anel SGOT were
`measured once per week for 3 weeks.
`MAYT was administereel by rapiel iv infusion over 3(cid:173)
`10 minutes into the siele arm of a freely floating infusion
`set-up on da ys 1, 3, anel 5 anel repeateel every 4 weeks
`from day 1. MA YT was supplied in l O-rnl Flint vials
`containing a white lyophilized powder consisting of 0.2.5
`mg MAYT and 100 mg mannitol. When reconstituted
`with 4.9 ml sodium chloride, each milliliter contained
`0.05 mg MA YT and 20 mg rnannitol. The reconstituted
`vials were eliscarded after 8 hours. The initial dose level
`was 0.015 mg MA YT/m 2 on days 1, 3, and 5 for an
`total elose of 0.045 mg/rn". Subsequent elosage
`initial
`escalations are shown in table 1. A slightly modifieel
`
`TABLE l.-Dosage escalation scheme [or MAYT
`
`Dose on days 1, 3, 5
`mg/rn"
`0.015
`0.030
`0.045
`0.090
`0.135
`
`0.300
`0.450
`0.600
`0.750
`0.900
`
`Total dose per course
`mg/rn"
`0.045
`0.090
`0.135
`0.270
`0.405
`Phase I meeting
`0.900
`1.350
`1.800
`2.250
`2.700
`
`Multiples ofthe
`starting dose
`1
`2
`3
`6
`9
`
`20
`30
`40
`50
`60
`
`Fibonacci escalation scheme (5) was employed initially
`up to the 0.405 mg/rn'' total-dose level. At that point, a
`discussion among the MAYT Phase I investigators and
`the NCI investigators resulted in a direct escalation to
`0.900 mg/rn" total dose.
`
`RESULTS
`
`in the 43 treatment courses
`Toxicity was minimal
`given to 26 patients at dosage levels up to and including
`the 1.350 mg/rn? total dose level. These 43 treatment
`courses consisted of 26 initial treatments with MA YT
`and 17 subsequent or escalation treatments after prior
`MA YT treatment at
`the same or a lower dose level.
`The most common side effects encountered in this
`group related to the gastrointestinal tract and consisted
`of mild nausea in 16% (7/43), vomiting in 9% (4/43),
`and eliarrhea in 9%. The next most common toxicity,
`which did not appear to be dose related, was thrombo(cid:173)
`cytopenia that occurred after 9% of the treatment
`courses. The PL T nadirs, day of nadir count, and
`dosage level were as follows: 99,000 on day 29 at 0.090
`mg/rn", 100,000 on day 13 at 0.270 mg/rn", 93,000 on
`day 17 at 0.900 mg/rn", and 90,000 on day 21 at 1.350
`
`mg/rn". All PLT counts returned to normal wit hi n 4-7
`elays. Leukopenia, with a WBC nadir of 3,900 on da}'
`14, was noteel
`in only 1 patient , Two par ients (5%)
`elevelopeel an increase in SGOT levels on day 5 (at least
`a 50% increase above pretreatrnent level), which had
`returneel
`to normal by day 29 in bot.h parients. Both
`patients were treated at the 1.350 mg/m" total-dose level
`(table 2). Two patients also eleveloped neurologie S\J1l p(cid:173)
`to ms. One eleveloped an agitated depression an d alter(cid:173)
`ation in sleep pattern at 1.350 mg/rn" afrer reeeiving
`two prior courses of 0.900 mg/rn". One month after his
`fourth MA YT treatment
`(at 1.800 mg/m"). he also
`complained of leg cramps and parest hesia involving the
`fingers. No further MAYT was given, and all neuro(cid:173)
`logic sym pto ms had lessened at reexamination 2 months
`later. This patient was a 78-year-old man with lung
`cancer. He also developed atrial fibrillation after his
`first course of 0.900 mg/rn". The rate of fibrillatio n was
`slowed with digitalization, but the r hyth m did not re(cid:173)
`turn to normal. No clinical congestive heart failure was
`apparent. The other patient with neurologic syrnpto ms
`become "light-headed" after his day-l treatment at the
`1.350 mg/rn'' total-dose level (i.e., after 0.450 mg MA YTI
`m"). Blood pressure was not altered . The light-headed(cid:173)
`ness remained stable during the day-3 anel day-5 injec(cid:173)
`tions and cleared up 1 week later. This patient did not
`receive further MAYT.
`Toxicity became more severe and consistent at total(cid:173)
`dose levels of 1.800 mg/rn" and higher (table 2). At the
`1.800-2.250 mg/rn''
`total-dose
`levels,
`14 treatment
`courses were given. Ten were initial
`treatments and
`foul' were subsequent or escalation treatments. In this
`group, nausea, vomiting, and diarrhea occurred in 29%
`(4/14),14% (2/14), and 29%, respectively. These symp(cid:173)
`toms generally began on days 3-5 and persisted for
`another 24-48 hours. One episode of diarrhea, associ(cid:173)
`ated with cramps, was severe but not bloody. It began
`on day 6 and persisted for 2 days. SGOT elevatio ns
`were t he most frequent
`toxicity noted, occurring in
`43% (6/14). All SGOT levels that had been elevatecl
`returned to or toward normal by day 29. The alkaline
`phosphatase levels became elevated (an increase in 25%
`or more above base line) in 2 patients on day-5 deterrni(cid:173)
`nations. One of the 2 patients had extensive liver
`metastases from a colon cancer
`that progressed Oll
`therapy. Two instances of leukopenia arid thromboey(cid:173)
`topenia oecurred at the 1.800 mg/rn" dose level resulting
`in WBC nadirs of 3,600 and 3,300 on days 15 a n d 14,
`respectively, and in PLT nadirs of 126,000 anel 121,000
`on days 13 and 19, respectively. Orie patient developed
`unilateral facial n umbness at the 2.25 mg/m 2 level. This
`patient had known central nervous system metastases .
`She had disease progression and clid not return for
`subsequent
`reevaluation; no further
`information is
`available on the facial weakness.
`t he
`Toxicity was severe in the 4 patients treatecl at
`2.700 mg/rn'' total-dose level. All 4 patien ts received t his
`dose level as their first exposure to MA YT. Severe
`nausea and vomiting occurred in 3 of the 4 patients
`beginning on day 3. Two of these patients, who also
`had abdominal cramps, were eventually hospitalized
`
`J NATL CANCER INST
`
`VaL. 60, NO. 1, JANUARY 1978
`
`IMMUNOGEN 2042, pg. 2
`Phigenix v. Immunogen
`IPR2014-00676
`
`

`

`Downloaded from
`
`http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/
`
` by Kelley Martin on November 13, 2014
`
`TABLE 2.-Nature and frequency of toxicities" from MAYT based on total dosage of drug (in rnglmi) administered per course
`
`EARLY CLINICAL STUDY OF MAYTANSINE
`
`95
`
`Dose level
`mg/rn"
`
`No. of initial
`treatment
`courses
`
`No. of subse-
`quent esca-
`lation
`courses
`
`Toxic effects b
`
`Nausea Vomiting Diarrhea
`
`t SGOTc
`
`t Alka-
`line phos-
`phatase
`
`0.045
`0.090
`0.135
`0.270
`0.405
`0.900
`1.350
`
`1.800
`2.250
`2.700
`
`Total
`
`~1.350;
`
`1.8-2.25
`
`2.7
`
`3
`4
`4
`3
`5
`3
`4
`
`5
`5
`4
`
`40
`
`26
`
`10
`
`4
`
`0
`1
`2
`3
`1
`7
`3
`
`3
`1
`0
`
`21
`
`17
`
`4
`
`0
`
`0
`2
`1
`3
`0
`0
`1
`
`4
`0
`3
`
`14/61
`(23)
`
`7/43
`(16)
`4/14
`(29)
`3/4
`(75)
`
`0
`0
`1
`2
`0
`0
`1
`
`2
`0
`3
`
`9/61
`(15)
`
`4/43
`(9)
`2/14
`(14)
`3/4
`(75)
`
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`2
`2
`
`3
`1
`0
`
`8/61
`(13)
`
`4/43
`(9)
`4/14
`(29)
`0/4
`
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`2
`
`3
`3
`3
`
`11/61
`(18)
`
`2/43
`(5)
`6/14
`(43)
`3/4
`75
`
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`
`2
`0
`0
`
`2/61
`(3)
`
`0/43
`
`2/14
`(14)
`0/4
`
`Neuro-
`logic
`symp-
`toms
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`1
`1
`
`0
`1
`0
`
`3/61
`(5)
`
`2/43
`(5)
`1/14
`
`0/4
`
`t WBCd
`
`t PLTe
`
`~-~-"----_.-
`
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`0
`1
`
`2
`0
`0
`
`3/61
`(5)
`
`1/43
`(2)
`2/14
`(14)
`0/4
`
`0
`1
`0
`1
`0
`1
`1
`
`2
`0
`0
`
`6/61
`(10)
`
`4/43
`(9)
`2/14
`(14)
`0/4
`
`gressed after one course, 4 (10%) after two courses, 2
`three courses, and 1 (2.5%) after
`four
`(5%) after
`courses; 5 (12.5%) currently are stable.
`
`DISCUSSION
`
`The major clinical dose-limiting toxicity from MA YT
`was severe nausea and vomiting, generally beginning
`about day 4 or 5 and persisting for 1-5 days. This was
`sometimes accompanied by stornach cramps and waterv
`diarrhea. These toxicities became most apparent start(cid:173)
`ing at the 1.80 mg/m" dose level. At 2.7 mg/rn", 2 of 4
`patients had to be hospitalized for intraetable nausea,
`vomiting, and dehydration. The other major toxicity
`was liver dysfunction as evideneed by increases in SGOT
`levels and, occasionally, alkaline phosphatase levels.
`These abnormalities tended to improve or to disappear
`with time. Most patients reeeived only one course of
`treatment so that eumulative neurotoxicity as seen with
`the vinca alkaloids is hard to assess, but the development
`of paresthesia, leg eramps, agitation, and sleep abnor(cid:173)
`malities in a patient who received four courses of
`treatment seems to indicate that neurotoxieity does
`oeeur with MAYT. None ofthe 3 patients who devel(cid:173)
`oped apparent neurotoxicity had electromyograms
`done. Only 1 patient, who was 78 years old, developed
`a eardiac arrhythmia; it cannot be definitely aseribed to
`MA YT. Hematologic toxieity was seen infrequently,
`was mild, and usually presented as a transient throrn-
`
`a Toxicities are included in this table only if noted in > 1 patient.
`b Numbers in parentheses indicate percent.
`C 50% increase above pretreatment level.
`dA WBC nadir of <4,100 cells/mm".
`e A platelet nadir of <130,000 cells/mm".
`
`because the nausea and vorrntmg became intractable
`and led to dehydration. Three of these 4 patients also
`developed elevations of SGOT above their base line
`levels , two of which were elevated initially. However,
`by day 29, the SGOT levels had returned to normal in
`1 patient with the normal initial value and to a lower
`but still elevated level in 1 of the other 2 patients with
`initially elevated values on whom follow-up data are
`available.
`No objective tumors were noted in the 40 patients
`treated (table 3). Twenty-eight
`(70%) patients pro-
`
`TABLE 3.-Tumor site or histology in the 40 evaluable patients
`
`Tumor site or histology
`
`No.ofpatients
`
`13
`
`6331
`
`11
`
`332221111
`
`40
`
`Lung
`Large cell
`Adenocarcinoma
`Squamous cell
`Small cell
`Colorectal area
`Melanoma
`Adenocarcinoma-unknown primary
`Stomach
`Prostate gland
`Leiomyosarcoma
`Breast
`Liver
`Pancreas
`Thymoma
`Total
`
`VaL. 60, NO. 1, JANUARY 1978
`
`J NATL CANCER INST
`
`IMMUNOGEN 2042, pg. 3
`Phigenix v. Immunogen
`IPR2014-00676
`
`

`

`Downloaded from
`
`http://jnci.oxfordjournals.org/
`
` by Kelley Martin on November 13, 2014
`
`96
`
`EAGAN,
`
`INGLE, RUBIN, FRYTAK, AND MOERTEL
`
`bocytopenia occurring most frequently between days 14
`and 21 post treatment.
`No tumor responses were seen. Most treated tumors,
`colorectal and lung, are relatively drug resistant
`to
`single-agent chemotherapy, particularly when the single
`agent
`is given after prior chemotherapy. All but 3
`patients had received prior chemotherapy.
`The recommended starting dosage for Phase 11 stud(cid:173)
`ies is 2.25 mg/m" total dose per course. Whether or not
`transient liver dysfunction, as noted in this stud y, would
`progress to permanent hepatic parenchymal damage is
`unknown at present, since no patient in this current
`study received suffieient drug over a long enough time
`to develop persistent liver function abnormalities not
`associated with liver metastases. There was no clear
`relationship between the frequency or severity of toxic-
`
`ity and preexisting liver disease In the form of hepatic
`metastases .
`
`REFERENCES
`(1) KUPCHAN SM, KOMODA Y, COURT WA, et al: Maytansine, a
`novel antileukemic ansa macrolide from Maytenus ouatus . J Am
`Chem Soc 94: 1354-1356, 1972
`(2) WOLPERT-DEFILLIPES MK, BONO VH JR, DION RL, et al: Initial
`studies on maytansine-induced metaphase arrest
`in L1210
`murine leukemia cells. Biochem PharmacoI24:1735-1738, 1975
`(3) HOLMAN LJ, SLAVIK M: Clinical brochure on maytansirie (NSC
`153858)
`from the Investigational Drug Branch, Division of
`Cancer Teatrnent, National Cancer Institute, 1976
`(4) REMILLARDS S, REBHUN LI: Antimitotic activity of t.he potent
`tumor in hibitor , maytansine. Science 189:1002-1005, 1975
`(5) GOLDSMITH MA, SLAVIK M, CARTER SK: Quantitative prediction
`of drug toxicity in humans from toxicology in small and large
`animals. Cancer Res 35: 1354-1364, 1975
`
`J NATL CANCER INST
`
`VOL. 60, NO. 1, JANUARY 1978
`
`IMMUNOGEN 2042, pg. 4
`Phigenix v. Immunogen
`IPR2014-00676
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket