throbber

`
`IMMUNOGEN 2293, Pg. 1
`Phigenix v. Immunogen
`|PR2014-00676
`
`IMMUNOGEN 2293, pg. 1
`Phigenix v. Immunogen
`IPR2014-00676
`
`

`

`Program/ Proceedings of the
`American Society of Clinical Oncology
`
`
`AMERICAN SOCIETY OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, INC.
`
`OFFICERS
`
`1989—1990
`
`President, Robert C. Young
`
`Rresident-Elect, Harvey M. Golomb
`
`Immediate Past President, Charles A. Coliman, Jr.
`
`Secretary-Treasurer, John W. Yarbro
`
`BOARD OF DIRECTORS
`
`Karen Antman
`James O. Armitage
`John H. Glick
`
`Stephen E. Jones
`Robert J. Mayer
`Gary A. Presant
`James B. Gantenberg
`Executive Director
`
`‘
`
`
`
`Brigid Leventhal, Editor
`
`Editorial Staff provided by W.B. Saunders Company.
`
`
`Copyright 1990 by the American Society of Clinical Oncology.
`
`IMMUNOGEN 2293, Pg. 2
`Phigenix v. Immunogen
`|PR2014-00676
`
`IMMUNOGEN 2293, pg. 2
`Phigenix v. Immunogen
`IPR2014-00676
`
`

`

`IMMUNOLOGY AND CYTOKINES
`
`'721
`TREATMENT OF T CELL LYMPHOMA WITH MONOCLONAL ANTI-
`IDIOTYPE ANTIBODY. D.G. Maloney, H.T. Maecker. S. Takahashi,
`D. Czerwinskl and Ft. Levy. Stanford Medical Center, Slanlord
`CA 94305.
`Epitopes formed by the combination of the alpha and beta
`chains of
`the T cell antigen receptor provide a clonotypio
`marker for monoclonal tumors of T cell origin. We report here
`the production and therapeutic use pi a monoclonal anti-
`ldiotype antibody against the T cell receptor of a patient with
`cutaneous T cell lymphoma. Balb/c mice were immunized with
`tumor Cells and hybrldomas screened for
`the ability to co-
`modulate 003 then further selected for
`tumor specificity by
`cell staining and immunopreclpitation. HLl precipitatedthe
`alpha and beta chains of the T cell receptor but not
`the CD3
`complex from tumor cells.
`it bound to patient tumor cells. but
`not to other cloned T cell lines and less that 4 percent of cells in
`tonsil or blood.
`In
`vitro. HLt had no eitect on the
`incorporation ct SH-thymidine.
`Rapidly increasing skin
`lesions occurred following discontinuation otchemolherapy
`prior
`to antibody treatments.
`The patient was treated with
`antibody given IV three times each week for two.
`three week
`courses. The dose was escalated to 300 mg to obtain Circulating
`antibody. Blood and skin tumor cells were rapidly coated with
`antibody. Serum samples were monitored for antibody level
`and circulating tumor cells analyzed by FACS. Skin biopsies
`documented a reduction in tumor burden. HLi positive cells
`remained in the blood despite being coated with antibody. The
`patient had initial worsening then clearing of his skin lesions
`over the lollowlng four months. We conclude.
`that
`like antl-
`idiolype therapy of B cell malignancies. anti-idlotypio T cell
`antibodies hold promise as anti-tumor
`immunolherapeulic
`agents.
`
`'722
`ANTIvTRANSFERRIN RECEPTOR IMMUNOTOXIN (IT) THERAPY: PHASE-l
`[NTRAPERITONEAL (i.p.) TRIAL. M.A. Bookman, S. Godfrey, K. Pndnvic. T.
`Griffin. LP. Cordn. T. Hamilton, R.F. 02.015, 13.3. Groves. Fox Chase Cancer
`Center (FCCC), Philnladolphia, PA 19111; U. Muss. Medical School. Worcester.
`MA 01605; and Cetus Corp., Emeryville, CA 94608.
`The transferrin receptor (TfR) is uniformly expressed on malignant. as well.
`as normnl cells,
`is efficiently intomnlizcd. and is a suitable target for IT delivery.
`The mnrina nnti-TfR monoclonnl antibody 454Al2. was linked via a reducible disulfido
`bond to recombinant ricin A-chnin (rRA. Cetus) to create 454A12-rRA. Efficacy was
`demonstrated in preclinical studios using a xenogeneic nude mouse model with human
`ovarian cancer (FitzGerald. et al. Cancer Res 47: 1407. 1987) Mid n syngencic murine
`model with different nnti-TfR lTs (Bjorn and Gmetsemn, Cancer Res 47:6§39. I987).
`A clinical trial was initiated for patients (pts) with ovarian, mesothelinl. renal, and
`gastrointestinal cancer involving the peritoneal cavity:
`Target Doses:
`20 pg test dose day i; then 5, 10. 25, 50, 100 nglkg daily x 5
`days !.p, in 2000 ml dialysnte (1.5% dextrose)
`Accmnl (11/89):
`10 pts treated at FCCC and U. Moss, Medical School
`Maximum Done:
`20 pg test does followed by 25 rig/kg x 5 doses
`Toxicity:
`IT-rclated: Hypoalbuminomin Grl (all pts) and malaise.
`Not clearly IT-related: Poritonitis (1 pt,
`1 dose) and partial
`bowel obstmction (1 pt,
`1 dose). No myelosupprcssiou.
`mucositis, skin rush, or neurologic toxicity.
`Intact IT measured by sandwich ELISA (3 pts @ 5 [lg/kg).
`Lp. levels sustained in 3 pts between 20 and 150 ng/ml x 5 days.
`Serum levels detectable in 1 pt between 3 and 10 ng/ml.
`0 CR. 0 PR.
`I decreased ascites. 5 progressive disease.
`Response:
`Untreated nscites tumors were evaluated for Tilt by immunohistochomicnl staining and
`immunofluorescent staining with flow cytometry.
`IT-rnediated protein synthesis
`inhibition (Icso) was measured by [3H]-leucine incorporation @24 hrs. All tumors
`examined were TtR(+) and lle ICSO values between 10 and 100 ng/ml. Data
`regarding formation of neutralizing antibodies are pending. We conclude that anti~
`Tl‘R IT can be administered Lp. with acceptable toxicity to pts with cancer at doses
`Which achieve detectable serum levels and with i.p. levels that exceed the in Vitro
`le. Dose escalation continues on this study to determine the spectrum of dose-
`limiting toxicity and obtain additional biological data.
`
`IT Levels:
`
`'723
`A PHASE II STUDY OF DACARBAZlNE (DTIC), CISPLRTIN (DDP),
`AND OUTPATIENT INTERLEUKlN-e (IL—a)
`(RIDD-al
`1N METASTATIC
`MALIGNANT MELRNOMA (M.M.M.l.
`L. Flaherty, N. Robinson,
`8. Redman, R. Gonzales. 5. Martina,
`t1. Kraut,
`H. Valdivieso, and A. Rudolph. Wayne State Univ.,
`,Detroit, "1., 48201, Univ. of Colorado, Denver,
`(30.,
`80220, and Cetus Corp., Emeryville, CA., 94608.
`The tolerablllty of DTIC and outpatient
`lL—E along
`with a median survival of 8.5 mos., and responses in
`visceral organs (ASCO, 7:854, 1988)
`in MM”, prompted the
`present ongoing phase ll study of DTIC, DDP, and lL-E.
`DTIC (750 mg/M”)
`IV over 30 min. and DDP (100 mg/M”)
`IV
`over 30 min. are administered on Day 1.
`lL-a 29.0 x 10*
`lU/Ma IV bolus is administered die-to, d19—23 of each 28
`day cycle.
`25 patients (pts.) have been registered to
`date and 91 cycles of therapy have been evaluated for
`toxicity. Patient characteristics include median age—SE
`y.o.
`(16-74), males 13, females 13, performance status 0-1
`in at pta., a 1n 4 pts.
`No pt. had prior chemotherapy.
`17 pts. had visceral
`involvement. Toxicity consisting
`primarily of fatigue, anorexia, arthralgies, vomiting,
`fever and chills, necessitated 13 lL—E dose reductions.
`The mean dose of lL-a administered has been 81.3 x 10°
`IU/ME. Renal
`toxicity lcreatlnlna clearance (coco/min.)
`has occurred in 11/91 courses.
`E4 pts. are evaluable for
`response with E CR‘o and 7 PR’s (38% RR).
`E pta. have
`been rendered disease—free with additional surgery. CR's
`have occurred in soft tissue and lymph nodes.
`PR's have
`occurred in soft tissue,
`lymph node,
`lung,
`liver, spleen,
`and adrenals.
`DTIC and DDP did not interfere with the
`repeated generation of NK and LAK activity. This program
`has been tolerable and more effective than our prior
`efforts combining DTIC and lL-E.
`lL-E was provided by Cetus Corp., Emeryvilla, CA.
`
`’
`'724
`IN‘I'ERLEUKIN 2 (1L2) +
`HUMAN
`RECOMBINANT
`+
`ALPHA—INTERFKRON
`( LAK)
`LYMPHOCYTES
`METASTATIC RENAL CELL CARCINOMA.
`
`ILZ ACTIVATE)
`( ot-IFN)
`IN
`
`G.
`stoter‘, S.H. Goey‘
`t C.J.A. Punt“, cm. Pranks’. c.
`barriers1 , R.L.I-t. Bolhuls .
`l) Rotterdam Cancer: Institute,
`Rotterdam. The Netherlands 2) EuroCelzus BV, Amsterdam,
`The Netherlands
`3) University Hospital, Nljniegen, The
`Netherlands
`.
`-
`
`Sixteen patients (pt-.5) with measurable metastatic renal
`cell
`carcinoma
`have been treated with daily continuous
`intravenous
`(c.i.v.)
`infusion of
`ILZ 18 MIU/inz/day,
`(1
`1—5.
`Leukapheresis is performed at: d 7~9.
`LAX is given
`following leukapheresis
`at:
`d
`12—14 with 1L2 d 12—16.
`oc—IFN 5 MU/‘mz/day 1.m. is given at: it 12—15. This cycle is
`repeated at: day
`36.
`Patients with stable disease or
`response
`receive 4 maintenance cycles consisting of
`IL2
`18 MIU/mz/day c.i..v., at 1—4 and u—IFN 5 MU/mz/day 1.m.
`d
`1—4.
`Cycles are repeated every 4 weeks. There were
`11
`males and 5 females with a median age of 52 (39~65) and a
`Karnofsky
`index of
`100
`(80—100). All patients had
`undergone nephrectomy of
`the primary tumor. Metastatic
`sites were lung, pleura,
`lymph nodes, liver, mesentery,
`and retroperitoneum. Among 12 evaluable pts, we observed
`4 (33%) Emulate
`responses
`(CR),
`and 3 pts have stable
`disease while still on therapy. All responses occurred in
`lung and pleural metastases.
`one
`CR relapsed after: 5
`are
`months. The remaining 3 CR5
`lasting 4", 8+ and 11"
`months.
`side effects were similar to those expected from
`each treatment: component:
`alone.
`one patient developed a
`fatal myocardial infarction between cycle 1 and 2 with a
`ventricular septum defect.
`These preliminary results
`show
`a high CR
`rate as
`compared
`to our previous
`experience with 1L2 alone and 11.2 + LAK.
`N.B.: 1 Cetus Unit «a 6 International Units (IU)
`
`This material may be protected by Copyright law (Title 17 U.S. Code)
`
`PROCEEDINGS OF ASCO VOL. 9 MARCH 1990
`187
`
`
`
`IMMUNOGEN 2293, pg. 3
`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