throbber
Proceedings of ASCO Volume 17 1998
`
`CUNICAL PHARMACOLOGY
`
`225a
`
`*88.5
`
`*868
`
`PHASE I AND PHARMACOKINETIC (PK) STUDY OF THE GLYCINAMIDE RIBO-
`NUCLEOTIDE FORMYLTRANSFERASE (GARIq’) INHIBITOR LY309887 AS A BOLUS
`EVERY 3 WEEKS WITH FOLIC ACID (FA). C. A)~lesworth, $.D. Baker, J.
`Stephenson, P. Monroe, L Sanchez, J. Wafting, R. Johnson, D. Van Hoff and
`E. Rowinsky. Brooke Army Medical Center and Cancer Therapy and
`Research Center, San Antonio, TX; Eli Lilly Pharmaceuticals.
`
`LY309887 is a potent inhibitor of GARFT that catalyzes the first two
`folate-dependent steps of de novo purine biosynthesis. Compared to
`Lometrexol, a "first generation" GARFT inhibitor that induced delayed and
`cumulative clinical toxicity, LY309887 is less extensively polyglutaminated
`and 9-fold more potent at inhibiting GARFT. Also, LY309887 showed
`greater affinity for folate receptor isoforms in malignant compared to liver
`tissue. Co-administration of LY309887 and FA resulted in an increased
`therapeutic index in mice. The objectives of this study were to assess the
`feasibility of administering LY309887 as an iv bolus every 21 days with FA
`5 m~/day for 5 days starting 2 days before LY309887 in patients (pts) with
`advanced solid cancers and to determine the maximum tolerated dose
`(MTD) and both toxicity and PK profiles. To date, 14 pts have received drug
`at the following levels (rag/mS): 1 (3 pts! 8 courses (Cs)), 2 (1 pt/2Cs), 4 (1
`pt/4Cs), 8 (4 pLs/7Cs), 12 (2 pts/2Cs) and 6 (3 pts/6Cs). At 12 m~/m2, no
`toxicity occurred during C1, but C2 was associated with grade 4 neutrope-
`nia and grade 3 thrombocytopenia with recovery at day 64. Subsequent
`experience at 8 m~m2 resulted in grade 4 neutropenia (C1) and grade 4
`thrombocytopenia (C2). Modest neurosensory toxicity has also been noted
`in 4 pts across all dose levels. During C1, both Cmax and AUCo-24h values
`increased linearly with dose. Approximately 63 % of drug was excreted
`unchanged in urine. The t112 and CI were dose-independent with mean
`values of 4.3 hours and 92.7 ml/min, respectively. Increasing levels of drug
`exposure were associated with greater platelet toxicity. Interpatient variabil-
`ity in FA exposure was observed with Cm~ and AUCo-24h values ranging from
`500-2330 ug/ml and 77-220 ug*hr/ml, respectively, which may have
`contributed to large interpatient variability in toxicity. To date, 3 pts have
`received 6 Cs at the 6 mg/m2 without grade 3/4 hematologic toxicity. This
`dose level will be further evaluated to determine the MTD that permits
`repetitive dosing with acceptable toxicity and describe the relationship
`between PK and toxicity.
`
`A PHASE I AND PHARMACOKINETIC (PK) STUDY OF THE MULTITARGETED
`ANTIFOL (MTA) LY231514 WITH FOLIC ACID. L. Hammond, M. Vi/lalona-
`Calero, S.G. Eckhardt, R. Dreng[ler, C. Aylesworth, T. Johnson, M. Hidalg[o,
`G. Rodrig[uez, S. Diab, R Monroe, D. Thornton, D. Von Hoff, and E.
`Rowinsky. Cancer Therapy and Research Center and Brooke Army Med
`Center, San Antonio, TX, and Eli Lilly Company, Indianapolis, IN.
`
`MTA (LY 231514) is a new antifol that inhibits multiple folate-dependent
`enzymes, including thymidylate synthase, dihydrofolate reductase, and
`glycinamide ribonucleotide formyl transferase. Initial phase I trials demon-
`strated major antitumor responses when MTA was given as a 10 min i.v.
`infusion, however, myelosuppression precluded dose escalation above
`500-600 mg/m2. Since preclinical studies indicated that folic acid
`supplementation increases the therapeutic index of MTA, the feasibility of
`administering folio acid 5 mg daily for 5 days starting 2 days before MTA in
`minimally- and heavily-pretreated pts was evaluated to determine if folio
`acid supplementation ameliorates the toxic effects of MTA, permitting
`significant dose-escalation above the recommended phase II dose of MTA
`alone. Thus far, 21 pts with solid cancers have received 55 courses at the
`following dose levels: 600, 700, and 800 mg/m2. Drug-related toxicities
`have included neutropenia, anemia, and thrombocytopenia, which have
`been more severe in heavily-pretreated pts. Other toxicities (grade 1-2)
`include rash, somnolence, fatigue, leg edema, and diminished renal
`function manifested by a decrease in creatinine clearance. One pt taking a
`non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agent experienced severe toxicities at the
`800 mg/m2 dose, which resolved after administration of leucovorin and
`thymidine. One partial response in a pt with metastatic colon cancer has
`been observed. PK and vitamin (folio acid) metabolite profiles were done
`during cycles 1 and 3 at 600 and 800 mg/m2. To date, serum folic acid
`levels do not appear to be related to toxicity, but homocysteine was
`significantly elevated in the pt with severe toxicities at the 800 mg/m2
`dose. Thus far, heavily- and minimally-pretreated patients have tolerated
`MTA at 600 and 800 mg/ms and accrual continues at 700 and 900 mg/m2,
`respectively. These results indicate that folio iicid supplementation appears
`to permit MTA dose escalation.
`
`*887
`
`*868
`
`A PHASE I AND PHARMACOKINEI’IC (PK) STUDY OF TRIMETREXATE (TMTX) IN
`CANCER PATIENTS (PTS) WITH RENAL (RI) OR HEPATIC IMPAIRMENT (HI). M~./.:
`Gi/lisor~, S. O’Rei/ly, R.C. Donehower, D.A. Noe, M. Duerr, L.B. Grochow.
`Johns Hopkins Onco/o~, Center, Baltimore,
`
`The antifolate TMTX is undergoing phase III evaluation with 5FU in colon
`cancer pts. In phase I studies significant interpt variability in toxicity was
`observed and was related to hepatic function. A phase I and pk study was
`performed in pts without and with RI or Hi. Cohorts included: controls
`(creatinine clearance (CrCI) >7OraL/rain total bilirubin (TB) < 1.6rag/alL);
`pts with mild Ri (CrCi 40-60 mL/min); pts with moderate RI (CrCi
`20-4OraL/rain); pts with severe RI (CrCI < 2OraL/rain); and pts with HI
`(TB > 2.0 m~/dL, albumin < 3.6rag/alL). TMTX was given iv over 30 rain
`every 21 days. Doses were escalated from 140 mg/ms in controls and pts
`with mild RI; from 105 m~/ms in pts with moderate RI; and from 70 mg/ms
`in pts with severe RI or HI. Dose limiting toxicities (DLT) were grade IV
`neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, mucositis and rash. Ten DLT occurred in
`3/17 controls who received 62 cycles of TMTX (range 105-275 rag/mS); 27
`DLT occurred in 9/13 RI pts over 61 cycles (range 35-175 rag/mS); and 10
`DLT occurred in 4/11 HI pts over 26 cycles (range 35-105rag/mS). Dose
`was reduced to 35mg/ms in HI pts, after the first 2 pts had severe DLT. Prior
`pelvic irradiation or nitrosourea therapy increased the risk of DLT (p = 0~06).
`Single clinical measures of RI or HI did not correlate with TMTX pk
`(r < 0.5). However, mean TMTX clearance was lower in HI pts compared to
`controls (36.5 vs. 64.3 mL/min; p = 0.016). Increasing hematologic
`toxicity was observed with increasing TMTX AUC in controls and RI pts but
`not in HI pts, suggesting variable metabolism of TMTX. TMTX pk is altered
`in HI pts, for whom a starting dose of 35 mg/m~ is recommended. A dose of
`105mg/ms is recommended for pts with CrCI of 20-6OraL/rain. Subse-
`quent dose escalations may be considered for pts without DLT. Supported
`by grants no. NO1 CM 07302 and CA 01709-03 (NIH)
`
`INTERIM RESULTS OF A PHASE I TRIAL SUGGEST THAT TOMUDEX~ (RALTI-
`TREXED) MAY ACT SYNERGISTICALLY WITH 5-FLUOROURACIL (S-FU) IN PA-
`TIENTS WITH ADVANCED COLORECTAL CANCER (ACC). K.H. Dragnev,
`Schwartz, J. Bertino, N. Kemeny, L. Saltz, A. Sug[arman, D.K. Kelsen, W.
`Tong[, C. Lowery. Memorial Sloan-Kettering[ Cancer Center, New York, NY
`and Zeneca Pharmaceuticals, Wilmington, DE.
`
`’Tomudex’ is a direct inhibitor of thymidylate synthase with activity in ACC.
`Synergy has been demonstrated in cell lines when ’Tomudex’ is followed by
`5-FU. 21 patients were given ’Tomudex’ followed 24 hours later by 5-FU
`every 21 days. All but five had failed prior modulated 5-FU therapy:
`
`Dose, mg/m2
`’Tomudex’/
`5-FU
`
`OR
`(duration
`months)
`
`SD
`(duration
`months)
`
`Mean
`5-FU Cmax
`PD (izM)
`
`Mean 5-FU
`AUC
`(p.M/min)
`
`0.5/900
`1.0/900
`1.5/900
`2.0/900
`2.51900
`3.01900
`
`1 306 -+ 32 10498 -+ 1119
`1 (3.7)
`1PR(5.9)*
`9176 ± 611
`1 278 -+ 52
`2 (3.8, 13-1)
`0
`5362 +- 2591
`1 166 -+ 86
`2 (6.0, 9.6)
`0
`6794 +- 1167
`1 216 -* 27
`1 (6.6)
`1PR(5.2)*
`3 (5.5, 6.5, 3.0) 0 648 -+ 74 19593 -+ 6074
`0
`2 528 +- 136 16360 _+ 1452
`1CR(9.5+) 0
`
`3.011050
`Total
`
`0
`3
`
`1 (3.0+)
`10
`
`2 667 -+ 116 20979 _+ 6046
`8
`
`*received prior 5-FU based therapy, **received no prior therapy
`
`Therapy was well tolerated. There was no grade 3 or 4 mucositis; the most
`common toxicity was neutropenia. Eighteen patients are alive. Clinical
`activity, including disease stabilization, was seen in patients previously
`treated with 5-FU. Pharmacokinetic data suggest synergy between ’Tomu-
`dex’ and 5-FU. At ’Tomudex’ doses above 2.0 mg/ms DLT has not yet been
`reached. Dose escalation continues. Tomudex is a trademark and property
`of Zeneca Ltd.
`
`Sandoz Inc.
`Exhibit 1014-0001
`
`Teva – Fresenius
`Exhibit 1014-00001

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