throbber
A phaseI study with tumor molecular pharmacodynamic (MPD)evaluation of dose ands... Page 1 of 1
`
`Joumalof Clinical Oncology, 2005 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings.
`Vol 23, No 16S (June 1 Supplement), 2005: 3007
`© 2005 American Society of Clinical Oncology
`Abstract
`
`A phaseI study with tumor molecular pharmacodynamic
`(MPD)evaluation of dose and schedule of the oral mTOR-
`inhibitor Everolimus (RAD001)in patients (pts) with advanced
`solid tumors
`J. Tabernero, F. Rojo, H. Burris, E. Casado, T. Macarulla, S. Jones, S. Dimitrijevic, K.
`Hazell, N. Shand, J. Baselga study group
`
`Vall d'Hebron Univ Hosp, Barcelona, Spain; Sarah Cannon CancerCtr, Nashville, TN;
`Novartis Oncology, Basel, Switzerland
`3007
`
`Background: Everolimus (E), an oral derivative of rapamycin, inhibits mTOR,a protein
`kinase downstream of PI3K and Akt,involved in the regulation of cell growth,proliferation
`andsurvival. In preclinical models, the administration of E is associated with reduction of
`mTORdownstream phosphorylated(p}-S6 (p-S6) and p-4E-BP1, and occasionally with
`increase in upstream p-Akt. This study explores safety, PK and MPD changes in tumorat
`different doses and schedulesof E to define the recommendeddose forfurther
`development. Methods: Pts with advanced solid tumors were treated in successive cohorts
`of E: weekly 20, 50 and 70 mgordaily 5 and 10 mg. Dose escalation depended on dose
`limiting toxicity (DLT) rate during thefirst 4-week period. Pre- and on-treatment steady-
`state (24hr post-dose and, for the weekly schedule, 5 days post-dose) tumor biopsies were
`obtained from each pt. Tumortissue was evaluated by immunchistochemistry (IHC) for
`p-S6, p-4E-BP1 and p-Akt expression by a pathologistblinded for the biopsy sequence.
`Results: 33 pts have beentreated with 6-8 pts in each cohort. Grade 3 DLT occurred in 5
`pts comprising stomatitis (1 pt at 10 mg daily, 2 at 70 mg weekly), neutropenia and
`hyperglycemia (1 pt each at 70 mg weekly). There were onepartial response (colon
`cancer) and 2 stabilizations of >4 months (renal call and breast cancer). MPD studies (see
`table) demonstrated an almost completeinhibition of p-S6 at all doses and schedules
`(p=0.001). Preliminary results suggest a dose-related decrease in p-4E-BP1 andincrease
`in p-Akt expression with maximal effect at 10 mg daily and >50 mg weekly. Conclusions:
`This phase | study shows thatE, at the doses and schedules studied, results in intratumoral
`inhibition of mTORsignaling. Based onthe toxicity profile and the MPDfindings, a dosage
`of 10 mg daily can be recommendedfor further phaseII-III developmentwith E as a single
`agent.
`
` View larger version (12K):
`
`[in this window]
`[in a new window]
`
`AuthorDisclosure
`Other
`Expert
`Research
`Stock
`Employment Consultant or
`or Leadership Advisory Role Ownership Honoraria Funding Testimony Remuneration
`
`Novartis
`
`Merck KGaA,
`Novartis,
`Roche,sanofi-
`aventis
`
`Abstract presentation from the 2005 ASCO Annual Meeting
`
`Advertis
`
`ES
`
`Adverti:
`
`http://meeting.ascopubs.org/cgi/content/abstract/23/16_suppl/3007?sid=ee291936-2619-47.... 5/19/2015
`West-Ward Pharm.
`Exhibit 1038
`Page 001
`
`West-Ward Pharm.
`Exhibit 1038
`Page 001
`
`

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