throbber
n
`
`,
`
`c
`
`(imam
`America
`for CancefReqqqgfgh
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`April 1-5, 2000 San Francisco, CA
`(/10 [ll/26 4/
`//%I/(//1 Q9000 V
`
`Univ. ui Minn.
`Bin-Medical
`Library
`
`J
`
`A”
`___ 71
`Breckenridge Exhibit 1131
`Breckenridge v. Novartis lPR2017-01592
`Alexandre AACR Abstract
`
`

`

`host-dependent processes promoting cancer cell growth. ZD1839 showed an
`IC.o of 10.3-35.0 ng/ml for EGFR isolated from A431 vulval squamous carcinoma.
`This study evaluated the pharmacokinetics of ZD1839 following oral administra(cid:173)
`tion of single (50mg) and repeated (50-700 mg/day) doses in pis (n~6-10/group)
`with advanced malignancies. 57 pts (median age 55 years, range 28-75) provided
`blood samples included in the phannacokinetic analysis. Blood samples obtained
`up to 6 days after the single 50 mg dose, and at intervals during and for 6 days
`after the multiple-dose phase. were analysed by HPLC. Following the single 50
`mg dose, maximum plasma drug concentrations (mean 45 ng/ml; range 26.9-62.1
`ng/mQ occurred 1-5h post-dose. Concentrations declined biphasically thereafter
`with a mean terminal t"2 of 34h. Exposure (AUCO•24) following single and multiple
`administration, though variable (up to 7-fold at each dose level) increased ap(cid:173)
`proximately proportionally with dose with no apparent change in terminal t'll!' On
`repeated administration, steady-state was achieved by day 7, and there was a 2-
`to 7-fold increase in exposure (AUCO•24)on day 14 relative to day 1. Terminal t'l2
`appeared unaltered. Thus, ZD1839 is suitable for once-daily oral administration
`and potentially biologically relevant concentrations of drug are achievable at the
`dose levels studied. 'IRESSA' is a trademark, the property of the AstraZeneca
`group of companies
`
`#3897 PHASE I STUDY OF CCI-779,A NOVEL RAPAMYCIN ANALOG:
`PRELIMINARY RESULTS. Jerome Alexandre, E. Raymond, H. DepEmbrock, S.
`Mekhaldi. E. Angevin, C. Paillel. A. Hanauske, T. Le Chevalier, B. Escudier, J.
`Frisch, A. Feussner, and J. P Armand, Inst Gustave Roussy. Villejuif cedex,
`France. and Onkologische Tagesklinik, Genetics Institute, Munich. Germany
`CCI-779, a novel rapamycin analog displays antitumor activity without signifi(cid:173)
`cant immunosuppression in animals models. CCI-779 was given as a weekly 30
`min infusion in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors. Dose escalations were
`made using the modified continuous reassessment method. 15 pts (M/F: 10/5)
`were treated at the doses of 7.5 (1 pt. 15.0 (2 pts), 22.5 (1 pt). 34.0 (3 pts), 45.0
`(3 pts). 60.0 (2 pts), 80 (1 pt). 110 (1 pt. and 165 mg/m2/w (1 pt). So far. no dose
`limiting toxicity was observed. A grade (G) 1-2 skin toxiCity was observed at each
`dose level without any evidence of dose-effect relationship: dryness with mild
`itching (7 pts). eczema-like lesions (3 pts). sub-acute urticaria (1 pt). and aseptic
`follicles (10 pts). In the latest. skin biopsies showed folliculitis and superficial
`peri-capillar dermatitis. 5 pts experienced reactivation of peri-oral herpes lesions.
`G 1-2 mucositis was observed in 9 pts. All pts receiving >8 doses experienced GI
`nails Changes. ThromlXlcytopenia were observed in 4 pts treated at 34 (G3). 45
`(G2). 60 (G3) and 80mg/m2/w (Gl) requiring treatment delay in 3 pts. An asymp(cid:173)
`tomatic increased of triglyceridemia and cholesterolemia levels were observed in
`8 and 4 pts. respectively. Decreases in testoteronemia aSSOCiated with an in(cid:173)
`creased levels of LH and FSH were observed in 5/6 men receiving more than 4
`doses at doses >15mg/m2/w. The immunophenotype of peripheral lymphocytes
`and the mitogen proliferation assays did not show significant immunosuppres(cid:173)
`sion. 13 pts were evaluables for efficacy: 1 partial response in a patient with a
`1L2-IFa resistants metastatic renal cell carcinoma treated with 15mg/m2/w. 3
`minor responses. and 5 stabilization were observed. Accrual is ongoing.
`
`#3898 A PHASE I TRIAL OF GEMCITABINE AND RADIATION IN LOCALLY
`ADVANCED UNRESECTABLE CANCER OF THE PANCREAS. Laurie L Her(cid:173)
`scher, C. M Muir, G. S Kroog, J. A Cook. and J. B Mitchell, National Cancer Inst,
`Bethesda. MD
`Purpose: To determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose- limiting
`tOXicities ot gemcitabine with concurrent radiation therapy In patients with unre(cid:173)
`sectable adenocarcinoma of the pancreas delivered as a 30 minute infusion once
`weekly. Patients and Methods: Patients who had locally advanced or locally
`recurrent un resectable pancreatic cancer were eligible. Gemcitabine was admin(cid:173)
`istered as a 30 minute infusion once weekly for a total ot 5 cycles during the
`course of radiation therapy. The starting dose of gemcitablne was 350 mg/m2.
`Doses were escalated by increments of 25% in successive cohorts of three
`patients. Radiation therapy was delivered at 180 cGy/day to a total dose at
`5400-5580 cGy. Results: Nineteen patients were entered on this study through 3
`dose levels (350-550 mg/m2. The maximum tolerated dose was determined to be
`440 mg/m2. The dose-limiting toxicity was neutropenia and thrombocytopenia.
`Conclusion: The maximum tolerated dose of gemcilabine when administered as
`a 30 min infusion once weekly during radiation therapy tor unresectable pancre(cid:173)
`atic cancer was determined to be 440 mg/m2 • The dose-limiting toxiCity was
`cytopenia. Concurrent gemcitabine and radiotherapy is tolerable and may repre(cid:173)
`sent a basis to evolve increasingly effective chemoradiotherapy of pancreatic
`cancer.
`
`RADIOBIOLOGYIRADIATION ONCOLOGY 6: Radiation
`Biology V: Translational Research
`
`#3899 EFFECTS OF RADIATION DOSE AND DOSE RATE ON LYMPHO(cid:173)
`CYTE POPULAnONS. Michael J Pecaut, Radha Dutta-Roy. Michael F Moyers,
`Gregory A Nelson. and DaHa S Gridley, Loma Linda Univ. Lorna Linda, CA. and
`Lorna Linda Univ Med Ctr, Loma Linda, CA
`
`CLINICAL RESEARCH 22
`
`The hazards of interplanetary missions have been stressed in recent reports
`issued by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration and the National
`Research Council. Of concern is the possibility that the low-dosellow-dose rate
`radiation inherent to Solar Particle Events (SPE) and Galactic CosmiC Rays (GCR)
`may enhance tumorigenesis by immunosuppression andlor DNA damage. To
`address the issue of immune suppression, female C57BLl6 mice (n=85) were
`treated with whole-body irradiation from a 6°Cobalt gamma source. Animals were
`exposed to O. 0.5, 1.5, and 3.0 Gy at 1 cGy/min or 80 cGy/min. and euthanized
`4 days later. Splenic 'and peripheral blood lymphocytes underwent flow cytomet(cid:173)
`ric analysis with antibodies against leukocytes (CD45+), T cells (CD3+). B cells
`(CDI9+). helperlinducer T cells (CD4+), cytotoxic T cells (CD8+), and natural
`killer cells (NK 1.1 +). There were significant dose responses in both total cell
`counts and population distributions. In the blood, there were Significant dose
`responses in T cell. helper/inducer T cell. B cell. and NK cell percentages (p <
`0.001). However, only cytotoxiC T and NK cell percentages were affected by the
`dose rate (p < 0.02). Similar dose and dose rate responses were observed in the
`splenocyte percentages, as well as in blood and spleen lymphocyte counts.
`These results suggest that the doses predicted during SPEs can playa significant
`role in radiation-induced immunosuppression. There also appear to be differ(cid:173)
`ences in the ability of T, B, and NK cell populations to recover from radiation
`exposure. Because of these differences in population dynamics, hematopoietic,
`apoptotic, and trafficking mechanisms may all be involved. Studies are in
`progress to determine whether the immunomodulation affects tumor initiation and
`promotion.
`
`#3900 RADIATION EFFECTS OF TOTAL DOSE AND DOSE RATE ON
`COMPONENTS OF THE IMMUNE SYSTEM. Glen M Miller, Michael J Pecaut.
`Melba L Andres, Erik D Zendejas. Gregory A Nelson, and Daila S Gridley, Lama
`Linda Univ, Lorna Linda, CA, and Lorna Linda Univ Sch of Medicine, Lorna Linda,
`CA
`Interest in radiation-induced carcinogenesis has progressed as increased num(cid:173)
`bers of humans are exposed 10 radiation in various environmental, occupational,
`and therapeutic settings. Exposure to radiation can greatly modify immunological
`status and increase risk for cancer. In the present study. C57BLl6 female mice
`(n=85) were exposed to 0.5,1.5. and 3.0 Gy total dose of whole body gamma
`radiation from a 6OCobait source at a low dose rate (1 cGy/min) and a high dose
`rate (80 cGy/min). Four days post-exposure. all mice were euthanized to analyze
`immmunological components for a variety of proliferative and functional proper(cid:173)
`ties. A decline in spleen and thymus mass strongly correlated with total dose
`delivered. Similarly. leukocyte counts in both the blood and spleen were Inversely
`proportional to total dose (p<0.001) but independent of dose rate. In contrast,
`spontaneous blastogenesis results showed a directly proportional dose re(cid:173)
`sponse. Dose and dose rate did not alter splenocyte activation by PHA or ConA,
`T-cell mltogens. However. splenocyte response to the 8-cell mitogen, LPS, was
`negatively correlated with dose (p<O.OOI), independent of dose rate. Regarding
`cytokine production by splenocytes, IL-2 concentrations decreased as the total
`radiation dose increased. Cumulatively, these data suggest that protein synthesis
`of T-cells is affected by dose of radiation, as evidenced by IL-2 secretion, while
`DNA synthesis is unaffected within the same exposures. In summary, the data
`showed that immune components involved in tumor resistance, although highly
`affected by total dose, are not influenced by dose rate in these measures.
`Additional studies are in progress to detemline long term effects of radiation
`exposure on susceptibility to tumorigenesiS.
`
`#3901
`GENOTYPE/PHENOTYPE CORRELATIONS IN RADIATION-IN(cid:173)
`DUCED PAPILLARY THYROID CARCINOMAS: THE CHERNOBYL PARA·
`DIGM. Hartmut M Aabes, S. Klugbauer, D. Hoelzel. E. Lengfelder, and E. P
`Demidchik. Thyroid Cancer Ctr, Minsk, Belarus. and Univ of Munich, Munich,
`Germany
`The incidence of papillary thyroid carcinomas (PTC) increased in children
`exposed to radioactice fallout after the Chemobyl reactor accident. An analysis of
`191 cases revealed various types of RET rearrangements (H4IRET, PTC1; ELE11
`RET, PTC3; GOLGAS/AET, PTC5; HTIFIRET, PTC6; RFG7IRET, PTC7) with dif(cid:173)
`ferent prevalence and a few NTRKI rearrangements. RET rearrangement-positive
`PTC develop rapidly, with a significantly higher prevalence of PTC3 at short
`intervals after irradiation. At longer latency, the prevalence of rearrangements
`declines with a shift from PTC3 to PTCI. The type of rearrangement is indepen(cid:173)
`dent of age at radiation. However. the highest prevalence of PTC3 was found,
`irrespective of age, in the most heavily contaminated parts of Belarus. RET
`rearrangement is connected to a more advanced pT and pN category. In ELEI/
`RET tumors the solid variant of the papillary carcinoma predominates. while
`H4IRET tumors display more frequently the typical papillary pattem. The spec(cid:173)
`trum of radiation-induced gene rearrangements in the cohort of post-Chernobyl
`PTC from radiation-exposed children provides clues to phenotypes and bears
`implications for tumor biology and clinical course.
`
`#3902 MALDI·MASS SPECTROMETRY ANALYSIS OF NOVEL RADIA(cid:173)
`TION-INDUCED PROTEINS
`IN TUMORS AND HUMAN ENDOTHELIAL
`CELLS. M. Stoeckli. P. Chaurand, Elaine Sierra-Rivera. G. Cunningham, R. Cap(cid:173)
`rioli, and D. E Callahan, Vanderbilt Univ Sch of MediCine, Nashville, TN
`Tumor development and expansion requires a well-defined vascular supply to
`provide the tumor with necessary nutrients. Tumor blood vessels respond dlffer-
`
`Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research 0 Volume 41 0 Marcn 2000
`
`613
`
`

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