throbber
1060
`
`Clinical Pharmacology
`
`Proceedings of ASCO Volume 20 2001
`
`GEIIEIIAI. POSTER, SAT. 8:00 AM - 12:00 PM
`419
`Photo I and Pinnnacolrinetic Study of ilPlt116258A, a Novel Texans Deriva-
`tive, Administered intravenously over l Hour Every 3 weeks. A. D. Goetz, L. J.
`Denis, E. K. Rowinsliy, L. Ochoa, K. Molpus, B. Deblonde, D. Semrand, M.
`Besenval, A. W. Talcher; Institute forDrugDevelopmenf, San Antonio, TX,-
`Avenris Pharma, Washington DC
`is a weak
`RPR116258A, a semisynthetic and potent taxane derivative,
`substrate for P-glycoprotein and able to cross the blood brain barrier. These
`features confer broad antitumor activity in tumor models, including mdr-1
`cell lines. This clinical phase I study evaluates the safety and pharmacoki-
`netic (PK) profile of RPR1 16258A administered as 1-hour infusion every 3
`weeks in minimally-pretreated patients (pts) with advanced cancer. No
`prophylactic antiemetics or treatmentto prevent hypersensitivity reactions
`were permitted at cycle 1. Fourteen pts (9 maiesls females; median age 64
`yrs [32—80]; median PS 0 [0-2]) have been enrolled and 49 treatment
`courses were evaluable at dose levels of 10 (3 pts), 15 (6 pts). 20 (3 pts)
`and 25 mg/m"’ (2 pts). The main toxicity was short-lasting neutropenia Gr 4
`in one patient at 25mg/m’ and Gr 3 diarrhea in patients at 15 (1 pt) and 25
`mg/m’ (1 pt) that was well controlled by loperamide. Minor Gr 1 or Gr 2
`toxicities included diarrhea (3 pts). fatigue (3 pts), nausea (3 pts). vomiting
`(2 pts). neutropenia (5 pts), thrombocytopenia (1 pt), and neurosensory
`disorders Gr 1 (1 pt). Neither hypersensitivity reactions or fluid accumula-
`tion has been observed. Plasma samples were obtained up to 72 his
`post~infusion of cycles 1 and 2 and showed a -three-phasic elimination
`profile. Preliminary mean (2 SD) PK parametersindicated a high total body
`clearance (CL) of 30.5 (: 1 1 .7) Llh/m’, a large volume of distribution (V,,_)
`of 1438 (£701) Urn? and a long wrminal half-life of 55 (t 29) hours.
`lntrapatient variability of CL over 2 cycles was low (25%). One unconfirmed
`partial tumor response has been reported in a TCC bladder cancer patient
`and minor responses have been reported in patients with prostate cancer
`( 1) and osteosarcoma (1). In conclusion, the novel taxane RPRl16258A is
`well tolerated at the studied dose levels up to 25 mg/m‘. Preliminary PK
`results indicate a long terminal half-life justifying the intermittent dosing
`schedule every 3 weeks.
`
`‘
`
`differences
`
`BENEIAL POSTER,SAT.8:wAM -12:00PM
`‘
`421* ’
`Afhlooland PharIacoiririn!c(|?K)3IIliyof’ihelloveiTaxanu BIS 104476
`Allrlnietororlaca I-llourinlravonoostllolullsion Weekly. M. Beeram, M.
`Hidolgo, G. Rodriguez, K. Molpus, R. Df,9"8i'W. A. Tortora, L Smrfh, C.
`Tarby, L. Ochoa, S. Choc, A. Tolcller, G. Gallant, E. Rowinsky; institute for
`Drw Development, Cancer Therapy and %erarch« Center; The University
`of Texas Health science Center at Saniflnionia. San Antonio, TX; Bristol-
`Myers-Squibb, Wallingford, CT
`BMS 184476 is :—a‘ novel tonne with greater potency and a broader
`speotrurn antiturnor activity than paclitaxei in preclinical. modes. Further-
`more, 'BMSLl84476 is more soluble in aqueorfifsoiutions than pacllltaxel,
`‘ requiring 6B%‘less Cremophor ELO, which zrnayrender shorter iv adminis-
`tration schedules more feasible and and/or decrease the requirement for
`prernedication to prevent hypersensitivity rea¢tio’ns.- The maximum toler-
`ated dose. (MTD) of BMS-184476 administered. asa 1-hour IV infusion
`awry 3
`'60 mg/m2. with an unacceptably high incidence of
`rnucositis, and diarrma at higher doses. Based’ on distinct
`torricologic profiles of the laxanaon weekly schedules,
`flltritehavlor of Bills 184476 administered as a 1-hour
`W infusionion arruninterruptod weekly schedule is beingrevaluated. To
`date, 24 patients (median -age, 56, median ECOG PS - 1) have received 63
`three-week courses of BMSr18i)4'l6 at doses of 20, 25, 30, 35, and 40
`mg/m2.wee’kiy. Doseeiimitingtoxicity (DL‘l'),consisting.of grade 4 noutrope-
`nia with-feveril pt)
`bmlonoad neutropenia requiring a treotmentdelay
`exceeding 2 mltsil
`occurred in 1 heavily-pretreated (HP) and »1
`rnioimally—pretreated(MP):pt—at the 40 mg/m2 doseierrel. in addition. 1 of
`8 pts treated at thI.35.mym2 dose level developedigrade 3 diarrhea
`associated with dehydration and syncope. MP and HP pts are currently
`being treated at the 40 and 35, mg/m2. dose levels respectively. Prelimi-
`nary PK parameters determined in _Iitlpatienistrea_ted at dose levels of 20-
`35 mg/m2-revealed a .
`ionai. increment in Crnair and AUCO-24 that
`ranged from 3429 .-1054 l'l‘b1[flfld from 867 nM.h to 1458 nM.h. Meant
`1/2. Cl, and Vssrarrged
`31.3to~51.5 hours; 167 to 349 mil minl m2;
`and 514 to 744 l.‘fm2 respectively. These results indicate that EMS-
`184476 administered on weekly. IV schedule is well tolerated. At the 35 &
`40 mgIrn2 dose levels, which are projected to be the MTDs for HP and MP
`pts. respectively, the dose intensity is 1.75 and 2-fold higher than the MTD
`on the every 3-week schedule, but further studies are required to determine
`the clinical significance of this observation.
`
`GENERAL POSTER, SAT, 8:00 AM - 12:00
`420
`Phase I clinical and Plrarrnacokinotio (PK) Trial of the iiovol Tug
`IMS-184473 Administered as a I-Hour lV Infusion in combination mg
`clspiatin Every 21 Days. M. L. Gallagher. J. P. Stevenson, W. Sun,
`Vaughn, S. M. Hahn, D. G. Heller, R. Flrller, C. Tarby, D. Sannichsen
`Nason, G. Gallant, P. J, 0'Dwyer; University of Pennsylvania, Philadel
`PA; Bristol-Myers Squibb, Princeton, NJ; University of Pennsylamv&
`Philadelphia, PA
`BMS-184476 is a 7-methylthiomethyl ether derivative of paclitaxel th
`?
`displays in vitro potency at nM concentrations against paclitaxel-resi
`human tumor cell lines with MDR mediated by P-glycoprotein and alteggg”
`tubulin, and exhibits efficacy superior to paclitaxel against human to ’ *
`xenografts, producing significantly greater cures. Given the known syn
`1
`between taxanes and cisplatin in vitro and their clinical activity,
`performed a phase I trial of BMS-184476 as a 1-hour IV infusion foliovq
`by cisplatin every 21 days. 24 patients with a range of solid tumors and
`good performance status have received 84 cycles of therapy. EMS dose hag,
`ranged from, 40 - 60 mym2 with cisplatin fixed at 75 mg/m2. At mg
`planned final dose level of BMS—184476 60 mg/m2 and cisplatin IQ
`mglmz we observed DLT in the form of Gr 3/4 diarrhea (2 pts), Gr 3 NN~(s
`pts) and Gr 4 neutropenia 5 days (1 pt). We subsequently instituted:
`prophylactic regimen of ondansetron, dexamethasone, metoclopraml
`‘
`and pm loperamide and observed no further DLT in 6 additional pts. Mild:
`moderate peripheral neuropathy (Gr 1/2, 4 pts) has been infrequent as
`alopecia. Clinical responses include 3 PRs imesothelioma, esophageal
`H+N ca). 2 MR (cholangioca. mesothelioma) and 4 SD. Preliminary cycle
`PK analyses reveal dose-proportional increases in plasma BMS-18447 ,
`Cmax and AUC valuesrdetailed below (SD). BMS-184476 60 mymz and
`cisplatln 75 mglmz are recommended for further evaluation on this
`schedule, using antiemetic prophylaxis. The lack of significant peripherii
`neuropathy allowed prolonged dosing in responding pts. Antitumor activity“
`was observed in range of tumor types, and BMS-184476 PK parameters
`were not significantly different from single-agent studies at similar doses
`Don
`AUC(24l'l)
`CH
`MM m
`,
`1732 (425)
`218(84)
`2375 (491)
`253 (69)
`2509 (52Z(
`275 (88)
`
`nw_r(n) vssiuma
`43(17)
`545(129)
`24 (3)
`327 (81)
`27 (10)
`409 (151)
`
`n
`5
`3
`
`CMAX(ngli‘nL)
`9l3($5)
`14% (217)
`1541 (474)
`
`cannon rosrni. SAT. 8:00AM —12=ooro
`422
`Phase I Study of BIS-188797. a flow Tulane Analog Administered Weekly I
`Patients with Advanced llalignancics. R. Advani, G. A. Fisher, ‘C. Jamba
`A. Yuen. C. Cho, 3. L. Lurrr, C. Tarby, 5. Cline, C. A. Bulanhagui, 6. Gallon
`B. I. Sikic; Stanford University Medical Center, Stanford, CA; Bristol-M ‘
`Squibb, Princeton. NJ
`BMS-188797 is-a noveltexane with superior activity in experimental to
`models compared tripaclitaxel. The main objective of this study was
`establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and dose limiting toxiciti
`(DLT) of this agent given weekly on d. 1, 8, 15 every 21 d. as a 1 int
`infusion. Eighteen patients with advanced malignancies (median print
`regimens 2.5) were enrolled between 4/00 and 11/00. Tumor ty
`included: 4 ovarian. 3: lung, 2 colon, 2 GI stromal, 2 sarcoma and 5 othe
`Three dose levels were evaluated: 35 mg/m'*’ (n=3), 50 mglmz (n=9) a
`65 mg/m= (n=6). in 65 mglmz, are patients had DLTs (1 gr.4 neutropenw’
`7d and 2 gr. 3 diarrhea); hence the dose level of 50 mglmz was expanded
`a cohort of 9 pls. This dose of 50 mg/m2 is the MTD and was well tolerated
`with only 1/9 pts. experiencing a DLT (gr. 4 neutropenia with fever). Othfi
`transient gr. 2 side effects included nail changes (n=4). fatigue (n= ‘
`edema (n=3), nausea (n=3). diarrhea (n=2) and neuropathy (n=1).
`V
`patients are evaluable for response: 2 PR (ovarian 6+ mo, lung 4 + mo). :
`MR (lung 4+ mo, esophageal 3 + mo) and 2 SD (ovarian 6 mo. rectal.§
`mo). Allthe responders had previously received a paclitaxel containi
`V
`regimen. Plasma and urine pharrnacokinetic (PK) data are available for lg
`pts at 35 mg/ma (n-=3). 50 mg/m’ (n=5) and 65 mg/m2 (n=3). Meaiii
`values of CMAX and AUC (48 h) increased in a dose-related man
`individual T‘l2 values ranged from 11.9 to 25.9 h and individual
`values ranged from 84 to 192 um’. Complete PK data will be presented.
`conclusion, the MTD and the recommended phase ii dose of single age
`BMS-188797 is 50 mglmz. The drug demonstrates very encouragi
`antitumor activity. and is now being evaluated in combination ll.
`carbopiatin.
`~
`.
`“i
`
`AVENTIS EXHIBIT 2040
`Mylan v. Aventis
`
`AVENTIS EXHIBIT 2040
`Mylan v. Aventis
`IPR2016-00627
`
`1

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