2011 Pharmaceutical Research & Manufacturers of America Report Lists 58 Drugs in Development For Ovarian Cancer

Currently, 851 medicines are in development for diseases that exclusively or disproportionately affect women, according to a report unveiled today by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).

Currently, 851 medicines are in development for diseases that exclusively or disproportionately affect women, according to a report unveiled today by the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA).  The medicines in the pipeline for women (either in human clinical trials or awaiting review by the Food and Drug Administration) include:

• 139 for cancers affecting women, including 91 for breast cancer, 49 for ovarian cancer,[1] and 9 for cervical cancer.

• 114 for arthritis/musculoskeletal disorders. Approximately 46 million Americans have some type of arthritis or related condition, and 60 percent of them are female.

• 64 for obstetric/gynecologic conditions.

• 110 for autoimmune diseases, which strike women three times more than men.

• 72 for depression and anxiety. Almost twice as many women as men suffer from these disorders.

• 83 for Alzheimer’s disease. Two-thirds (3.4 million) of the 5.4 million Americans living with Alzheimer’s today are women.

The Drug Discovery Process

Ovarian cancer affected an estimated 21,880 U.S. women in 2010 and caused an estimated 13,850 deaths.  The PhRMA report highlighted a potential first-in-class ovarian cancer drug (volasertib/BI 6727) in development which works by selectively inhibiting the polo-like kinase-1 (PLK-1), an enzyme crucial for cell division. PLK-1 is expressed in proliferating cells and most tumors. Inhibiting its activity disrupts cell division, which induces cell death and reduces cancer growth.

The ovarian cancer drugs listed in the PhRMA report are listed below by name (brand name, if available, and generic name), manufacturer, and phase of clinical testing. The ovarian cancer drugs listed in the “Cancer” section of the PhRMA report are set forth below:[2]

A6, Angstrom Pharmaceuticals, Phase II.

Abagovomab (anti-idiotype ovarian cancer vaccine)(Orphan Drug), Menarini, Phase I/II.

Abraxane®/albumin-bound paclitaxel, Celgene, Phase II.

ABT-888/veliparib, Abbott Laboratories, Phase II.

AE-37, Antigen Express, Phase I.

Afinitor®/everolimus, Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Phase I/II.

AMG 386, Amgen, Phase III.

AMG 479, Amgen, Phase II.

Avastin®, bevacizumab, Genentech, Phase III.

BC-819, BioCancell Therapeutics, Phase I/II.

Catumaxomab, Fresenius Biotech, Phase II.

CVac™/MUC-2 cancer vaccine, Prima BioMed, Phase II.

DCVax®-L/ovarian cancer vaccine, Northwest Biotherapeutics, Phase I.

DPX-0907, Immunovaccine, Phase I.

EC-145, Endocyte, Phase II.

EGEN-001 (Orphan Drug), EGEN, Phase I/II.

ENMD-2076, EntreMed, Phase II.

Estybon™/ON-01910.Na, Onconova Therapeutics, Phase II.

Evizon™/squalamine, OHR Pharmaceuticals, Phase II.

farletuzumab/MORAb-003, Eisai, Phase III.

iboctadekin, GlaxoSmithKline, Phase I.

IMT-1012/immunotherapeutic vaccine, Immunotope, Phase I.

iniparib/BSI-201, BiPar Sciences/sanofi-aventis, Phase II.

Karenitecin®/cositecan, BioNumerik Pharmaceuticals, Phase III.

KHK-2866, Kyowa Hakko Kirin Pharma, Phase I.

lenvatinib/E7080, Eisai, Phase II.

MK-2206, Merck, Phase I.

Nexavar®/sorafenib, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals/Onyx Pharmaceuticals, Phase II.

NKTR-102, Nektar Therapeutics, Phase II.

NOV-002, Novelos Therapeutics, Phase II.

OGX-427, Oncogenex Pharmaceuticals, Phase I.

olaparib/AZD2281, AstraZeneca, Phase II.

Opaxio™/paclitaxel poliglumex, Cell Therapeutics/Novartis Pharmaceuticals, Phase III.

Optisome™/topetecan liposomal, Talon Therapeutics, Phase I.

Oregovomab, Quest Pharmatech, Phase I/II.

OSI-906/linsitinib, OSI Pharmaceuticals, Phase II.

OVax®/ovarian cancer vaccine (Orphan Drug), AVAX Technologies, Phase I/II.

Perifosine/KRX-0401, AEterna Zentaris/Keryx Biopharmaceuticals, Phase I.

PF-01367338, Pfizer, Phase II.

Phenoxodiol (next generation drug will be NV-143), Marshall Edwards, Phase III.

Picoplatin intravenous, Poniard Pharmaceuticals, Phase II.

Quinamed®/amonafide, ChemGenex Pharmaceuticals, Phase II.

Ramucirumab/IMC-1121-B, Eli Lilly/ImClone, Phase I.

Ridaforolimus, Merck/Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Phase I.

Sagopilone, Bayer HealthCare Pharmaceuticals, Phase II.

SAR256212/MM-121, Merrimack Pharmaceuticals/sanofi-aventis, Phase I.

SG2000, Spirogen, Phase II.

Sprycel®/dasatinib, Bristol-Myers Squibb, Phase

Tarceva®/erlotinib, Genentech, Phase II.

Telcyta®/canfosfimide, Telik, Phase III.

Tigatuzumab, Daiichi Sankyo, Phase II.

Tykerb®/lapatinib, GlaxoSmithKline, Phase I/II.

Volasertib, Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Phase II.

Volociximab, Bigen Idec/Facet Biotech, Phase II.

Vosaroxin™/SNS-595, Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Phase II.

Votrient®/pazopanib, GlaxoSmithKline, Phase III.

Zolinza®/vorinostat, Merck, Phase II.

Zybrestat™/fosbretabulin, OXiGENE, Phase II.

References:

1/The 2011 PhRMA report lists 49 ovarian cancer drugs in development.  After comparing the entire “Cancer” drug list set forth on pages 16 – 24 of the PhRMA report to the ovarian cancer clinical trials provided at http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, we determined that an additional nine drugs appearing on the PhRMA cancer drug list are being tested in ovarian cancer clinical trials.

2/Please note that the PhRMA cancer drug list does not set forth all ovarian cancer drugs in development.  For a list of all open ovarian cancer clinical trials listed at www.clinicaltrials.gov, click here.

Sources:

Resources:

Experimental Drug NVP-BEZ235 Slows Ovarian Cancer Growth in Mice; Solid Tumor Clinical Trials Ongoing

A study conducted recently at UCLA’s Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center found that experimental drug NVP-BEZ235, which blocks two points of a crucial cancer cell signaling pathway, inhibits the growth of ovarian cancer cells and significantly increases survival in an ovarian cancer mouse model.

A study conducted recently at  UCLA’s Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center (JCCC) found that an experimental drug, which blocks two points of a crucial cancer cell signaling pathway, inhibits the growth of ovarian cancer cells and significantly increases survival in an ovarian cancer mouse model.

Oliver Dorigo, M.D., Ph.D., Assistant Professor, Department of Gynecologic Oncology, Division Gynecologic Oncology, UCLA Jonnson Comprehensive Cancer Center; Member, JCCC Cancer Molecular Imaging Program Area

The Novartis Oncology drug, called NVP-BEZ235, also inhibits growth of ovarian cancer cells that have become resistant to the conventional treatment with platinum chemotherapy and helps to resensitize the cancer cells to the therapy. In addition, it enhances the effect of platinum chemotherapy on ovarian cancer cells that are still responding to the therapy, said the study’s senior author, Dr. Oliver Dorigo, an assistant professor of obstetrics and gynecology and a JCCC researcher.

“Platinum-based chemotherapy drugs are effective in treating ovarian cancers as long as the cancer cells remain sensitive to platinum,” Dorigo said. “But once the tumor becomes resistant, treating the cancer becomes very challenging. This is a significant clinical problem, since the majority of ovarian cancer patients develop resistance at some point during treatment. Breaking chemotherapy resistance is a difficult challenge, but crucial if we want to improve long-term survival for our patients.”

The study, performed on cells lines and mouse models, appears in the April 15 issue of the journal Clinical Cancer Research.

Over the last several years, Dorigo has been working in his laboratory to develop new therapies for ovarian cancer. About 22,000 American women are diagnosed each year with ovarian cancer, and more than 14,000 deaths are attributed to the disease annually. Dorigo has focused his research efforts on a pathway called PI3Kinase/Akt/mTOR, which, once activated, promotes ovarian cancer growth. The activated pathway also makes the cancer more aggressive and more likely to spread to other organs, Dorigo said, so targeting it offers great promise for more effective therapies for the disease.

In this two-year study, Dorigo and postdoctoral fellow Chintda Santiskulvong found that inhibiting two checkpoints of the pathway — PI3Kinase and mTOR — with NVP-BEZ235 decreased cancer growth, both in cell culture dishes and in mice with ovarian cancer. It also significantly increased survival in the mice, he said. More importantly, NVP-BEZ235 slowed growth of the ovarian cancer cells that had become resistant to platinum and helped to break that resistance.

“We were very encouraged to find that NPV-BEZ235 could resensitize the ovarian cancer cells to standard platinum treatment,” Dorigo said. “In addition, we found this drug to be more effective in inhibiting ovarian cancer cell growth than other drugs that target only one checkpoint, mTOR, in this pathway. We believe that NVP-BEZ235 has superior efficacy because of the dual effect on PI3Kinase and mTOR.”

The experimental drug is being tested as a single agent at the Jonsson Cancer Center in human clinical trials against other solid tumors. Researchers involved with those studies have said early results are encouraging.

John Glaspy, M.D., M.P.H., Co-Chief, Department of Medicine, Hematology/Oncology, UCLA Jonnson Comprehensive Cancer Center; JCCC Director, JCCC Clinical Research Unit; Member, Stand Up To Cancer Mangement Committee

“This is clearly a promising agent with activity in humans,” said Dr. John Glaspy, a professor of hematology–oncology and a Jonsson Cancer Center scientist involved with the studies. “We are still assessing its tolerability in patients.”

Dorigo said he hopes to initiate a clinical trial for women with ovarian cancer that tests the combination of NVP-BEZ235 with platinum chemotherapy, as he believes that the combination might be more effective than each drug alone.

The study was funded by the Ovarian Cancer Research Foundation/Liz Tilberis Scholarship, the Gynecologic Cancer Foundation/Florence and Marshall Schwid Ovarian Cancer Award, a STOP Cancer Career Development Award and the National Institutes of Health’s Women’s Reproductive Health Research Program.

About the UCLA Jonnson Comprehensive Cancer Center

UCLA’s Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center has more than 240 researchers and clinicians engaged in disease research, prevention, detection, control, treatment and education. One of the nation’s largest comprehensive cancer centers, the Jonsson Center is dedicated to promoting research and translating basic science into leading-edge clinical studies. In July 2010, the center was named among the top 10 cancer centers nationwide by U.S. News & World Report, a ranking it has held for 10 of the last 11 years.

Sources:

Clinical Trial Information:

2011 AACR Annual Meeting: Select Ovarian Cancer Presentations & Abstracts Available Online

The 102nd American Association For Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting will be held from Saturday, April 2 through Wednesday, April 6, 2011, at the Orange County Convention Center located in Orlando, Florida.  Select ovarian cancer presentations and abstracts are available online.

The 102nd American Association For Cancer Research (AACR) Annual Meeting will be held from Saturday, April 2 through Wednesday, April 6, 2011, at the Orange County Convention Center located in Orlando, Florida.  Select ovarian cancer meeting presentations and abstracts are now available online.

Once again, the AACR will host and organize an exciting program on the best and latest in cancer research, in which a large cross section of the cancer research community will participate, to advance the cause of treating and preventing cancer. The meeting program not only reflects the AACR’s strengths in basic, translational, and clinical research, but also emphasizes the productive interfaces emerging between these once-separated disciplines. The program also captures the advances on all of these fronts, with a range of speakers and participants who are leaders in research: cancer mechanisms, systems approaches to cancer biology, diagnostics and therapeutics, translation of advances to the clinic, and cutting-edge science in the prevention and early interception of cancer.

In advance of the actual meeting, you can review select ovarian cancer meeting and poster presentations that relate to basic, clinical, epidemiological, and translational research.

To view all available ovarian cancer meeting and poster presentations, CLICK HERE, and then click the “advanced search button,” and under “Abstract Organ Site,” choose “gynecological cancer:  ovarian cancer,” then click “search” at the top or bottom of the page .

To view a list of all available AACR program ovarian cancer-related webcasts available during and/or after the meeting, CLICK HERE and (i) type in “ovarian cancer” in the search box; (ii) choose “sessions (with details)” under the “Browse By” menu at the top of the page; and (iii) choose only2011” within the  search filter (i.e., uncheck conference years 2004 – 2010), then click “Update Filter.” (note: you can also search for free and/or paid webcasts by using the search filter on this page).

Libby’s H*O*P*E*™ will post newsworthy ovarian cancer information that is disclosed during the course of the AACR Annual Meeting.

About the American Association For Cancer Research

The mission of the American Association for Cancer Research is to prevent and cure cancer. AACR was founded in 1907 by a group of 11 physicians and scientists interested in research “to further the investigation and spread the knowledge of cancer.” The AACR is the world’s oldest and largest professional organization dedicated to advancing cancer research. The membership includes 33,000 basic, translational and clinical researchers; health care professionals; and cancer survivors and advocates in the United States and more than 90 other countries.

The AACR marshals the full spectrum of expertise from the cancer community to accelerate progress in the prevention, diagnosis and treatment of cancer through high-quality scientific and educational programs. It funds innovative, meritorious research grants, research fellowships and career development awards. The AACR Annual Meeting attracts more than 18,000 participants who share the latest discoveries and developments in the field. Special conferences throughout the year present novel data across a wide variety of topics in cancer research, treatment and patient care. Including Cancer Discovery, the AACR publishes seven major peer-reviewed journals: Cancer Research; Clinical Cancer Research; Molecular Cancer Therapeutics; Molecular Cancer Research; Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention; and Cancer Prevention Research. AACR journals represented 20 percent of the market share of total citations in 2009. The AACR also publishes CR, a magazine for cancer survivors and their families, patient advocates, physicians and scientists.

Therapeutic Response To The Angiogenesis Inhibitor Sunitinib In Ovarian Clear Cell Cancer

A group of international researchers reported sustained responses in two ovarian clear cell cancer (OCCC) patients with chemotherapy-resistant disease, who were treated with the anti-angiogenesis inhibitor sunitinib (Sutent®). The researchers emphasize the growing realization that OCCC is molecularly and clinically distinct as compared to other forms of ovarian cancer, and note significant common scientific characteristics possessed by both OCCC and renal clear cell cancer.

Clear Cell Carcinoma of the Ovary

Ovarian clear cell cancer (OCCC) is a rare form or subtype of epithelial ovarian cancer that is generally refractory to platinum-based chemotherapy. A group of international researchers from the United Kingdom, Australia, Japan, Canada and the United States recently reported results from comprehensive OCCC tumor gene expression and copy number testing, which was designed to identify potential therapeutic targets of OCCC.

Gene expression and DNA copy number testing was performed using primary human OCCC tumor samples, and the test findings were confirmed by immunohistochemistry (IHC) on tissue microarrays. Based on this testing, the researchers identified specific over-expression of the IL6 (interleukin-6)-STAT3 (signal transducer and activator of transcription 3)-HIF (hypoxia-inducible factors) cellular pathway in OCCC tumors, as compared with high-grade serous ovarian cancers. Expression of PTHLH (parathyroid hormone-like hormone) and high levels of circulating IL6 were also found in OCCC patients, and the researchers believe that this finding may explain the frequent occurrence of hypercalcemia and thromboembolic events in OCCC. Notably, the study results set forth a description of amplification of several RTKs (receptor tyrosine kinases), most notably MET (met proto-oncogene [hepatocyte growth factor receptor]), which certainly suggests other potential therapeutic targets for this hard-to-treat subtype of ovarian cancer.

Circulating IL6 levels were measured in the blood serum from patients with OCCC or high-grade serous ovarian cancers and corresponded to progression-free and overall survival. Two OCCC patients were treated with sunitinib and their therapeutic responses were measured clinically and by positron emission tomography (PET). The researchers reported sustained clinical and functional imaging responses in two OCCC patients with chemotherapy-resistant disease who were treated with sunitinib, thereby showing  significant scientific parallels with renal clear cell cancer.

Based upon the findings above, the researchers highlighted the importance of specific therapeutic targets in the treatment of OCCC, and suggested that more extensive clinical trials with sunitinib in OCCC patients are warranted.  The overarching findings of this study provide significant impetus to the growing realization that OCCC is molecularly and clinically distinct as compared to other forms of ovarian cancer.

Source: Anglesio MS, George J, Kulbe H, et. al. IL6-STAT3-HIF Signalling and Therapeutic Response To The Angiogenesis Inhibitor, Sunitinib, In Ovarian Clear Cell Cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2011 Feb 22. [Epub ahead of print] PubMed PMID: 21343371.

Additional Information:

  • Dedicated Ovarian Clear Cell Cancer Clinical Trials (currently recruiting as of 3/25/11).

A Phase II Evaluation of SU11248 (Sunitinib Malate) (IND #74019, NSC #736511) in the Treatment of Persistent or Recurrent Clear Cell Ovarian Carcinoma, Clinical Trial Summary, NCT00979992, ClinicalTrials.gov.

A Phase II Evaluation of Temsirolimus (CCI-779) [Torisel®] (NCI Supplied Agent: NSC# 683864, IND# 61010) in Combination With Carboplatin and Paclitaxel Followed by Temsirolimus (CCI-779) Consolidation as First-Line Therapy in the Treatment of Stage III-IV Clear Cell Carcinoma of the Ovary, Clinical Trial Summary, NCT01196429, ClinicalTrials.gov.

  • Open Ovarian Cancer and Solid Tumor Clinical Trials Testing MET Inhibitors (as of 3/25/11)

We provide below a list of MET inhibitors that are currently available through open ovarian cancer and solid tumor clinical trials.  A few caveats are noteworthy.

First, the association between MET inhibiton and ovarian clear cell cancer inhibition has NOT been established as a form of treatment in large randomized, prospective clinical trials.

Second, most of the clinical trials listed below are phase I studies designed to test the biological activity and safety of the drug — not the effectiveness.  Patients enrolled in a phase I trial are generally the first humans to receive the study drug.

Third, all patients should seek advice from their doctor in advance of deciding to enroll in a clinical trial. Many of the clinical drugs listed below inhibit one or more cellular functions in addition to MET.

List of open solid tumor clinical trials testing AMG 208.

List of open solid tumor clinical trials testing MGCD-265.

List of open solid tumor clinical trials testing PF-2341066 (crizotinib)(NCT01121588NCT00585195).

List of open ovarian cancer clinical trials testing sunitinib (SU11274)/Sutent®.

List of open solid tumor clinical trials testing sunitinib (SU11274)/Sutent®.

List of open solid tumor clinical trials testing cabozantinib (a/k/a XL184 or BMS-907351).

List of open solid tumor clinical trials testing ARQ197.

List of open solid tumor clinical trials testing INCB28060.

List of open solid tumor clinical trials testing E7050.

List of open solid tumor clinical trials testing MGCD265.

  • Genetic Similarity Between Ovarian Clear Cell Cancer & Renal Clear Cell Cancer

Yoshida S, Furukawa N, Haruta S, et. al. Theoretical model of treatment strategies for clear cell carcinoma of the ovary: focus on perspectives. Cancer Treat Rev. 2009 Nov;35(7):608-15. Epub 2009 Aug 8. Review. PubMed PMID: 19665848.

Rauh-Hain JA, Penson RT. Potential benefit of Sunitinib in recurrent and refractory ovarian clear cell adenocarcinoma. Int J Gynecol Cancer. 2008 Sep-Oct;18(5):934-6. Epub 2007 Dec 13. PubMed PMID: 18081793.

Zorn KK, Bonome T, Gangi L, et. al. Gene expression profiles of serous, endometrioid, and clear cell subtypes of ovarian and endometrial cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2005 Sep 15;11(18):6422-30. PubMed PMID: 16166416.

Ohio State University Reports That Ovarian Cancer Drug Bevacizumab Is Not Cost-Effective

An analysis conducted by Ohio State University cancer researchers found that adding the targeted therapy bevacizumab to the first-line treatment of patients with advanced ovarian cancer is not cost effective.

An analysis conducted by Ohio State University cancer researchers found that adding the targeted therapy bevacizumab [Avastin®] to the first-line treatment of patients with advanced ovarian cancer is not cost-effective.

The findings comparing the relative value of various clinical strategies were published online March 7 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology (JCO).

Dr. David E. Cohn is a gynecologic oncologist & researcher at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital & Richard J. Solove Research Institute. He is also the lead author of the bevacizumab cost-effectiveness study.

The researchers performed a cost-effectiveness analysis looking at a clinical trial conducted by the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) studying the use of bevacizumab along with standard chemotherapy for patients with advanced ovarian cancer, said first author Dr. David E. Cohn, a gynecologic surgical oncologist and researcher at The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (OSUCCC – James).

Bevacizumab is a novel targeted therapy designed to inhibit angiogenesis, the process by which new blood vessels develop and carry vital nutrients to a tumor.

Although a discussion regarding cost-effectiveness of a potentially life-extending intervention invariably suggests the rationing of limited health care resources, the intent of this study was to provide a framework with which to evaluate the pending results of a clinical trial of three different interventions for ovarian cancer, said Cohn.

“We do not suggest that bevacizumab, also known by the brand name Avastin, should be withheld from a patient with ovarian cancer, but rather argue that studies evaluating the effectiveness of new treatments should also be interpreted with consideration of the expense,” says Cohn, who collaborated with Dr. J. Michael Straughn Jr., an associate professor of obstetrics and gynecology at the University of Alabama at Birmingham.

The results of the randomized phase III [GOG 218] clinical trial demonstrated an additional 3.8 months of progression-free survival (PFS) when maintenance bevacizumab was added for about one year following treatment with standard chemotherapy drugs carboplatin and paclitaxel along with bevacizumab.

“We put together a model looking at the variety of treatment arms on this clinical trial, each of which included 600 patients,” said Cohn. “Given the fact that the addition of the drug was associated with 3.8 months of additional survival without cancer, we set out to determine whether or not that benefit of survival was justified by the expense of the drug.”

The model showed that standard chemotherapy for patients in the clinical trial would cost $2.5 million, compared to $78.3 million for patients who were treated with standard chemotherapy and bevacizumab, plus additional maintenance treatments of bevacizumab for almost one year.

Bevacizumab has been used in the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved it for the treatment of colorectal, lung, breast, brain (glioblastoma) and renal cell [kidney] cancers.

Typically each treatment with bevacizumab costs $5,000, with most of those costs directly attributable to the cost of the drug, Cohn said.

Effectiveness was defined as months of progression-free survival, and costs were calculated as total costs per strategy. Cost-effectiveness strategies were defined as the cost per year of progression-free survival. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was defined as the costs per progression-free year of life saved.

“Ultimately, we found that if you reduced the drug cost to 25 percent of the baseline, it does become cost effective to treat patients with bevacizumab,” said Cohn. “Or, if the survival could be substantially increased above the 3.8 months of progression-free survival, that could lead to cost-effective treatment for patients with advanced ovarian cancer.”

Ovarian cancer is the most lethal gynecologic cancer, with almost 14,000 women expected to die from the disease this year, according to the American Cancer Society.

“It is anticipated that in the future, there will be increased scrutiny regarding the individual and societal costs of an effective medication,” said Cohn. “We hope that future clinical trials will incorporate the prospective collection of cost, toxicity and quality-of-life data to allow for a fully informed interpretation of the results.”

Other Ohio State researchers involved in the study are Kenneth H. Kim, Kimberly E. Resnick and David O’Malley.

Big Cost For Little Gain in Ovarian Cancer – JCO Editorial

Results of the cost-effectiveness model reported above by Cohen et. al. reveal that paclitaxel plus carboplatin plus bevacizumab, followed by bevacizumab maintenance (PCB-B), as tested in the GOG 218 phase III clinical trial, costs $78.3 million ($1,305,000 per patient) with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $401,088 per progression-free year of life saved. It is important to note that traditional cost-effectiveness study models utilize the costs of improvements in overall survival, as compared to the traditional cost-effective standard of $50,000 per year of life saved, or more recently, $100,000 per year of life saved.  Cohen et. al. found that the traditional standard of $100,000 per progression free year of life saved can be achieved in calculating the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio, but only at a bevacizumab drug price point that is 25% below the actual drug cost.

Martee L. Hensley, M.D., Gynecologic Medical Oncology Service, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center

In an accompanying JCO editorial, Martee L. Hensley, M.D., a board-certified medical oncologist who treats women with gynecologic cancers at the Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York city, raises several important considerations with respect to the Ohio State University study.

First, Dr. Hensley notes that the “costs” accounted for by the Ohio State University researchers only refer to the additional monies incurred by adding bevacizumab to the standard of care paclitaxel-carboplatin treatment.  Specifically, the researchers used a standard cost metholodolgy based upon estimates of drug costs using Medicare reimbursement rates.  The model used does not include indirect costs (e.g., patient out-of-pocket expenses, time lost from work associated with 51 weeks of bevacizumab maintenance, etc.). The only costs related to toxicity of treatment included by researchers were those associated with management of intestinal perforations. Dr. Hensley highlights the fact that the cost model does not include management of grade 2 or worse hypertension or other potential problems that may be caused by bevacizumab or the other chemotherapy drugs.  To the extent that additional costs are added to the model, the cost-effectiveness ratio generated by the researchers would worsen.

Second, Dr. Hensley explains that out of necessity, the researchers’ cost-effectiveness model used PFS data due to the unavailability of overall survival or quality adjusted overall survival data in connection with the three most recent bevacizumab phase III clinical trials. This model construct assumes that the 3.8 month improvement in PFS (as reported by the GOG 218 trial investigators)  provides an improvement in the patient’s experience. Dr. Hensley emphasizes that most ovarian cancer recurrences are identified while the patient is still asymptomatic, with the help of CA-125 blood testing and computed tomography imaging (i.e., CT scan).  Stated differently, it may not be correct to assume that remaining radiographically progression-free for an addtional 3.8 months would improve a patient’s quality of life.  If GOG 218 ultimately finds that PCB-B does not improve overall survival, then the drug’s cost-effectiveness will drift farther away from an acceptable level, says Hensley.

Third, Dr. Hensley points out that only when PFS associated with PCB-B use was hypothetically extended to 32.1 months (observed PFS in GOG 218 was 14.1 months) by the researchers did the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio approach $100,000 per progression-free year of life saved.  Hensley believes that the bevacizumab data accrued to date suggests that a 32.1 month PFS is unlikely. Notably, median PFS is only 24 months among lower-risk patients with optimally debulked stage III ovarian cancer treated with intraperitoneal-based platinum drug/taxane drug therapy.

Fourth, Dr. Hensley explains that it may be possible to achieve a better incremental cost-effectiveness ratio based upon preliminary data derived from the Gynaecologic Cancer Intergroup (GCIG) phase III randomized clinical trail of paclitaxel plus carboplatin, with or without bevacizumab and bevacizumab maintenace therapy (ICON7 trial). The bevacizumab dose tested in ICON7 was only half of that used in GOG 218 (7.5 mg/kg versus 15 mg/kg), and the duration of maintenance therapy in ICON7 was only 36 weeks of continued treatment as compared to 51 weeks in GOG 218. Preliminary results reported by the GCIG in ICON7 indicate that bevacizumab creates a PFS advantage in line with that produced in GOG 218, but at half the dose. Based on these facts, Hensley states that potential use of lower-dose and shorter-duration bevacizumab would improve the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Moreover, if lower dose/shorter duration bevacizumab use is also found to reduce the frequency of grade 2 or worse hypertension, the overall costs associated with the drug would also be lower, says Hensley.

Dr. Hensley believes that there are additional steps to be taken (and questions to be answered) which could improve an evaluation of the role and costs of bevacizumab:

  • Is there a clinically meaningful overall survival advantage to PCB-B over paclitaxel plus carboplatin? If PCB-B is not effective, then by definition, it is not cost-effective.
  • Is the data from ICON7 sufficient to permit treatment at half the dose for 9 months instead of 12 months? If so, total bevacizumab costs would be lower.
  • Is there a subset of patients who benefit dramatically from PCB-B?
  • If there is a subset of patients who benefit dramatically from PCB-B, it is necessary to study this group of women to determine if potential biomarkers can identify which patients will or will not benefit from the addition of bevacizumab. Identifying biomarkers that can predict response means commitment to correlative studies as part of large clinical trials.

In sum, Dr. Hensley believes that buying bevacizumab at $78.3 million for 3.8 months of progression-free survival on behalf of approximately 600 women is not sustainable in today’s health care delivery system. Moreover, the incurrence of such costs may hinder basic clinical research to find better compounds that improve PFS by a more meaningful magnitude, says Dr. Hensley.  From Hensley’s perspective, it appears that the stage is set for a potential collision between medicine and policy with respect to where and how a finite number of health care dollars will be spent.

About the Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute

The Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center – Arthur G. James Cancer Hospital and Richard J. Solove Research Institute (cancer.osu.edu) is one of only 40 Comprehensive Cancer Centers in the United States designated by the National Cancer Institute. Ranked by U.S. News & World Report among the top cancer hospitals in the nation, The Arthur G. James Hospital is the 205-bed adult patient-care component of the cancer program at The Ohio State University. The OSUCCC – James is one of only seven funded programs in the country approved by the NCI to conduct both phase I and II clinical trials.

Sources:

2011 SGO Annual Meeting: Ovarian Cancer Abstracts Selected For Presentation

The March 2011 supplemental issue of Gynecologic Oncology sets forth the ovarian cancer and ovarian cancer-related medical abstracts selected by the Society of Gynecologic Oncologists for presentation at its 42nd Annual Meeting on Women’s Cancer™, which is being held in Orlando, Florida from March 6-9, 2011.

The Society of Gynecologic Oncologists (SGO) is hosting its 42nd Annual Meeting on Women’s Cancer™ (March 6–9, 2011) in Orlando, Florida. The SGO Annual Meeting attracts more than 1,700 gynecologic oncologists and other health professional from around the world.

In connection with this premier gynecologic cancer event, 651 abstracts, and 27 surgical films were submitted for consideration. After careful discussion and deliberation, the SGO selected 51 abstracts for oral presentation (27 Plenary session papers, 24 Focused Plenary papers, and 42 Featured Posters, presented in a new, electronic format), along with 227 for poster presentation. Of the 27 surgical films originally submitted, five films were selected for presentation during a featured Focused Plenary session.

The ovarian cancer abstracts listed below were obtained from the March 2011 supplemental issue of Gynecologic Oncology. Each abstract bears the number that it was assigned in the Gynecologic Oncology journal table of contents.

Please note that we provide below (under the heading “Additional Information”) Adobe Reader PDF copies of the 2011 SGO Annual Meeting program summary and the medical abstract booklet (includes all gynecologic cancer topics). If you require a free copy of the Adobe Reader software, please visit http://get.adobe.com/reader/otherversions/.

For your convenience, we listed the 2011 SGO Annual Meeting ovarian cancer abstracts under the following subject matter headings:  (1) ovarian cancer symptoms, (2) ovarian cancer screening, (3) pathology, (4) ovarian cancer staging, (5) chemotherapy, (6) diagnostic and prognostic biomarkers, (7) clinical trial drugs and results, (8) hereditary breast & ovarian cancer syndrome (BRCA gene deficiencies & Lynch Syndrome), (9) gynecologic practice, (10) gynecologic surgery, (11) genetic/molecular profiling, (12) immunotherapy, (13) medical imaging, (14) preclinical studies – general, (15) preclinical studies – potential therapeutic targets, (16) palliative and supportive care, (17) rare ovarian cancers, (18) survival data, (19) survivorship, (20) other, (21) late breaking abstracts.

Ovarian Cancer Symptoms

142. Utility of symptom index in women at increased risk for ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #140)

184. Symptom-triggered screening for ovarian cancer: A pilot study of feasibility and acceptability. (SGO Abstract #182)

187. Women without ovarian cancer reporting disease-specific symptoms. (SGO Abstract #185)

Ovarian Cancer Screening

12. Ovarian cancer: Predictors of primary care physicians’ referral to gynecologic oncologists. (SGO Abstract #10)

84. Long-term survival of patients with epithelial ovarian cancer detected by sonographic screening. (SGO Abstract #82)

90. Significant endometrial pathology detected during a transvaginal ultrasound screening trial for ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #88)

109. Detection of the tissue-derived biomarker peroxiredoxin 1 in serum of patients with ovarian cancer: A biomarker feasibility study. (SGO Abstract #107)

113. Epithelial ovarian cancer tumor microenvironment is a favorable biomarker resource. (SGO Abstract #111)

127. Stop and smell the volatile organic compounds: A novel breath-based bioassay for detection of ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #125)

144. Incidental gynecologic FDG-PET/CT findings in women with a history of breast cancer. (SGO Abstract #142)

156. Discovery of novel monoclonal antibodies (MC1–MC6) to detect ovarian cancer in serum and differentiate it from benign tumors. (SGO Abstract #154)

158. Evaluation of the risk of ovarian malignancy algorithm (ROMA) in women with a pelvic mass presenting to general gynecologists. (SGO Abstract #156)

162. Human epididymis protein 4 increases specificity for the detection of invasive epithelial ovarian cancer in premenopausal women presenting with an adnexal mass. (SGO Abstract #160)

163. Identification of biomarkers to improve specificity in preoperative assessment of ovarian tumor for risk of cancer. (SGO Abstract #161)

171. OVA1 has high sensitivity in identifying ovarian malignancy compared with preoperative assessment and CA-125. (SGO Abstract #169)

172. OVA1 improves the sensitivity of the ACOG referral guidelines for an ovarian mass. (SGO Abstract #170)

182. Sonographic predictors of ovarian malignancy. (SGO Abstract #180)

237. Management of complex pelvic masses using the OVA1 test: A decision analysis. (SGO Abstract #235)

241. Three-dimensional power doppler angiography as a three-step technique for differential diagnosis of adnexal masses: A prospective study. (SGO Abstract #239)

Pathology

145. Accuracy of frozen-section diagnosis of ovarian borderline tumor. (SGO Abstract #143)

Ovarian Cancer Staging

31. Should stage IIIC ovarian cancer be further stratified by intraperitoneal versus retroperitoneal-only disease? A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. (SGO Abstract #29)

173. Peritoneal staging biopsies in early-stage ovarian cancer: Are they necessary? (SGO Abstract #171)

Chemotherapy

29. Treatment of chemotherapy-induced anemia in patients with ovarian cancer: Does the use of erythropoiesis-stimulating agents worsen survival? (SGO Abstract #27)

69. Intraperitoneal chemotherapy for recurrent ovarian cancer appears efficacious with high completion rates and low complications. (SGO Abstract #67)

174. Predictors of severe and febrile neutropenia during primary chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #172)

177. Sequencing of therapy and outcomes associated with use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy in advanced epithelial ovarian cancer in the Medicare population. (SGO Abstract #175)

179. Should we treat patients with ovarian cancer with positive retroperitoneal lymph nodes with intraperitoneal chemotherapy? Impact of lymph node status in women undergoing intraperitoneal chemotherapy. (SGO Abstract #177)

229. Predictors and effects of reduced relative dose intensity in women receiving their primary course of chemotherapy for ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #227)

Diagnostic & Prognostic Biomarkers

128. Stress and the metastatic switch in epithelial ovarian carcinoma. (SGO Abstract #126)

130. The cytoskeletal gateway for tumor aggressiveness in ovarian cancer is driven by class III β-tubulin. (SGO Abstract #128)

134. True blood: Platelets as a biomarker of ovarian cancer recurrence. (SGO Abstract #132)

148. CA-125 changes can predict optimal interval cytoreduction in patients with advanced-stage epithelial ovarian cancer treated with neoadjuvant chemotherapy. (SGO Abstract #146)

149. CA-125 surveillance for women with ovarian, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancers: What do survivors think? (SGO Abstract #147)

150. Calretinin as a prognostic indicator in granulosa cell tumor. (SGO Abstract #148)

135. Tumor expression of the type I insulin-like growth factor receptor is an independent prognostic factor in epithelial ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #133)

147. C-terminal binding protein 2: A potential marker for response to histone deacetylase inhibitors in epithelial ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #145)

157. Elevated serum adiponectin levels correlate with survival in epithelial ovarian cancers. (SGO Abstract #155)

175. Prognostic impact of prechemotherapy HE4 and CA-125 levels in patients with ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #175)

178. Serum HE4 level is an independent risk factor of surgical outcome and prognosis of epithelial ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #176)

Clinical Trial Drugs & Results

8. MicroRNA as a novel predictor of response to bevacizumab in recurrent serous ovarian cancer: An analysis of The Cancer Genome Atlas. (SGO Abstract #6)

9. Prospective investigation of risk factors for gastrointestinal adverse events in a phase III randomized trial of bevacizumab in first-line therapy of advanced epithelial ovarian cancer, primary peritoneal cancer or fallopian tube cancer: A Gynecologic Oncology Group study. (SGO Abstract #7)

10. First in human trial of the poly(ADP)-ribose polymerase inhibitor MK-4827 in patients with advanced cancer with antitumor activity in BRCA-deficient and sporadic ovarian cancers.  (SGO Abstract #8)

30. An economic analysis of intravenous carboplatin plus dose-dense weekly paclitaxel versus intravenous carboplatin plus every three-weeks paclitaxel in the upfront treatment of ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #28)

51. BRCA1-deficient tumors demonstrate enhanced cytotoxicity and T-cell recruitment following doxil treatment. (SGO Abstract #49)

54. A novel combination of a MEK inhibitor and fulvestrant shows synergistic antitumor activity in estrogen receptor-positive ovarian carcinoma. (SGO Abstract #52)

68. An economic analysis of bevacizumab in recurrent treatment of ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #66)

71. A phase II study of gemcitabine, carboplatin and bevacizumab for the treatment of platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #69)

72. A phase I clinical trial of a novel infectivity-enhanced suicide gene adenovirus with gene transfer imaging capacity in patients with recurrent gynecologic cancer. (SGO Abstract #70)

73. A phase I study of a novel lipopolymer-based interleukin-12 gene therapeutic in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of platinum-sensitive recurrent ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #71)

74. AMG 386 combined with either pegylated liposomal doxorubicin or topotecan in patients with advanced ovarian cancer: Results from a phase Ib study. (SGO Abstract #72)

86. Pressure to respond: Hypertension predicts clinical benefit from bevacizumab in recurrent ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #84)

152. Changes in tumor blood flow as estimated by dynamic-contrast MRI may predict activity of single-agent bevacizumab in recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer and primary peritoneal cancer: An exploratory analysis of a Gynecologic Oncology Group phase II trial. (SGO Abstract #150)

153. Comparing overall survival in patients with epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer who received chemotherapy alone versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by delayed primary debulking. (SGO Abstract #151)

154. Consolidation paclitaxel is more cost-effective than bevacizumab following upfront treatment of advanced ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #152)

193. Pegylated liposomal doxorubicin with bevacizumab in the treatment of platinum-resistant ovarian cancer: Toxicity profile results. (SGO Abstract #191)

194. Phase II Trial of docetaxel and bevacizumab in recurrent ovarian cancer within 12 months of prior platinum-based chemotherapy. (SGO Abstract #192)

195. A phase I/II trial of IDD-6, an autologous dendritic cell vaccine for women with advanced ovarian cancer in remission. (SGO Abstract #193)

183. STAC: A phase II study of carboplatin/paclitaxel/bevacizumab followed by randomization to either bevacizumab alone or erlotinib and bevacizumab in the upfront management of patients with ovarian, fallopian tube or peritoneal cancer. (SGO Abstract #181)

228. Is it more cost-effective to use bevacizumab in the primary treatment setting or at recurrence? An economic analysis. (SGO Abstract #226)

240. The use of bevacizumab and cytotoxic and consolidation chemotherapy for the upfront treatment of advanced ovarian cancer: Practice patterns among medical and gynecologic oncology SGO members. (SGO Abstract #238)

Hereditary Breast & Ovarian Cancer Syndrome (BRCA gene deficiencies & Lynch Syndrome)

39. BRCAness profile of ovarian cancer predicts disease recurrence. (SGO Abstract #37)

52. A history of breast carcinoma predicts worse survival in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers with ovarian carcinoma. (SGO Abstract #52)

137. Does genetic counseling for women at high risk of harboring a deleterious BRCA mutation alter risk-reduction strategies and cancer surveillance behaviors? (SGO Abstract #135)

138. Hereditary breast and ovarian cancer syndrome based on family history alone and implications for patients with serous carcinoma. (SGO Abstract #138)

139. Management and clinical outcomes of women with BRCA1/2 mutations found to have occult cancers at the time of risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy. (SGO Abstract #137)

141. The impact of BRCA testing on surgical treatment decisions for patients with breast cancer. (SGO Abstract #139)

136. Compliance with recommended genetic counseling for Lynch syndrome: Room for improvement. (SGO Abstract #134)

Gynecologic Practice

81. Availability of gynecologic oncologists for ovarian cancer care. (SGO Abstract #79)

Gynecologic Surgery

19. Single-port paraaortic lymph node dissection. (SGO Abstract #17)

20. Robotic nerve-sparing radical hysterectomy type C1. (SGO Abstract #18)

21. Urinary reconstruction after pelvic exenteration: Modified Indiana pouch. (SGO Abstract #19)

22. Intrathoracic cytoreductive surgery by video-assisted thoracic surgery in advanced ovarian carcinoma. (SGO Abstract #20)

26. Cost comparison of strategies for the management of venous thromboembolic event risk following laparotomy for ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #24)

28. Primary debulking surgery versus neoadjuvant chemotherapy in stage IV ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #26)

33. Does the bedside assistant matter in robotic surgery: An analysis of patient outcomes in gynecologic oncology. (SGO Abstract #31)

48. Defining the limits of radical cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #46)

87. Prognostic impact of lymphadenectomy in clinically early-stage ovarian malignant germ cell tumor. (SGO Abstract #85)

93. Secondary cytoreductive surgery: A key tool in the management of recurrent ovarian sex cord–stromal tumors. (SGO Abstract #91)

146. Advanced-stage ovarian cancer metastases to sigmoid colon mesenteric lymph nodes: Clinical consideration of tumor spread and biologic behavior. (SGO Abstract #144)

155. Cytoreductive surgery for serous ovarian cancer in patients 75 years and older. (SGO Abstract #153)

168. Intraperitoneal catheters placed at the time of bowel surgery: A review of complications. (SGO Abstract #166)

169. Laparoscopic versus laparotomic surgical staging for early-stage epithelial ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #167)

170. Oncologic and reproductive outcomes of cystectomy compared with oophorectomy as treatment for borderline ovarian tumor. (SGO Abstract #168)

180. Significance of perioperative infectious disease in patients with ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #178)

185. The feasibility of mediastinal lymphadenectomy in the management of advanced and recurrent ovarian carcinoma. (SGO Abstract #183)

235. Incidence of venous thromboembolism after robotic surgery for gynecologic malignancy: Is dual prophylaxis necessary? (SGO Abstract #233)

286. Charlson’s index: A validation study to predict surgical adverse events in gynecologic oncology. (SGO Abstract #284)

288. Cost-effectiveness of extended postoperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in gynecologic pncology patients. (SGO Abstract #286)

302. Integration of and training for robot-assisted surgery in a gynecologic oncology fellowship program. (SGO Abstract #300)

303. Outcomes of patients with gynecologic malignancies undergoing video-assisted thorascopic surgery and pleurodesis for malignant pleural effusion. (SGO Abstract #301)

304. Perioperative and pathologic outcomes following robot-assisted laparoscopic versus abdominal management of ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #302)

307. Predictive risk factors for prolonged hospitalizations after gynecologic laparoscopic surgery. (SGO Abstract #305)

309. Robot-assisted surgery for gynecologic cancer: A systematic review. (SGO Abstract #307)

310. Robotic radical hysterectomy: Extent of tumor resection and operative outcomes compared with laparoscopy and exploratory laparotomy. (SGO Abstract #308)

315. Utilization of specialized postoperative services in a comprehensive surgical cytoreduction program. (SGO Abstract #313)

Genetic/Molecular Profiling

5. A 3’ UTR KRAS variant as a biomarker of poor outcome and chemotherapy resistance in ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #3)

15. XPC single-nucleotide polymorphisms correlate with prolonged progression-free survival in advanced ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #13)

16. Genomewide methylation analyses reveal a prominent role of HINF1 network genes, via hypomethylation, in ovarian clear cell carcinoma. (SGO Abstract #14)

49. Loss of ARID1A is a frequent event in clear cell and endometrioid ovarian cancers. (SGO Abstract #47)

53. Genetic variants in the mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR) signaling pathway as predictors of clinical response and survival in women with ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #51)

55. BAD apoptosis pathway expression and survival from cancer. (SGO Abstract #53)

59. Molecular profiling of advanced pelvic serous carcinoma associated with serous tubal intraepithelial carcinoma. (SGO Abstract #57)

82. Biologic roles of tumor and endothelial delta-like ligand 4 in ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #80)

85. MicroRNA 101 inhibits ovarian cancer xenografts by relieving the chromatin-mediated transcriptional repression of p21waf1/cip1. (SGO Abstract #83)

102. Association between global DNA hypomethylation in leukocytes and risk of ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #100)

103. Cisplatin, carboplatin, and paclitaxel: Unique and common pathways that underlie ovarian cancer response. (SGO Abstract #101)

106. Comparison of mTOR and HIF pathway alterations in the clear cell carcinoma variant of kidney, ovary and endometrium. (SGO Abstract #104)

107. Concordant gene expression profiles in matched primary and recurrent serous ovarian cancers predict platinum response. (SGO Abstract #105)

111. Differential microRNA expression in cis-platinum-resistant versus -sensitive ovarian cancer cell lines. (SGO Abstract #109)

112. DNA methylation markers associated with serous ovarian cancer subtypes. (SGO Abstract #110)

118. MicroRNA and messenger RNA pathways associated with ovarian cancer cell sensitivity to topotecan, gemcitabine and doxorubicin. (SGO Abstract #116)

119. Molecular profiling of patients with curatively treated advanced serous ovarian carcinoma from The Cancer Genome Atlas. (SGO Abstract #117)

125. Proteomic analysis demonstrates that BRCA1-deficient epithelial ovarian cancer cell lines activate alternative pathways following exposure to cisplatin. (SGO Abstract #123)

132. The tumor suppressor KLF6, lost in a majority of ovarian cancer cases, represses VEGF expression levels. (SGO Abstract #130)

126. Quantitative PCR array identification of microRNA clusters associated with epithelial ovarian cancer chemoresistance. (SGO Abstract #124)

160. Genes functionally regulated by methylation in ovarian cancer are involved in cell proliferation, development and morphogenesis. (SGO Abstract #158)

181. Single-nucleotide polymorphism in DNA repair and drug resistance genes alone or in combination in epithelail ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #179)

278. Expression patterns of p53 and p21 cell cycle regulators and clinical outcome in women with pure gynecologic sarcomas. (SGO Abstract #276)

Immunotherapy

98. Ab-IL2 fusion proteins mediate NK cell immune synapse formation in epithelial ovarian cancer by polarizing CD25 to the target cell–effector cell interface. (SGO Abstract #96)

124. Proteasome inhibition increases death receptors and decreases major histocompatibility complex I expression: Pathways to exploit in natural killer cell immunotherapy. (SGO Abstract #122)

Medical Imaging

164. Impact of FDG-PET in suspected recurrent ovarian cancer and optimization of patient selection for cytoreductive surgery. (SGO Abstract #162)

294. The clinical and financial implications of MRI of pelvic masses. (SGO Abstract #292)

Preclinical Studies

11. A unique microRNA locus at 19q13.41 sensitizes epithelial ovarian cancers to chemotherapy. (SGO Abstract #9)

14. Common single-nucleotide polymorphisms in the BNC2, HOXD1 and MERIT40 regions contribute significantly to racial differences in ovarian cancer incidence. (SGO Abstract #12)

46. Development of a preclinical serous ovarian cancer mouse model. (SGO Abstract #44)

56. Examination of matched primary and recurrent ovarian cancer specimens supports the cancer stem cell hypothesis. (SGO Abstract #54)

58. Modeling of early events in serous carcinogenesis: Molecular prerequisites for transformation of fallopian tube epithelial cells. (SGO Abstract #56)

101. Antiproliferative activity of a phenolic extract from a native Chilean Amaranthaceae plant in drug-resistant ovarian cancer cell lines. (SGO Abstract #99)

115. Identification and characterization of CD44+/CD24–ovarian cancer stem cell properties and their correlation with survival. (SGO Abstract #113)

Preclinical Studies – Potential Therapeutic Targets

57. Hypoxia-mediated activation of signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (STAT3) in ovarian cancer: A novel therapeutic strategy using HO-3867, a STAT3 inhibitor (and novel curcumin analog). (SGO Abstract #55)

61. The ubiquitin ligase EDD mediates platinum resistance and is a target for therapy in epithelial ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #59)

97. A novel hedgehog pathway smoothened inhibitor (BMS-833923) demonstrates in vitro synergy with carboplatin in ovarian cancer cells. (SGO Abstract #95)

100. AMPK activation mimics glucose deprivation and induces cytotoxicity in ovarian cancer cells. (SGO Abstract #98)

104. Clinical significance of vascular cell adhesion molecule 1 (VCAM-1) in the ovarian cancer microenvironment. (SGO Abstract #102)

105. Combined erbB/VEGFR blockade has improved anticancer activity over single-pathway inhibition in ovarian cancer in vivo. (SGO Abstract #103)

114. EZH2 expression correlates with increased angiogenesis in ovarian carcinoma. (SGO Abstract #112)

116. Induction of apoptosis in cisplatin-resistant ovarian cancer cells by G-1, a specific agonist of the G-protein-coupled estrogen receptor GPR30. (SGO Abstract #114)

120. Neuropilin-1 blockade in the tumor microenvironment reduces tumor growth. (SGO Abstract #118)

129. Targeting the hedgehog pathway reverses taxane resistance in ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #127)

121. Ovarian cancer lymph node metastases express unique cellular structure and adhesion genes. (SGO Abstract #119)

122. Overexpression of fibroblast growth factor 1 and fibroblast growth factor receptor 4 in high-grade serous ovarian carcinoma: Correlation with survival and implications for therapeutic targeting. (SGO Abstract #120)

131. The pattern of H3K56 acetylation expression in ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #129)

133. Thinking outside of the tumor: Targeting the ovarian cancer microenvironment. (SGO Abstract #131)

161. Horm-A domain-containing protein 1 (HORMAD1) and outcomes in patients with ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #159)

165. Influence of the novel histone deacetylase inhibitor panobinostat (LBH589) on the growth of ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #163)

166. Inhibition of stress-induced phosphoprotein 1 decreases proliferation of ovarian cancer cell lines. (SGO Abstract #164)

167. Insulin-like growth factor receptor 1 pathway signature correlates with adverse clinical outcome in ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #165)

230. Therapeutic synergy and resensitization of drug-resistant ovarian carcinoma to cisplatin by HO-3867. (SGO Abstract #228)

Palliative & Supportive Care

159. Factors associated with hospice use in ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #226)

190. Age-related preferences regarding end-of-life care discussions among gynecologic oncology patients. (SGO Abstract #188)

192. Palliative care education in gynecologic oncology: A survey of the fellows. (SGO Abstract #190)

Rare Ovarian Cancers

151. Carcinosarcoma of the ovary: A case–control study. (SGO Abstract #149)

Survival Data

80. Ten-year relative survival for epithelial ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #78)

83. Impact of beta blockers on epithelial ovarian cancer survival. (SGO Abstract #81)

176. Revisiting the issue of race-related outcomes in patients with stage IIIC papillary serous ovarian cancer who receive similar treatment. (SGO Abstract #174)

186. The impact of diabetes on survival in women with ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #184)

284. Survival following ovarian versus uterine carcinosarcoma. (SGO Abstract #282)

285. The unique natural history of mucinous tumors of the ovary. (SGO Abstract #283)

292. Stage IC ovarian cancer: Tumor rupture versus ovarian surface involvement. (SGO Abstract #290)

Survivorship

191. Menopausal symptoms and use of hormone replacement therapy: The gynecologic cancer survivors’ perspective. (SGO Abstract #189)

Other

4. From guidelines to the front line: Only a minority of the Medicare population with advanced epithelial ovarian cancer receive optimal therapy. (SGO Abstract #2)

32. Efficacy of influenza vaccination in women with ovarian cancer. (SGO Abstract #30)

91. Women with invasive gynecologic malignancies are more than 12 times as likely to commit suicide as are women in the general population. (SGO Abstract #89)

231. Attrition of first-time faculty in gynecologic oncology: Is there a difference between men and women? (SGO Abstract #229)

238. Relative impact of cost drivers on the increasing expense of inpatient gynecologic oncology care. (SGO Abstract #236)

Late-Breaking Abstracts

About Society of Gynecologic Oncologists (SGO)

The SGO is a national medical specialty organization of physicians and allied healthcare professionals who are trained in the comprehensive management of women with malignancies of the reproductive tract. Its purpose is to improve the care of women with gynecologic cancer by encouraging research, disseminating knowledge which will raise the standards of practice in the prevention and treatment of gynecologic malignancies, and cooperating with other organizations interested in women’s health care, oncology and related fields. The Society’s membership, totaling more than 1,400, is primarily comprised of gynecologic oncologists, as well as other related medical specialists including medical oncologists, radiation oncologists, nurses, social workers and pathologists. SGO members provide multidisciplinary cancer treatment including chemotherapy, radiation therapy, surgery and supportive care. More information on the SGO can be found at www.sgo.org.

About Gynecologic Oncologists

Gynecologic oncologists are physicians committed to the comprehensive treatment of women with cancer. After completing four years of medical school and four years of residency in obstetrics and gynecology, these physicians pursue an additional three to four years of training in gynecologic oncology through a rigorous fellowship program overseen by the American Board of Obstetrics and Gynecology. Gynecologic oncologists are not only trained to be skilled surgeons capable of performing wide-ranging cancer operations, but they are also trained in prescribing the appropriate chemotherapy for those conditions and/or radiation therapy when indicated. Frequently, gynecologic oncologists are involved in research studies and clinical trials that are aimed at finding more effective and less toxic treatments to further advance the field and improve cure rates.

Studies on outcomes from gynecologic cancers demonstrate that women treated by a gynecologic oncologist have a better likelihood of prolonged survival compared to care rendered by non-specialists. Due to their extensive training and expertise, gynecologic oncologists often serve as the “team captain” who coordinates all aspects of a woman’s cancer care and recovery. Gynecologic oncologists understand the impact of cancer and its treatments on all aspects of women’s lives including future childbearing, sexuality, physical and emotional well-being—and the impact cancer can have on the patient’s whole family.

Sources:

Additional Information:


FDA Awards $1.6M Orphan Drug Grant for Clinical Phase II Development of EGEN-001 for Treatment of Ovarian Cancer

EGEN, Inc. announced that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) awarded the company a four-year grant of $1.6 million to assist in the phase II clinical development of EGEN-001, the company’s lead product. EGEN-001 is under clinical development for the treatment of advanced recurrent ovarian cancer.

EGEN, Inc. announced that the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) awarded the company a four-year grant of $1.6 million to assist in the phase II clinical development of EGEN-001, the company’s lead product. EGEN-001 is under clinical development for the treatment of advanced recurrent ovarian cancer.[1]

EGEN, Inc. is developing gene-based biopharmaceuticals that rely on proprietary delivery technologies such as TheraPlas™ (illustrated above). In preclinical studies, the application of this approach produced anti-cancer activity in the treatment of disseminated abdominal cancers, solid tumors and metastatic cancers. (Photo: EGEN, Inc.)

EGEN-001 was developed as an interleukin-12 (IL‑12) gene therapy for the treatment of disseminated epithelial ovarian cancer. It is a low concentration formulation composed of a human IL-12 plasmid formulated with a proprietary PPC delivery system. EGEN-001 is designed for intraperitoneal (IP) administration. The subsequent IL-12 protein expression is associated with an increase in immune system activity, including T-lymphocyte and natural killer (NK) cell proliferation, and cytotoxic activation and secretion of interferon gamma (IFN-g), which in turn, leads to tumor inhibition. Additionally, IL-12 inhibits angiogenesis and formation of tumor vascularization.

EGEN has successfully completed two Phase I trials of EGEN-001 in ovarian cancer patients.  In the first study, EGEN-001 was administered as monotherapy in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer patients[2] and in the second study in combination with carboplatin/docetaxel chemotherapy in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer patients.[3] In both studies, EGEN-001 treatment resulted in good safety, biological activity and encouraging efficacy.[4-5] EGEN-001 received Orphan Drug Status from the FDA in 2005, and its first $1 million FDA orphan grant in 2005.

“This is a significant milestone and accomplishment for the company,” commented Dr. Khursheed Anwer, President and Chief Science Officer of EGEN. “We are pleased to receive this FDA support, which has been very useful in the advancement of our novel EGEN-001 product in the clinic for the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer. The product utilizes the Company’s proprietary TheraPlas® delivery technology and is composed of interleukin-12 (IL-12) gene formulation with a biocompatible delivery polymer. IL-12 is a potent cytokine which works by enhancing the body’s immune system against cancer and inhibiting tumor blood supply.”

About EGEN, Inc.

EGEN, Inc. (EGEN), with laboratories and headquarters in Huntsville, Alabama, is a privately held biopharmaceutical company focused on developing therapeutics for the treatment of human diseases including cancer. The Company specializes in the delivery of therapeutic nucleic acids (DNA and RNAi) and proteins aimed at specific disease targets. The Company has a significant intellectual property position in synthetic carriers, their combination with DNA, and their therapeutic applications. EGEN’s research pipeline products are aimed at treatment of various cancer indications. In addition, the Company has its TheraSilence® delivery technology aimed at delivery of therapeutic siRNA for the treatment of human diseases. EGEN collaborates with outside investigators, biotech organizations, and universities on various projects in these areas.

References:

1/ A Phase II Evaluation of Intraperitoneal EGEN-001 (IL-12 Plasmid Formulated With PEG-PEI-Cholesterol Lipopolymer) in the Treatment of Persistent or Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian, Fallopian Tube or Primary Peritoneal Cancer, Clinical Trial Summary, ClinicialTrials.gov (Identifier:  NCT01118052).

2/A Phase 1, Open Label, Dose Escalation Study of the Safety, Tolerability and Preliminary Efficacy of Intraperitoneal EGEN-001 in Patients With Recurrent Epithelial Ovarian Cancer, Clinical Trial Summary, ClinicialTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT00137865).

3/A Phase 1, Open-Label, Dose Escalation Study of the Safety and Preliminary Efficacy of EGEN-001 in Combination With Carboplatin and Docetaxel in Women With Recurrent, Platinum-Sensitive, Epithelial Ovarian Cancer, Clinical Trial Summary, ClinicialTrials.gov (Identifier:  NCT00473954).

4/Kendrick JE, Matthews KS, Straughn JM, et. al.  A phase I trial of intraperitoneal EGEN-001, a novel IL-12 gene therapeutic, administered alone or in combination with chemotherapy in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.  J Clin Oncol 26: 2008 (May 20 suppl; abstr 5572).

5/Anwar K, Barnes MN, Kelly FJ, et. al. Safety and tolerability of a novel IL-12 gene therapeutic administered in combination with carboplatin/docetaxel in patients with recurrent ovarian cancer.  J Clin Oncol 28:15s, 2010 (suppl; abstr 5045).

Source: FDA Awards EGEN, Inc. Orphan -Drug Grant for Clinical Development of EGEN-001 for Treatment of Ovarian Cancer, Press Release, EGEN, Inc., February 2, 2011.

Yale University Scientists Synthesize Long-Sought-After Anticancer Agent

A team of Yale University scientists has synthesized for the first time a chemical compound  called “lomaiviticin aglycon, ” which led to the development of a new class of molecules that appear to target and destroy cancer stem cells.

A team of Yale University scientists has synthesized for the first time a chemical compound called “lomaiviticin aglycon,” which led to the development of a new class of molecules that appear to target and destroy cancer stem cells.

Chemists worldwide have been interested in lomaiviticin’s potential anticancer properties since its discovery in 2001. But so far, they have been unable to obtain significant quantities of the compound, which is produced by a rare marine bacterium that cannot be easily coaxed into creating the molecule. For the past decade, different groups around the world have been trying instead to synthesize the natural compound in the lab, but without success.

Dr. Seth Herzon (center), along with team members Christina Woo and Liang Lu, synthesized a naturally occurring anticancer compound that scientists worldwide have been trying to replicate in the lab for nearly a decade.

Now a team at Yale, led by chemist Dr. Seth Herzon, has managed to create lomaiviticin aglycon for the first time, opening up new avenues of exploration into novel chemotherapies that could target cancer stem cells, thought to be the precursors to tumors in a number of different cancers including ovarian, brain, lung, prostate and leukemia. Their discovery appears online today in the Journal of the American Chemical Society.

“About three quarters of anticancer agents are derived from natural products, so there’s been lots of work in this area,” Herzon said. “But this compound is structurally very different from other natural products, which made it extremely difficult to synthesize in the lab.”

In addition to lomaiviticin aglycon, Herzon’s team also created smaller, similar molecules that have proven extremely effective in killing ovarian stem cells, said Gil Mor, M.D., Ph.D., a researcher at the Yale School of Medicine who is collaborating with Herzon to test the new class of molecules’ potential as a cancer therapeutic. This family of compounds are called “kinamycins.” The reactive core of the kinamycins also plays a key role in lomaiviticin aglycon, which is even more toxic and could prove even more effective in destroying cancer cells.

The scientists are particularly excited about lomaiviticin aglycon’s potential to kill ovarian cancer stem cells because the disease is notoriously resistant to paclitaxel (Taxol) and carboplatin, two of the most commonly used ovarian cancer chemotherapy drugs. “Ovarian cancer has a high rate of recurrence, and after using chemotherapy to fight the tumor the first time, you’re left with resistant tumor cells that tend to keep coming back,” Mor explained. “If you can kill the stem cells before they have the chance to form a tumor, the patient will have a much better chance of survival — and there aren’t many potential therapies out there that target cancer stem cells right now.”

Image of one of the kinamycin compounds synthesized by Yale researchers destroying ovarian cancer cells (the spherical objects) in less than 48 hours in lab tests. (Credit: Gil Mor)

Herzon’s team, which managed to synthesize the molecule in just 11 steps starting from basic chemical building blocks, has been working on the problem since 2008 and spent more than a year on just one step of the process involving the creation of a carbon-carbon bond. It was an achievement that many researchers deemed impossible, but while others tried to work around having to create that bond by using other techniques, the team’s persistence paid off.

“A lot of blood, sweat and tears went into creating that bond,” Herzon said. “After that, the rest of the process was relatively easy.”

Next, the team will continue to analyze the compound to better understand what’s happening to the stem cells at the molecular level. The team hopes to begin testing the compounds in animals shortly.

“This is a great example of the synergy between basic chemistry and the applied sciences,” Herzon said. “Our original goal of synthesizing this natural product has led us into entirely new directions that could have broad impacts in human medicine.”

Other authors of the paper include Liang Lu, Christina M. Woo and Shivajirao L. Gholap, all of Yale University.

Sources:

Outside-the-Box: The Rogosin Institute Is Fighting Cancer With Cancer Cells In Clinical Trials

Researchers at the Rogosin Institute are using cancer “macrobeads” to fight cancer.  Cancer cells in the beads secrete proteins which researchers believe could signal a patient’s cancer to stop growing, shrink or even die. The treatment is currently being tested in human clinical trials.

Two groundbreaking preclinical studies demonstrate for the first time that encapsulated mouse kidney cancer cells inhibit the growth of freely-growing cancer cells of the same or different type in a laboratory dish and in tumor-bearing animals. These findings support the hypothesis that cancer cells entrapped in seaweed-based gel, called “macrobeads,” send biological feedback or signals to freely-growing tumors outside the macrobead to slow or stop their growth. Both studies (cited below) are published in the on-line January 24, 2011 issue of Cancer Research, a publication of the American Association For Cancer Research.

Barry H. Smith, M.D., Ph.D., Director, The Rogosin Institute; Professor, Clinical Surgery, Weill Cornell Medical College

The Rogosin Institute, an independent not-for-profit treatment and research center associated with New York-Presbyterian Hospital and Weill Cornell Medical College, developed the cell encapsulation technology that facilitated production of the macrobead and applied this technology in conducting preclinical studies. The research team was headed by Barry H. Smith, M.D., Ph.D.,  the Director of The Rogosin Institute, Professor of Clinical Surgery at the Weill Cornell Medical College, and lead author of the studies. Findings in the studies to date are consistent with the hypothesis that when macrobeads are implanted in a host, the encapsulated cells are isolated from the host’s immune system but continue to maintain their functionality.

In addition to the standard preclinical in vivo and in vitro experiments, a clinical veterinary study was conducted in cats and dogs suffering from various spontaneous (non-induced) cancers. More than 40 animals were treated with the macrobead technology. Consistent results, measured both in terms of tumor response and animal well-being, occurred with prostate, liver and breast cancer, as well as lymphoma. Additional research revealed that regardless of the animal specie or type of cancer cell that was encapsulated, the macrobead technology inhibited cancer growth across all species and cancer types tested.  The results have included slowed tumor growth or, in some cases, necrosis and elimination of tumors and the restoration of a normal animal lifespan.

Cancer macrobead therapy has proceeded to human clinical testing. A Phase 1 trial in more than 30 patients evaluated the safety of macrobeads implanted in the abdominal cavity as a biological treatment of end-stage, treatment-resistant, epithelial-derived cancer. Based on the safety profile data, Phase 2 efficacy trials are in progress in patients with colorectal cancer, pancreatic cancer and prostate cancer. The Phase 1 trial remains open to a range of epithelial-derived cancers, including ovarian.  To date, the Rogosin Institute research team has not found evidence to indicate that placing mouse tumors in humans or other animal species causes harm or side-effects.

Scientists are testing whether macrobeads containing cancer cells can be implanted into patients and communicate with the patient’s tumor to stop growing, shrink or die.

Step 1:  Small beads are made from a seaweed-derived sugar called agarose and mixed with 150,000 mouse kidney cancer cells, and a second layer of agarose is added, encapsulating the cancer cells.

Step 2:  Within 3-to-10 days, 99% of the kidney cancer cells die.  The remaining cells have traits similar to cancer stem cells.

Step 3:  The stem cells begin to recolonize the bead.  The colonies increase in sufficient numbers within a few weeks to reach a stable state.

Step 4:  The beads begin to release proteins —  chemical signals reflecting that the beads have sufficient numbers of cells for growth regulators to kick in.

Step 5: Several hundred beads (depending on patient’s weight) are implanted in the abdominal cavity in a laparoscopic surgical procedure.  The cancer cells are trapped in the beads; preventing their circulation elsewhere in the body and protecting them from attack by the body’s immune system.

Step 6: In animal studies, researchers believe some proteins released from the beads reached tumors elsewhere in the body and tricked them into sensing that other tumor cells are nearby.

Step 7:  As a result, researchers believe tumors in some animals stopped growing, shrank or died.  The hypothesis is being tested in people with cancer.

Howard Parnes, M.D., Chief, Prostate & Urologic Cancer Research Group, Division of Cancer Prevention, National Cancer Institute

“This is a completely novel way of thinking about cancer biology,” says Howard L. Parnes, a researcher in the Division of  Cancer Prevention at the National Cancer Institute who is familiar with the work but was not involved with it. “We talk about thinking outside the box. It’s hard to think of a better example.” “They demonstrate a remarkable proof of principle that tumor cells from one animal can be manipulated to produce factors that can inhibit the growth of cancers in other animals,” Dr. Parnes says. “This suggests that these cancer inhibitory factors have been conserved over millions of years of evolution.”

“Macrobead therapy holds promise as a new option in cancer treatment because it makes use of normal biological mechanisms and avoids the toxicities associated with traditional chemotherapy,” said Dr. Barry Smith. “The results of our research show that this approach is not specific to tumor type or species so that, for example, mouse cells can be used to treat several different human tumors and human cells can be used to treat several different animal tumors.”

“Because cancer and other diseases are their own biological systems, we believe that the future of effective disease treatment must likewise be biological and system-based,” said Stuart Subotnick, CEO of Metromedia Bio-Science LLC. “Many of the existing therapies are narrow, targeted approaches that fail to treat diseases comprehensively. In contrast, our unique macrobead technology delivers an integrated cell system that alters disease processes and utilizes the body’s natural defense mechanisms. The goal is to repair the body and not merely treat the symptoms.”

It is well-known that proof of anti-tumor activity in treating animals does not represent guaranteed effectiveness in humans. But, assuming the macrobead therapy proves ultimately effective in humans, it would represent a novel approach to treating cancer and challenge existing scientific dogmas.

The cancer macrobead therapy described above is backed by Metromedia Company, a privately held telecommunications company which was run by billionaire John Kluge until his recent death. The Metromedia Biosciences unit has invested $50 million into the research.  If the treatment proves successful in humans, a large part of the revenue generated will be contributed to Mr. Kluge’s charitable foundation.

About Metromedia Bio-Science LLC

Metromedia Bio-Science LLC, in conjunction with The Rogosin Institute, utilizes the novel cell encapsulation technology to conduct research into the treatment of various diseases, including cancer and diabetes, and the evaluation of disease therapies. Metromedia Bio-Science LLC is an affiliate of Metromedia Company, a diversified partnership founded by the late John W. Kluge and Stuart Subotnick.

About The Rogosin Institute

The Rogosin Institute is an independent not-for-profit treatment and research center associated with New York-Presbyterian Hospital (NYPH) and Weill Cornell Medical College. It is one of the nation’s leading research and treatment centers for kidney disease, providing services from early stage disease to those requiring dialysis and transplantation. It also has programs in diabetes, hypertension and lipid disorders. The Institute’s cancer research program, featuring the macrobeads, began in 1995. The Rogosin Institute is unique in its combination of the best in clinical care with research into new and better ways to prevent and treat disease.

References:

Clinical Trials:

PARP Inhibitor MK-4827 Shows Anti-Tumor Activity in First Human Clinical Study

MK-4827, a new drug that targets proteins responsible for helping cancer cells repair their damaged DNA, has shown promising anti-tumor activity in its first human clinical trial.

MK-4827, a new drug that targets proteins responsible for helping cancer cells repair their damaged DNA, has shown promising anti-tumour activity in its first human clinical trial. Some patients with a range of solid tumors, many of whom had been treated unsuccessfully for their cancer with other therapies, have seen their tumors shrink or stabilize for periods of between 46 days to more than a year. The research will be presented today (Thursday) at the 22nd EORTCNCIAACR [1] Symposium on Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics, which is being held in Berlin, Germany.

PARP is a key signaling enzyme involved in triggering the repair of single-strand DNA damage. PARP inhibition has been demonstrated to selectively kill tumor cells lacking components of the homologous recombination (HR) DNA repair pathway while sparing normal cells. Known defects in HR repair include the well-characterized hereditary BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations in breast and ovarian cancer, as well as nonhereditary BRCA mutations. (Photo Credit: AstraZeneca Oncology)

Laboratory studies of the drug, MK-4827, have shown that it inhibits proteins called PARP1 and PARP2 (poly(ADP)-ribose polymerase). PARP is involved in a number of cellular processes and one of its important functions is to assist in the repair of single-strand breaks in DNA. Notably, if one single-strand DNA break is replicated (replication occurs before cell division), then it results in a double-strand break.  By inhibiting the action of PARP, double-strand breaks occur, which in turn, lead to cell death. Tumors that are caused by a mutation in the BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes are susceptible to cell death through PARP inhibition because correctly functioning BRCA genes assist in repairing double-strand DNA breaks via a process called homologous-recombination-dependent DNA repair, whereas mutated versions are unable to perform this role. Normal cells do not replicate as often as cancer cells and they still have homologous repair operating; this enables them to survive the inhibition of PARP and makes PARP a good target for anti-cancer therapy.

In a Phase I trial [2] conducted at the H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center (Tampa Florida, USA), University of Wisconsin-Madison (Madison, USA) and the Royal Marsden Hospital (London, UK), MK-4827 was given to 59 patients (46 women, 13 men) with a range of solid tumors such as non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), prostate cancer, sarcoma, melanoma and breast and ovarian cancers. Some patients had cancers caused by mutations in the BRCA1/2 genes, such as breast and ovarian cancer, but others had cancers that had arisen sporadically.

Robert M. Wenham, M.D., MS, FACOG, Clinical Director, Gynecologic Oncology, Department of Women's Oncology, H. Lee Moffitt Cancer Center

The drug was given in pill form once a day, and the researchers found that the maximum tolerated dose was 300 mg per day. Dr. Robert Wenham, Clinical Director for Gynecologic Oncology in the Department of Women’s Oncology at the Moffitt Cancer Center, who is presenting data on behalf of the participating investigators, said: “MK-4827 is generally well tolerated, with the main dose-limiting toxicity being thrombocytopenia – an abnormal decrease in the number of platelets in the circulatory blood. The most common side effects are mild nausea, vomiting, anorexia and fatigue.”

The researchers saw anti-tumor responses in both sporadic (non-inherited) and BRCA1/2 mutation-associated cancers [emphasis added]. Ten patients with breast and ovarian cancers had partial responses, with progression-free survival between 51-445 days, and seven of these patients are still responding to treatment. Four patients (two with ovarian cancer and two with NSCLC) had stable disease for between 130-353 days.

Dr. Wenham said: “Most patients in the trial had exhausted standard therapies and those who responded to this drug have benefited. Several patients have been receiving treatment for more than a year. The responses mean that MK-4827 is working as hoped and justify additional studies. Just how well MK-4827 works compared to other treatments is the goal of the next set of studies.”

He gave a possible explanation as to why patients with cancers that were not caused by BRCA1 or BRCA 2 gene mutations also responded to the PARP inhibition. “BRCA is a tumor suppressor gene that assists in repairing double stranded DNA breaks. In BRCA-mutation related cancers, loss of both copies of the gene results in a non-functional protein and thus BRCA deficiency. Because BRCA works with other proteins, BRCA-pathway related deficiency can be seen in the absence of two mutated copies of the BRCA genes. This may explain why responses have been reported for this class of drugs in non-BRCA mutant cancers.”

Dr. Wenham and his colleagues are recruiting more patients for additional studies and an expansion of the existing trial. “We want to understand what types of cancers will respond best to treatment with MK-4827,” he said. “Cohorts are currently open for patients with ovarian cancer, patients without germ-line BRCA mutations, and prostate cancer patients. Cohorts will open soon for patients with T-cell prolymphocytic leukemia, endometrial cancer, breast cancer and colorectal cancer. MK-4827 is also being studied in combination with conventional chemotherapy drugs.”

Sources:

Additional Information:

Related Information:

References:

[1] EORTC [European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, NCI [National Cancer Institute], AACR [American Association for Cancer Research].

[2] This study was funded by Merck & Co., Inc. MK-4827 is owned by Merck & Co., Inc.

Dana-Farber Researchers “OncoMap” The Way To Personalized Treatment For Ovarian Cancer

Researchers have shown that point mutations – mis-spellings in a single letter of genetic code – that drive the onset and growth of cancer cells can be detected successfully in advanced ovarian cancer using a technique called OncoMap. The finding opens the way for personalized medicine in which every patient could have their tumor screened, specific mutations identified, and the appropriate drug chosen to target the mutation and halt the growth of their cancer.

Researchers have shown that point mutations – mis-spellings in a single letter of genetic code – that drive the onset and growth of cancer cells can be detected successfully in advanced ovarian cancer using a technique called OncoMap. The finding opens the way for personalized medicine in which every patient could have their tumor screened, specific mutations identified, and the appropriate drug chosen to target the mutation and halt the growth of their cancer.

Using mass spectrometry for identifying the genetic make-up of cancer cells, OncoMap can determine the point mutations in tumors by utilizing a large panel of over 100 known cancer-causing genes (referred to as “oncogenes“). In the work to be presented today (Wednesday) at the 22nd EORTCNCIAACR [1] Symposium on Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics in Berlin, researchers will describe how they used OncoMap to identify oncogene mutations in tumor samples obtained from women with advanced high-grade serous ovarian cancer. [2] Earlier in the year 76 mutations in 26 different genes had been found but, since then, further work in more tumor samples has found more.

Ursula A. Matulonis, M.D., Medical Director, Gynecologic Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute; Associate Professor, Medicine, Harvard Medical School

Dr. Ursula Matulonis, director/program leader in medical gynecologic oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute located in Boston, Massachusetts (USA) and Associate Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School, will tell the meeting:

“Epithelial ovarian cancer is the most lethal of all the gynecologic malignancies, and new treatments are needed for both newly diagnosed patients as well as patients with recurrent cancer. The success of conventional chemotherapy has reached a plateau, and new means of characterizing ovarian cancer so that treatment can be personalized are needed.

We know that many human cancers have point mutations in certain oncogenes, and that these mutations can cause cancer cells to have a dependence on just one overactive gene or signalling pathway for the cancer cell’s growth and survival – a phenomenon known as ‘oncogene addiction’. If the mutation that causes the oncogene addiction can be inhibited, then it seems that this often halts the cancer process. Examples of mutations that are successfully inhibited by targeted drugs are HER2 (for which trastuzumab [Herceptin®] is used in breast cancer), EGFR (erlotinib [Tarceva®] in lung cancer) and c-kit (imatinib [Gleevec®] in chronic myeloid leukemia). So if we know the status of specific genes in a tumor, then this enables us to choose specific treatments that are likely to work successfully against the cancer.”

Dr Matulonis and her colleagues used OncoMap to investigate the mutation status of high-grade serous ovarian tumors that were known not to be caused by inherited mutations in the BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 genes. They found mutations previously identified to be involved in ovarian cancer: KRAS, BRAF, CTNNB1 and PIK3CA. The KRAS and PIK3CA mutations were the most common, while BRAF was more rare. The researchers also identified a low frequency of mutations in many other different oncogenes.

Dr. Matulonis further noted:

“This study shows that it’s feasible to use OncoMap to identify whether a patient’s tumor has a mutation in an oncogene for which a known drug is available to target that specific gene, so as to enable us to place her on a clinical study of that drug; for instance, XL147 or GDC-0941 are inhibitors for the P13kinase mutation that are in clinical trials at present.  In addition, someone’s cancer could harbor a mutation (such as ALK) that is not known to be associated with ovarian cancer or has not yet been studied in ovarian cancer – these patients could be matched with a drug that inhibits that protein too. As new drugs get developed, this information would be used to match future drugs with patients and their cancers.”

The researchers hope that OncoMap will become a clinical test for all cancer patients at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute before long, so that the genetic information obtained can be used to choose the best treatment for them.

Dr. Matulonis said:

“At present, only a few targeted therapies are being used for newly diagnosed ovarian cancer and most are being used to treat recurrent ovarian cancer, but this will change eventually. I have already referred several of our patients who are either newly diagnosed or have recurrent cancer and who have mutations (one with KRAS and one with PIK3CA) to our phase I program for drugs studies specific to these mutations.  For ovarian cancer, understanding mutational analysis is one piece of the genetic puzzle. Our group will also start looking for chromosomal and gene amplifications and deletions in patients’ tumors, which we know are important for ovarian cancer.”

Matulonis believes that OncoMap and other similar analytical tools will become mainstream practice in all cancer clinics before long. Tools for detecting genes with the incorrect numbers of copies or abnormal expression will also help doctors to choose the best treatment for individual patients.”

Source: Researchers map the way to personalised treatment for ovarian cancer, Abstract no: 35. Oral presentation in plenary session 2.  22nd EORTC-NCI-AACR Symposium on Molecular Targets and Cancer Therapeutics, Berlin, Germany, November 16- 19, 2010.

References:

[1] EORTC [European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, NCI [National Cancer Institute], AACR [American Association for Cancer Research].

[2] The study was funded by the Madeline Franchi Ovarian Cancer Research Fund, twoAM Fund and the Sally Cooke Ovarian Cancer Research Fund.

Related Information:

Ovarian Cancer Drug AMG 386 Shows Promise With Move To Phase 3 Trials In Australia, Canada & Europe

A new drug (AMG 386) designed to arrest ovarian cancer cell growth by inhibiting blood vessel formation is being readied for a phase 3 trial in Australia, Canada and Europe.

AMG 386, a new drug designed to arrest ovarian cancer cell growth by inhibiting blood vessel formation, is being readied for a phase 3 trial in Australia, Canada and Europe.

The attendees at the Clinical Oncological Society of Australia Annual Scientific Meeting were told on November 10th that AMG 386 offers benefits over existing treatments, extending survival in advanced ovarian cancer patients with fewer side-effects.

AMG 386 is a first-in-class investigational “peptibody” (i.e., a combination of a peptide + an antibody) that is designed to block angiogenesis by inhibiting angiopoietin-1 and -2 (Ang1 & Ang2). Angiopoietins interact with the Tie2 receptor, which mediates vascular remodeling. Ang1 and Ang2 are thought to play opposing roles, and the maturation of blood vessels appears to be controlled by their precise balance.

Gary E. Richardson, M.D., Associate Professor of Medicine, Monash University, Victoria, Australia

Associate Professor of Medicine at Monash University, Gary Richardson, presented updated data from phase 2 clinical trials (first reported in June at the American Society of Clinical Oncology) showing that AMG 386 in combination with paclitaxel not only extends survival, but is well tolerated and reduces the risk of serious complications such as bowel perforation.

“Currently the prognosis for ovarian cancer patients is poor,” Professor Richardson said. “Over 75% of patients diagnosed with ovarian cancer present with advanced disease. Current treatments will cure only about a quarter of these patients.”

“The phase 2 trials show that AMG 386 combined with paclitaxel extends survival of heavily pre-treated patients by almost two thirds (4.6 to 7.2 months). In practical terms, this does not add significantly to survival time for terminal patients, but importantly indicates real potential as a first line treatment immediately following surgery.”

Professor Richardson said the treatment worked by inhibiting angiogenesis, the process by which new blood vessels grow from existing blood vessels. “By starving the cancer cells of blood supply, they will die in greater numbers. This form of therapy is complementary to current chemotherapy treatment as it uses a different mechanism to target the cancer.”

Professor Richardson said the phase 3 trial would commence by the end of this year and involve more than 1,000 patients in Australia, Canada and western Europe.

Bruce Mann, M.D., President, Clinical Oncological Society of Australia

Clinical Oncological Society of Australia President, Professor Bruce Mann, said clinicians had been frustrated by the lack of progress in treatment for ovarian cancer. “We don’t want to get ahead of ourselves, but novel approaches like this have the potential to make a real difference in patient survival from this devastating disease.”

Sources:

Additional Information:

New Assay Test Predicts That 50% of Ovarian Cancers Will Respond To In Vitro PARP Inhibition

U.K. researchers develop a new test that could be used to select ovarian cancer patients who will benefit from a new class of drugs called “PARP inhibitors.”

U.K. researchers have developed a new test that could be used to select which patients with ovarian cancer will benefit from a new class of drugs called “PARP (poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase) inhibitors,” according to preclinical research presented at the National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) Cancer Conference held in Liverpool on November 8th.  According to the test results, approximately 50 percent of all patients with ovarian cancer may benefit from PARP inhibitors.

Dr. Asima Mukhopadhyay Discusses Her Research Into A More Tailored Treatment For Ovarian Cancer

PARP Inhibition & BRCA Gene Mutations: Exploiting Ovarian Cancer’s Inherent Defects

  • Genetics 101

DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) is the genetic material that contains the instructions used in the development and functioning of our cells. DNA is generally stored in the nucleus of our cells. The primary purpose of DNA molecules is the long-term storage of information. Often compared to a recipe or a code, DNA is a set of blueprints that contains the instructions our cells require to construct other cell components, such as proteins and RNA (ribonucleic acid) molecules. The DNA segments that carry this genetic information are called “genes.”

A gene is essentially a sentence made up of the bases A (adenine), T (thymine), G (guanine), and C (cytosine) that describes how to make a protein. Any change in the sequence of bases — and therefore in the protein instructions — is a mutation. Just like changing a letter in a sentence can change the sentence’s meaning, a mutation can change the instruction contained in the gene. Any changes to those instructions can alter the gene’s meaning and change the protein that is made, or how or when a cell makes that protein.

Gene mutations can (i) result in a protein that cannot carry out its normal function in the cell, (ii) prevent the protein from being made at all, or (iii) cause too much or too little of a normal protein to be made.

  • Targeting DNA Repair Through PARP Inhibition

Targeting DNA repair through PARP inhibition in BRCA gene-mutated cancer cells. "DSB" stands for DNA "Double Stand Break." (Photo Credit: AstraZeneca Oncology)

Normally functioning BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes are necessary for DNA repair through a process known as “homologous recombination” (HR).  HR is a form of genetic recombination in which two similar DNA strands exchange genetic material. This process is critical to a cell’s ability to repair its DNA in the event that it becomes damaged, so the cell can continue to function.

A cell’s DNA structure can be damaged by a wide variety of intentional (i.e., select cancer treatments) or unintentional (ultraviolet light, ionizing radiation, man-made chemicals, etc.) factors.  For example, chemotherapy regimens used in the treatment of cancer, including alkylating agents, topoisomerase inhibitors, and platinum drugs, are designed to damage DNA and prevent cancer cells from reproducing.

In approximately 10 percent of inherited ovarian cancers, the BRCA 1 or BRCA2 gene is damaged or mutated.  When the BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene is mutated, a backup type of DNA repair mechanism called “base-excision repair” usually compensates for the lack of DNA repair by HR.  Base-excision repair represents a DNA “emergency repair kit.” DNA repair enzymes such as PARP, whose activity and expression are upregulated in tumor cells, are believed to dampen the intended effect of chemotherapy and generate drug resistance.

When the PARP1 protein – which is necessary for base-excision repair – is inhibited in ovarian cancer cells possessing a BRCA gene mutation, DNA repair is drastically reduced, and the cancer cell dies through so-called “synthetic lethality.”  In sum, PARP inhibitors enhance the potential of chemotherapy (and radiation therapy) to induce cell death.  Healthy cells are unaffected if PARP is blocked because they either contain one or two working BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes which do an effective DNA repair job through use of HR.

  • PARP Inhibitors: A New Class of Targeted Therapy

PARP inhibitors represent a new, targeted approach to treating certain types of cancers. PARP inhibition has the potential to overwhelm cancer cells with lethal DNA damage by exploiting impaired DNA repair function inherent in some cancers, including breast and ovarian cancers with defects in the BRCA1 gene or BRCA 2 gene, and other DNA repair molecules. Inhibition of PARP leads to the cell’s failure to repair single strand DNA breaks, which, in turn, causes double strand DNA breaks. These effects are particularly detrimental to cancer cells that are deficient in repairing double strand DNA breaks and ultimately lead to cancer cell death.

PARP inhibitors are the first targeted treatment to be developed for women with inherited forms of breast and ovarian cancer carrying faults or mutations in a BRCA gene. Early results from clinical trials are showing promise for patients with the rare inherited forms of these cancers.

Study Hypothesis: PARP Inhibitors May Be Effective Against a Large Proportion of Non-Inherited Ovarian Cancers

As noted above, PARP inhibitors selectively target HR–defective cells and have shown good clinical activity in hereditary breast and ovarian cancers associated with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. The U.K. researchers hypothesized that a high proportion (up to 50%) of sporadic (non-inherited) epithelial ovarian cancers could be deficient in HR due to genetic or epigenetic inactivation of the BRCA1, BRCA2, or other HR-related genes, which occur during a woman’s lifetime. Therefore, PARP inhibitors could prove beneficial to a larger group of ovarian cancer patients, assuming a patient’s HR status can be properly identified.

To test this hypothesis, the U.K. researchers developed a functional assay to test the HR status of primary ovarian cancer cultures derived from patients’ ascitic fluid. The test, referred to as the “RAD51 assay,” scans the cancer cells and identifies which tumor samples contain defective DNA repair ability (i.e., HR-deficient) which can be targeted by the PARP inhibitor. The researchers tested the HR status of each culture, and then subjected each one to in vitro cytotoxicity testing using the potent PARP inhibitor PF-01367338 (formerly known as AG-14699).

Study Results: 90% of HR-Deficient Ovarian Cancer Cultures Respond to PARP Inhibition

Upon testing completion, the U.K. researchers discovered that out of 50 primary cultures evaluated for HR status and cytotoxicity to the PARP inhibitor, approximately 40% of the cultures evidenced normal HR activity, while 60 percent of the cultures evidenced deficient HR activity. Cytotoxicity to PARP inhibitors was observed in approximately 90 percent of the HR deficient cultures, while no cytotoxicity was seen in the cultures that evidenced normal HR activity. Specifically, the PARP inhibitor PF-01367338 was found to selectively block the spread of ovarian tumor cells with low RAD51 expression.

Conclusion

Based upon the findings above, the U.K. researchers concluded that HR-deficient status can be determined in primary ovarian cancer, and that such status correlates with in vitro response to PARP inhibition.  Accordingly, the researchers concluded that potentially 50 to 60 percent of ovarian cancers could benefit from PARP inhibitors, but they note that use of the RAD51 assay as a biomarker requires additional clinical trial testing.  Although the RAD51 assay test that was used by the U.K. researchers to examine tumor samples in the laboratory is not yet suitable for routine clinical practice, the U.K. research team hopes to refine it for use in patients.

Upon presentation of the testing results, Dr. Asima Mukhopadhyay said:

“Our results show that this new test is almost 100 percent effective in identifying which ovarian cancer patients could benefit from these promising new drugs.  We have only been able to carry out this work because of the great team we have here which includes both doctors and scientists.”

The team based at Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead and the Newcastle Cancer Centre at the NICR, Newcastle University collaborated with Pfizer to develop the new assay to test tumor samples taken from ovarian cancer patients when they had surgery.

Dr. Mukhopadhyay added:

“Now we hope to hone the test to be used directly with patients and then carry out clinical trials. If the trials are successful we hope it will help doctors treat patients in a personalised and targeted way based on their individual tumour. It is also now hoped that PARP inhibitors will be useful for a broad range of cancers and we hope this test can be extended to other cancer types.”

Dr. Lesley Walker, Cancer Research UK’s director of cancer information, said:

“It’s exciting to see the development of promising new ‘smart’ drugs such as PARP inhibitors. But equally important is the need to identify exactly which sub-groups of patients will benefit from these new treatments. Tests like this will become invaluable in helping doctors get the most effective treatments quickly to patients, sparing them from unnecessary treatments and side effects.”

Sources:

Additional Information:

________________________________________

About The Researchers

Dr. Asima Mukhopadhyay is a doctor and clinical research fellow working at the Queen Elizabeth Hospital, Gateshead and the Northern Institute for Cancer Research at Newcastle University. Queen Elizabeth Hospital is run by Gateshead Health NHS Foundation Trust and is the home for gynecological oncology for the North East of England and Cumbria. She received a bursary to attend the conference, which was awarded on the merit of her work.

Key researchers on the study included Dr. Richard Edmondson, who was funded by the NHS, and Professor Nicola Curtin, who was funded by the Higher Education Funding Council. Dr Asima Mukhopadhyay is funded by the NHS.

Dr Richard Edmondson is a consultant gynecological oncologist at the Northern Gynaecological Oncology Centre, Gateshead and a Senior Lecturer at the Newcastle Cancer Centre at the Northern Institute for Cancer Research, Newcastle University, and is a member of the research team.

Nicola Curtin is Professor of Experimental Cancer Therapeutics at Newcastle University and is the principal investigator of this project.

Current and future work involves working closely with Pfizer. Pfizer developed one of the PARP inhibitors and supported this project.

About The Newcastle Cancer Centre

The Newcastle Cancer Centre at the Northern Institute for Cancer Research is jointly funded by three charities: Cancer Research UK, Leukaemia and Lymphoma Research, and the North of England Children’s Cancer Research Fund.  Launched in July 2009, the Centre is based at the Northern Institute for Cancer Research at Newcastle University.  The Centre brings together some of the world’s leading figures in cancer research and drug development. They play a crucial role in delivering the new generation of cancer treatments for children and adults by identifying new drug targets, developing new drugs and verifying the effectiveness and safety of new treatments. This collaborative approach makes it easier for researchers to work alongside doctors treating patients, allowing promising new treatments to reach patients quickly.

About the NCRI Cancer Conference

The National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) Cancer Conference is the UK’s major forum for showcasing the best British and international cancer research. The Conference offers unique opportunities for networking and sharing knowledge by bringing together world leading experts from all cancer research disciplines. The sixth annual NCRI Cancer Conference was held from November 7-10, 2010 at the BT Convention Centre in Liverpool. For more information visit www.ncri.org.uk/ncriconference.

About the NCRI

The National Cancer Research Institute (NCRI) was established in April 2001. It is a UK-wide partnership between the government, charity and industry which promotes cooperation in cancer research among the 21 member organizations for the benefit of patients, the public and the scientific community. For more information visit www.ncri.org.uk.

NCRI members include: the Association of the British Pharmaceutical Industry (ABPI); Association for International Cancer Research; Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council; Breakthrough Breast Cancer; Breast Cancer Campaign; CancerResearch UK; CHILDREN with LEUKAEMIA, Department of Health; Economic and Social Research Council; Leukaemia & Lymphoma Research; Ludwig Institute for Cancer Research; Macmillan Cancer Support; Marie Curie Cancer Care; Medical Research Council; Northern Ireland Health and Social Care (Research & Development Office); Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation; Scottish Government Health Directorates (Chief Scientist Office);Tenovus; Welsh Assembly Government (Wales Office of Research and Development for Health & Social Care); The Wellcome Trust; and Yorkshire Cancer Research.

Access Pharma Commences European Phase II Study of ProLindac™ + Paclitaxel In Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian Cancer Patients

Access Pharmaceuticals announces commencement of a Phase 2 combination trial for its second generation DACH-platinum cancer drug, ProLindac™ (formerly known as AP5346), in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer patients. This trial is an open-label, Phase 2 study of ProLindac™ given intravenously with paclitaxel. The combination trial will be conducted in up to eight European participating centers.

Access Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a biopharmaceutical company leveraging its proprietary drug-delivery platforms to develop treatments in the areas of oncology, cancer supportive care and diabetes, announces commencement of a Phase 2 combination trial for its second generation DACH-platinum [the active part of the currently-marketed drug, oxaliplatin] cancer drug, ProLindac™ (formerly known as AP5346), in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer patients. This trial is an open-label, Phase 2 study of ProLindac™ given intravenously with paclitaxel. The combination trial will be conducted in up to eight European participating centers.

“We are very pleased to be able to begin this trial, which will be the first of several ProLindac-based combination studies in a variety of indications,” said Prof. Esteban Cvitkovic, Vice Chairman Europe and Senior Director Clinical Oncology R&D, Access Pharmaceuticals, Inc. He continued, “The ambitious two-step design of the study will allow us to rapidly benchmark ProLindac/paclitaxel in a clinical setting where there is a clear need to establish an improved standard for long-term tumor responses. When treated using the current first-line combination of carboplatin/paclitaxel, more than half of patients with advanced ovarian cancer will relapse. There are very few second-line options. Approved agents for second-line and later therapy are currently focused primarily on the palliation of more resistant tumors. This lack of valid second-line options presents an opportunity to prove the role of ProLindac-based combinations in ovarian cancer.”

“After optimizing ProLindac’s scaled-up manufacturing process, we are pleased to be moving forward with its clinical development,” said Jeff Davis, President and CEO, Access Pharmaceuticals, Inc. He continued, “We think there is a significant clinical need and commercial opportunity for safer, more effective platinum drugs.”

Access Pharmaceuticals previously announced positive safety and efficacy results from its Phase 2 monotherapy clinical study of ProLindac™ in late-stage, heavily pretreated ovarian cancer patients. In this study, 66% of patients who received the highest dose achieved clinically meaningful disease stabilization according to RECIST [Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors] criteria, including sustained significant reductions in CA-125 (the established specific serum marker for ovarian cancer) observed in several patients. No patient in any dose group exhibited signs of acute neurotoxicity, which is a major adverse side-effect of the approved DACH platinum, Eloxatin®. ProLindac was very well tolerated, with only minor sporadic hematologic toxicity.

Access Pharmaceuticals is evaluating various indications where DACH platinum-based combinations have been proven active, such as hepatocarcinoma, biliary tree cancer and pancreatic cancer before deciding on an expanded Phase 2 program.

About ProLindac:

ProLindac™ is a novel DACH platinum prodrug that has completed a phase 2 monotherapy study in ovarian cancer patients. It is a polymer therapeutic that utilizes a safe, water-soluble nanoparticulate system to deliver DACH platinum to tumors, while reducing delivery to normal tissue, resulting in an increase in drug effectiveness and a significant decrease in toxic side-effects seen in the currently marketed DACH platinum, Eloxatin®.

For more information, please visit http://www.accesspharma.com/product-programs/prolindac/.

Source: Access Pharmaceuticals Commences ProLindac Phase 2 Combination Clinical Trial – Multicenter, Open-Label Trial to Target Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian-Cancer Patients, News Release, Access Pharmaceuticals, Inc., November 3, 2010.

Additional Information:


Largest Study Matching Genomes To Potential Anticancer Treatments Releases Initial Results

The largest study to correlate genetics with response to anticancer drugs released its first results on July 15. The researchers behind the study, based at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, describe in this initial dataset the responses of 350 cancer samples (including ovarian cancer) to 18 anticancer therapeutics.

U.K.–U.S. Collaboration Builds a Database For “Personalized” Cancer Treatment

The Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer project released its first results on July 15th. Researchers released a first dataset from a study that will expose 1,000 cancer cell lines (including ovarian) to 400 anticancer treatments.

The largest study to correlate genetics with response to anticancer drugs released its first results on July 15. The researchers behind the study, based at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, describe in this initial dataset the responses of 350 cancer samples (including ovarian cancer) to 18 anticancer therapeutics.

These first results, made freely available on the Genomics of Drug Sensitivity in Cancer website, will help cancer researchers around the world to obtain a better understanding of cancer genetics and could help to improve treatment regimens.

Dr. Andy Futreal, co-leader of the Cancer Genome Project at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, said:

Today is our first glimpse of this complex interface, where genomes meet cancer medicine. We will, over the course of this work, add to this picture, identifying genetic changes that can inform clinical decisions, with the hope of improving treatment.  By producing a carefully curated set of data to serve the cancer research community, we hope to produce a database for improving patient response during cancer treatment.

How a patient responds to anticancer treatment is determined in large part by the combination of gene mutations in her or his cancer cells. The better this relationship is understood, the better treatment can be targeted to the particular tumor.

The aim of the five-year, international drug-sensitivity study is to find the best combinations of treatments for a wide range of cancer types: roughly 1000 cancer cell lines will be exposed to 400 anticancer treatments, alone or in combination, to determine the most effective drug or combination of drugs in the lab.

The therapies include known anticancer drugs as well as others in preclinical development.

To make the study as comprehensive as possible, the researchers have selected 1000 genetically characterized cell lines that include common cancers such as breast, colorectal and lung. Each cell line has been genetically fingerprinted and this data will also be publicly available on the website. Importantly, the researchers will take promising leads from the cancer samples in the lab to be verified in clinical specimens: the findings will be used to design clinical studies in which treatment will be selected based on a patient’s cancer mutation spectrum.

The new data released today draws on large-scale analyses of cancer genomes to identify genomic markers of sensitivity to anticancer drugs.

The first data release confirms several genes that predict therapeutic response in different cancer types. These include sensitivity of melanoma, a deadly form of skin cancer, with activating mutations in the gene BRAF to molecular therapeutics targeting this protein, a therapeutic strategy that is currently being exploited in the clinical setting. These first results provide a striking example of the power of this approach to identify genetic factors that determine drug response.

Dr. Ultan McDermott, Faculty Investigator at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, said:

It is very encouraging that we are able to clearly identify drug–gene interactions that are known to have clinical impact at an early stage in the study. It suggests that we will discover many novel interactions even before we have the full complement of cancer cell lines and drugs screened. We have already studied more gene mutation-drug interactions than any previous work but, more importantly, we are putting in place a mechanism to ensure rapid dissemination of our results to enable worldwide collaborative research. By ensuring that all the drug sensitivity data and correlative analysis is freely available in an easy-to-use website, we hope to enable and support the important work of the wider community of cancer researchers.

Further results from this study should, over its five-year term, identify interactions between mutations and drug sensitivities most likely to translate into benefit for patients: at the moment we do not have sufficient understanding of the complexity of cancer drug response to optimize treatment based on a person’s genome.

Professor Daniel Haber, Director of the Cancer Center at Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, said:

We need better information linking tumor genotypes to drug sensitivities across the broad spectrum of cancer heterogeneity, and then we need to be in position to apply that research foundation to improve patient care.  The effectiveness of novel targeted cancer agents could be substantially improved by directing treatment towards those patients that genetic study suggests are most likely to benefit, thus “personalizing” cancer treatment.

The comprehensive results include correlating drug sensitivity with measurements of mutations in key cancer genes, structural changes in the cancer cells (copy number information) and differences in gene activity, making this the largest project of its type and a unique resource for cancer researchers around the world.

Professor Michael Stratton, co-leader of the Cancer Genome Project and Director of the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, said:

“This is one of the Sanger Institute’s first large-scale explorations into the therapeutics of human disease.  I am delighted to see the early results from our partnership with the team at Massachusetts General Hospital. Collaboration is essential in cancer research: this important project is part of wider efforts to bring international expertise to bear on cancer.”

Ovarian Cancer Sample Gene Mutation Prevalence

As part of the Cancer Genome Project, researchers identified gene mutations found in 20 ovarian cancer cell lines and the associated prevalence of such mutations within the sample population tested. For purposes of this project, a mutation — referred to by researchers as a “genetic event” in the project analyses description — is defined as (i) a coding sequence variant in a cancer gene, or (ii) a gene copy number equal to zero (i.e., a gene deletion) or greater than or equal to 8 (i.e., gene amplification).  The ovarian cancer sample analysis thus far, indicates the presence of mutations in twelve genes. The genes that are mutated and the accompanying mutation prevalence percentage are as follows:  APC (5%), CDKN2A (24%), CTNNB1 (5%), ERBB2/HER-2 (5%), KRAS (10% ), MAP2K4 (5%), MSH2 (5%), NRAS (10%), PIK3CA (10%), PTEN (14%), STK11 (5%), and TP53 (62%). Accordingly, as of date, the top five ovarian cancer gene mutations occurred in TP53, CDKN2A, CDKN2a(p14)(see below), PTEN, and KRAS.

Click here to view the Ovary Tissue Overview.  Click here to download a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet listing the mutations in 52 cancer genes across tissue types. Based upon the Ovary Tissue Overview chart, the Microsoft Excel Chart has not been updated to include the following additional ovarian cancer sample mutations and associated prevalence percentages: CDKN2a(p14)(24%), FAM123B (5%), FBXW7 (5%), MLH1 (10%), MSH6 (5%).

18 AntiCancer Therapies Tested; Next 9 Therapies To Be Tested Identified

As presented in the initial study results, 18 drugs/preclinical compounds were tested against various cancer cell lines, including ovarian. The list of drugs/preclinical compounds that were tested for sensitivity are as follows:  imatinib (brand name: Gleevec),  AZ628 (C-Raf inhibitor)MG132 (proteasome inhibitor), TAE684 (ALK inhibitor), MK-0457 (Aurora kinase inhibitor)sorafenib (C-Raf kinase & angiogenesis inhibitor) (brand name: Nexavar), Go 6976 (protein kinase C (PKC) inhibitor), paclitaxel (brand name: Taxol), rapamycin (mTOR inhibitor)(brand name: Rapamune), erlotinib (EGFR inhibitor)(brand name: Tarceva), HKI-272 (a/k/a neratinib) (HER-2 inhibitor), Geldanamycin (Heat Shock Protein 90 inhibitor), cyclopamine (Hedgehog pathway inhibitor), AZD-0530 (Src and Abl inhibitor), sunitinib (angiogenesis & c-kit inhibitor)(brand name:  Sutent), PHA665752 (c-Met inhibitor), PF-2341066 (c-Met inhibitor), and PD173074 (FGFR1 & angiogenesis inhibitor).

Click here to view the project drug/preclinical compound sensitivity data chart.

The additional drugs/compounds that will be screened by researchers in the near future are metformin (insulin)(brand name:  Glucophage), AICAR (AMP inhibitor), docetaxel (platinum drug)(brand name: Taxotere), cisplatin (platinum drug)(brand name: Platinol), gefitinib (EGFR inhibitor)(brand name:  Iressa), BIBW 2992 (EGFR/HER-2 inhibitor)(brand name:  Tovok), PLX4720 (B-Raf [V600E] inhibitor), axitinib (angiogenesis inhibitor)(a/k/a AG-013736), and CI-1040 (PD184352)(MEK inhibitor).

Ovarian cancer cells dividing. (Source: ecancermedia)

Ovarian Cancer Therapy Sensitivity

Targeted molecular therapies that disrupt specific intracellular signaling pathways are increasingly used for the treatment of cancer. The rational for this approach is based on our ever increasing understanding of the genes that are causally implicated in cancer and the clinical observation that the genetic features of a cancer can be predictive of a patient’s response to targeted therapies. As noted above, the goal of the Cancer Genome Project is to discover new cancer biomarkers that define subsets of drug-sensitive patients. Towards this aim, the researchers are (i) screening a wide range of anti-cancer therapeutics against a large number of genetically characterized human cancer cell lines (including ovarian), and (ii) correlating drug sensitivity with extensive genetic data. This information can be used to determine the optimal clinical application of cancer drugs as well as the design of clinical trials involving investigational compounds being developed for the clinic.

When the researchers tested the 18 anticancer therapies against the 20 ovarian cancer cell lines, they determined that the samples were sensitive to many of the drugs/compounds. The initial results of this testing indicate that there are at least six ovarian cancer gene mutations that were sensitive to eight of the anticancer therapies, with such results rising to the level of statistical significance.  We should note that although most (but not all) of the ovarian cancer gene mutations were sensitive to several anticancer therapies, we listed below only those which were sensitive enough to be assigned a green (i.e., sensitive) heatmap code by the researchers.

Click here to download a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet showing the effect of each of the 51 genes on the 18 drugs tested. Statistically significant effects are highlighted in bold and the corresponding p values for each gene/drug interaction are displayed in an adjacent table.  A heatmap overlay for the effect of the gene on drug sensitivity was created, with the color red indicating drug resistance and the color green indicating drug sensitivity.

The mutated genes present within the 20 ovarian cancer cell line sample that were sensitive to anticancer therapies are listed below.  Again, only statistically significant sensitivities are provided.

  • CDKN2A gene mutation was sensitive to TAE684, MK-0457, paclitaxel, and PHA665752.
  • CTNNB1 gene mutation was sensitive to MK-0457.
  • ERBB2/HER-2 gene mutation was sensitive to HKI-272.
  • KRAS gene mutation was sensitive to AZ628.
  • MSH2 gene mutation was sensitive to AZD0530.
  • NRAS gene mutation was sensitive to AZ628.

We will provide you with future updates regarding additional ovarian cancer gene mutation findings, and new anticancer therapies tested, pursuant to the ongoing Cancer Genome Project.

Sources:

_____________________________________________________________

About The Genomics of Drug Sensitivity In Cancer Project

The Genomics of Drug Sensitivity In Cancer Project was launched in December 2008 with funding from a five-year Wellcome Trust strategic award. The U.K.–U.S. collaboration harnesses the experience in experimental molecular therapeutics at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and the expertise in large scale genomics, sequencing and informatics at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute. The scientists will use their skills in high-throughput research to test the sensitivity of 1000 cancer cell samples to hundreds of known and novel molecular anticancer treatments and correlate these responses to the genes known to be driving the cancers. The study makes use of a very large collection of genetically defined cancer cell lines to identify genetic events that predict response to cancer drugs. The results will give a catalogue of the most promising treatments or combinations of treatments for each of the cancer types based on the specific genetic alterations in these cancers. This information will then be used to empower more informative clinical trials thus aiding the use of targeted agents in the clinic and ultimately improvements in patient care.

Project leadership includes Professor Daniel Haber and Dr. Cyril Benes at Massachusetts General Hospital Cancer Center and Professor Mike Stratton and Drs. Andy Futreal and Ultan McDermott at the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute.

About Massachusetts General Hospital

Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH), established in 1811, is the original and largest teaching hospital of Harvard Medical School. The MGH conducts the largest hospital-based research program in the United States, with an annual research budget of more than $600 million and major research centers in AIDS, cardiovascular research, cancer, computational and integrative biology, cutaneous biology, human genetics, medical imaging, neurodegenerative disorders, regenerative medicine, systems biology, transplantation biology and photomedicine.

About The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute

The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute, which receives the majority of its funding from the Wellcome Trust, was founded in 1992 as the focus for U.K. gene sequencing efforts. The Institute is responsible for the completion of the sequence of approximately one-third of the human genome as well as genomes of model organisms such as mouse and zebrafish, and more than 90 pathogen genomes. In October 2005, new funding was awarded by the Wellcome Trust to enable the Institute to build on its world-class scientific achievements and exploit the wealth of genome data now available to answer important questions about health and disease. These programs are built around a Faculty of more than 30 senior researchers. The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute is based in Hinxton, Cambridge, U.K.

About The Wellcome Trust

The Wellcome Trust is a global charity dedicated to achieving extraordinary improvements in human and animal health. It supports the brightest minds in biomedical research and the medical humanities. The Trust’s breadth of support includes public engagement, education, and the application of research to improve health. It is independent of both political and commercial interests.

Required Cancer Genome Project Disclaimer:

The data above was obtained from the Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute Cancer Genome Project web site, http://www.sanger.ac.uk/genetics/CGP. The data is made available before scientific publication with the understanding that the Wellcom Trust Sanger Institute intends to publish the initial large-scale analysis of the dataset. This publication will include a summary detailing the curated data and its key features.  Any redistribution of the original data should carry this notice: Please ensure that you use the latest available version of the data as it is being continually updated.  If you have any questions regarding the sequence or mutation data or their use in publications, please contact cosmic@sanger.ac.uk so as to obtain any updated or additional data.  The Wellcome Trust Sanger Institute provides this data in good faith, but makes no warranty, express or implied, nor assumes any legal liability or responsibility for any purpose for which the data are used.