challenges of pharmacokinetic pharmacodynamic assessments in pediatric oncology l.
Download
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Challenges of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Assessments in Pediatric Oncology PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Challenges of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Assessments in Pediatric Oncology

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 25

Challenges of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Assessments in Pediatric Oncology - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 157 Views
  • Uploaded on

Challenges of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Assessments in Pediatric Oncology. Clinton F. Stewart, Pharm.D. St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital Memphis, TN. Outline. Summary of results of early clinical pharmacokinetic studies with topoisomerase I inhibitors

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Challenges of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Assessments in Pediatric Oncology' - noelani


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
challenges of pharmacokinetic pharmacodynamic assessments in pediatric oncology
Challenges of Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Assessments in Pediatric Oncology

Clinton F. Stewart, Pharm.D.

St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital

Memphis, TN

outline
Outline
  • Summary of results of early clinical pharmacokinetic studies with topoisomerase I inhibitors
  • Application of results from nonclinical studies of topoisomerase I inhibitors to design of clinical trials (Phase Ib/IIa)
  • Summary results of later clinical drug development with topoisomerase I inhibitors (Phase Ib/Phase IIa)
  • Thoughts regarding design of clinical pharmacokinetic studies of “targeted” drug therapy
pharmacology studies enhance development of anticancer drugs

Phase I

Clinical

Trials

Nonclinical

PK/PD Studies

Pharmacology Studies EnhanceDevelopment of Anticancer Drugs
  • Additional PK/PD (efficacy) studies
  • Evaluate different schedules

Phase IV

Clinical

Trials

Phase II

Clinical

Trials

Phase III

Clinical

Trials

MARKET

  • Evaluate clinical safety of new schedules, dosage, or combinations
  • Comparative studiesof efficacy
slide4
Two Commercially Available Topoisomerase I Inhibitors For Use In Pediatric Oncology:Topotecan and Irinotecan
initial clinical trials with topoisomerase i inhibitors in children with cancer

TOPO-L

Oncolytic Response

Mucositis

Initial Clinical Trials with Topoisomerase I Inhibitors in Children with Cancer
  • Topotecan 72-hour CI in children with recurrent solid tumors (Pratt, JCO, 1994)
    • Antitumor activity*
    • DLT myelosuppression
    • Preliminary data for LSM
  • Topotecan 120-hour CI in children with recurrent leukemia (MTSE) (Furman, JCO, 1996)
    • Antileukemic effect*
    • DLT mucositis
    • PK/PD observations
initial clinical trials with topoisomerase i inhibitors in children with cancer6

0.5-hr 24-hr 72-hr

Initial Clinical Trials with Topoisomerase I Inhibitors in Children with Cancer
  • Oral topotecan (15 or 21-days) in children with refractory solid tumors (Zamboni, CCP, 1999)
    • Well absorbed
    • Wide interpatient variability but less than intrapatient
  • Topotecan CSF penetration studied in children with primary brain tumors (Baker, CCP, 1996)
    • Extensive penetration, wide interpatient variability, no difference among infusion rates
initial clinical trials with topoisomerase i inhibitors in children with cancer7
Initial Clinical Trials with Topoisomerase I Inhibitors in Children with Cancer
  • Topotecan 30-min infusion (dx5) in children with recurrent solid tumors (POG-9275; Tubergen, Stewart JPHO, 1996)
    • Antitumor activity
    • DLT myelosuppression
    • Validation of LSM
    • Wide interpatient variabilityin clearance with small (~20%) dosage increments, overlap in topotecan exposure across dose levels
initial clinical trials with topoisomerase i inhibitors in children with cancer8
Initial Clinical Trials with Topoisomerase I Inhibitors in Children with Cancer
  • Irinotecan 60-min infusion (dx5x2) in children with recurrent solid tumors (Furman, JCO, 1999)
    • Antitumor activity
    • DLT diarrhea
    • Pharmacokinetics complex with metabolism to active (SN-38) and inactive metabolites
    • SN-38 highly protein bound
    • Role for pharmacogenetics
comparison of results from adult and pediatric phase i studies for the topoisomerase i inhibitors
Comparison of Results from Adult and Pediatric Phase I Studies for the Topoisomerase I Inhibitors
  • Pharmacokinetics
    • Topotecan lactone systemic clearance similar between adults and children, in early studies*
    • Limited pediatric population (ages, drug-drug intxn)
  • Pharmacodynamics
    • Relation between TPT lactone systemic exposure and %decrease ANC similar between two groups
  • MTD
    • Pediatric MTD higher for comparable schedules; problematic comparison (dx5x2)
  • DLT (no difference)
outline10
Outline
  • Summary of results of early clinical pharmacokinetic studies with topoisomerase I inhibitors
  • Application of results from nonclinical studies of topoisomerase I inhibitors to design of clinical trials (Phase Ib/Iia)
  • Summary results of later clinical drug development with topoisomerase I inhibitors (Phase Ib/Phase Iia)
  • Thoughts regarding design of clinical pharmacokinetic studies of “targeted” drug therapy
application of nonclinical pk pd studies enhance anticancer drug development

Phase IV

Clinical

Trials

Phase III

Clinical

Trials

Phase I

Clinical

Trials

Nonclinical

PK/PD Studies

MARKET

  • Comparative studiesof efficacy
Application of Nonclinical PK/PD StudiesEnhance Anticancer Drug Development
  • Additional PK/PD (efficacy) studies
  • Evaluate different schedules

Phase II

Clinical

Trials

  • Evaluate clinical safety of new schedules, dosage, or combinations
summary of topoisomerase i antitumor efficacy studies conducted in the xenograft model
Summary of Topoisomerase I Antitumor Efficacy Studies Conducted in the Xenograft Model
  • Schedule-dependent
    • Duration of therapy critical
    • Administration interval important
    • Protracted dosing schedule associated with antitumor activity
  • Dose-dependent
    • Self-limiting antitumor activity at high doses
    • Critical threshold drug exposure for antitumor activity
  • Clinical dosing schedule: low-dose, protracted (dx5x2)
use of the nonhuman primate model

Objectives

Use of the Nonhuman Primate Model

Topotecan in CNS Malignancies

  • To evaluate effect of TPT infusion rate on TPT CSF concentration throughout the neuraxis (ventricular & lumbar)
  • To generate a PK model to describe plasma and CSF TPT disposition, which could be used to design clinical trials of TPT to treat CNS tumors
outline15
Outline
  • Summary of results of early clinical pharmacokinetic studies with topoisomerase I inhibitors
  • Application of results from nonclinical studies of topoisomerase I inhibitors to design of clinical trials (Phase Ib/Iia)
  • Summary results of later clinical drug development with topoisomerase I inhibitors (Phase Ib/Phase Iia)
  • Thoughts regarding design of clinical pharmacokinetic studies of “targeted” drug therapy
rationale for pharmacokinetically guided dosing of anticancer drugs

Dose intensity

Clinical Response

Rationale for Pharmacokinetically Guided Dosing of Anticancer Drugs
  • Considerations for this relationship
    • Preclinical models
    • Clinical studies
    • Drug sensitive tumor
  • Systemic-intensity not same as dose intensity
    • Medication errors
    • Patient tolerance
    • Patient compliance

Dose intensity

Clinical Response

Systemic Exposure

rationale for pharmacokinetically guided dosing in children with cancer

7-Fold Range In TPT Clearance

# Courses of Therapy

10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Topotecan Systemic Clr (L/hr/m2)

Rationale for Pharmacokinetically Guided Dosing in Children with Cancer
  • Pharmacokinetic variability
    • Drug absorption, distribution, metabolism, & elimination
    • Inter-patient variability greater than intrapatient
  • Other sources of variability
    • Maturational changes
    • Renal & hepatic impairment
    • Inherited difference in drug metabolism & disposition
    • Drug-drug intxns
selected criteria for pharmacokinetically guided dosing
Selected Criteria for Pharmacokinetically Guided Dosing
  • General considerations
    • Narrow therapeutic index
    • Drug effect delayed
    • Relation between drug effect & drug exposure
  • Logistical considerations
    • Drug regimen amenable to dosage adjustment (e.g., > 24 hr CI, > 1 d regimen [dx5x2], etc.)
    • Assay method available
  • Pharmacokinetic considerations
    • Well-characterized pharmacokinetics (PK model)
    • Population priors for available for Bayesian analysis
    • Limited sampling model
application of pharmacokinetic studies to optimize topotecan therapy design considerations

Area under the concentration-

time curve (AUC) in plasma

Time Above Threshold Exposure in CSF

Application of Pharmacokinetic Studies to Optimize Topotecan Therapy: Design Considerations
  • Selection of initial systemic exposure and dose
  • Pharmacokinetic metric to express drug exposure
slide20

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

Day

X

X

Dose

Topotecan Dosage Adjustment Schema

TOPO5x2

PK

Studies

Adjust

Dose

Topotecan i.v. over 30 minutes daily x 5 for two consecutive weeks

Target topotecan systemic exposure 100 ± 20 ng/ml-hr

lessons learned from pharmacokinetically guided topotecan clinical trials
Lessons Learned from Pharmacokinetically Guided Topotecan Clinical Trials
  • Phase I Feasibility Study (TOPO5x2)
    • Antitumor activity noted
    • Achieve target systemic exposure and reduce interpatient variability in topotecan exposure
  • Pharmacokinetically guided TPT in combination with vincristine (Phase I)
    • Some antitumor responses
    • However, significant myelosuppression (platelets)
    • Used lower topotecan target (80 ± 10 ng/mL)
  • Pharmacokinetically guided TPT in combination with CTX (Phase I)
    • Used as a conditioning regimen followed by AHSCT
    • Toxicities manageable
    • ~90% patients were within “target”
lessons learned from pharmacokinetically guided topotecan clinical trials22
Lessons Learned from Pharmacokinetically Guided Topotecan Clinical Trials
  • PK guided TPT dosing: upfront window therapy (Phase II) in children with high-risk neuroblastoma (SJNB97)
    • No progressive disease noted (> 50% PR)
    • Achieve target exposure (>90%) &  interpt var. TPT AUC
    • Studied 10 infants (< 2 yr), noted TPT lactone systemic clearance significantly < than in other pts (12 vs 21 L/hr)
  • PK guided TPT dosing: upfront window therapy (Phase II) in children with high-risk medulloblastoma (drug exposure in a “minor” exposure compartment, i.e., CSF)
    • Significant antitumor response (target plasma~target CSF)
    • Manageable toxicities
    • Drug-drug interactions
      • Enzyme-inducing anticonvulsants (DPH) increase TPT clr
      • Dexamethasone increases TPT clr
outline23
Outline
  • Summary of results of early clinical pharmacokinetic studies with topoisomerase I inhibitors
  • Application of results from nonclinical studies of topoisomerase I inhibitors to design of clinical trials (Phase Ib/Iia)
  • Summary results of later clinical drug development with topoisomerase I inhibitors (Phase Ib/Phase Iia)
  • Thoughts regarding design of clinical pharmacokinetic studies of “targeted” drug therapy
design issues for molecular target based anticancer drugs in children
Design Issues for Molecular Target-Based Anticancer Drugs in Children
  • Definition of “target”
    • Expression of protein in vivo
    • Expression of protein and data from in vitro studies
    • Expression of protein, data from in vitro studies, and prognostic significance
  • Emphasizes the need for a “relevant” model in which to evaluate the “target”
    • In vitro, xenograft, transgenic
    • Requires a complete understanding of pathway(s)
  • Pharmacologic metric (as with PK guided dosing)
    • IC50 vs AUC vs some other measure of drug exposure
  • Important to consider that pediatric tumors likely have different biological pathways and therefore targets
challenges in pharmacokinetic pharmacodynamic assessments in pediatric oncology
Challenges in Pharmacokinetic/Pharmacodynamic Assessments in Pediatric Oncology
  • Haven’t really talked a lot about “challenges” per se because:
    • Resources and infrastructure of St. Jude have made these studies possible
    • Also, the infrastructure present in the DT Committee, COG
  • Challenge for the future to apply what we have learned to Phase IIb/III clinical trials of topotecan used in combination
    • COG study of topotecan in combination with CTX in NB
    • How to dose topotecan?
    • Topotecan population pharmacokinetic study, where we’ve found that covariates for TPT clearance included BSA, concomitant phenytoin therapy, serum creatinine, and age
  • PK studies provide insight into differences in drug disposition (phenotype) which can then be explained in many cases by genetic variations in drug metabolism or transport (genotype)