HonCode

Go Back   HER2 Support Group Forums > General Cancer News
Register Gallery FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

General Cancer News Latest Breast Cancer News from Moreover Technologies

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-03-2012, 10:20 PM   #1
News
Senior Member
 
News's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 18,946
Genentech’s T-DM1 Phase III study on HER2-positive mBC meets primary endpoint

Genentech, a member of the Roche Group, today announced that the Phase III EMILIA study of trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) met its co-primary endpoint of a significant improvement in the time people with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC) lived without their disease getting worse (progression-free survival, PFS).

More...
News is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-04-2012, 04:16 PM   #2
gdpawel
Senior Member
 
gdpawel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,080
Anitbody-drug conjugates (ADCs)

The EMILIA study found that trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) can improve progression-free survival in "some" women with metastatic breast cancer. The final arbiter of clinical approval is overall survival. Median overall survival for patients treated with T-DM1 was not reached. Drug response is not a reliable predictor of overall survival. Median progression-free survival was longer in patients treated with T-DM1 than in those treated with the standard therapy (9.6 vs 6.4 months). The difference reached is statistically significant?

The so-called immunoconjugates or antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) are unique therapeutics that have become the focus of a plethora of recent and ongoing clinical trials, and for the first time since 2000 when Mylotarg (gemtuzumab ozogamicin) was approved in AML, the FDA gave the green light for another ADC, namely Adcetris (brentuximab vedotin) for the management of Hodgkins Lymphoma (HL) and systemic anaplastic large cell lymphoma (sALCL), like its sister agent in HER2-positive breast cancer, T-DM1, and other ADCs.

The ADCs do not work for all patients, T-DM1 is meant to treat only roughly 20 percent of breast cancer cases characterized by an abundance of that protein, and they are not totally free of side effects. And of course, T-DM1 is also likely to be very expensive, costing more than $100,000 for a typical course of treatment. One note: Mylotarg was removed from the market in 2010 after newer studies showed it did not prolong lives and had safety problems. At initial approval, Mylotarg was associated with a serious liver condition called veno-occlusive disease, which can be fatal.

T-DM1 is a "large molecule" and does not cross the blood-brain barrier (BBB). Some think that those on the T-DM1, they should also give the ladies some straight Herceptin, and give a certain amount of protection. The only way for that to happen is a patient may also have to be subjected to an "intrathecal" injection of T-DM1. Herceptin does not cross the BBB because it is a "large molecule" drug. Some on the trial developed brain metastases. Patients on T-DM1 will have to be on it "indefinitely" or until progression. Some on the trial developed brain metastases.

One thing you can definitely say is that T-DM1 is an investigational agent, or just plain experimental.

http://abstract.asco.org/AbstView_114_98675.html

Antibody-Drug Conjugate Shrinks Some Breast Cancer Tumors

http://cancerfocus.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3768
gdpawel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-05-2012, 06:21 PM   #3
gdpawel
Senior Member
 
gdpawel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,080
Blood Brain Barrier: Is Tykerb Better Than Herceptin?

Cells are the most basic structure of the body. Cells make up tissues, and tissues make up organs, such as the lungs or liver. Each cell is surrounded by a membrane, a thin layer that separates the outside of the cell from the inside.

For a cell to perform necessary functions for the body and respond to its surroundings, it needs to communicate with other cells in the body. Communication occurs through chemical messages in a process called signal transduction. The purpose of these signals is to tell the cell what to do, such as when to grow, divide into two new cells, and die.

Targeted cancer therapies use drugs that block the growth and spread of cancer by interfering with specific molecules involved in carcinogenesis (the process by which normal cells become cancer cells) and tumor growth. By focusing on molecular and cellular changes that are specific to cancer, targeted cancer therapies may be more effective than current treatments and less harmful to normal cells.

However, the monoclonal antibodies like Herceptin are "large" molecules. These very large molecules don't have a convenient way of getting access to the large majority of cells. Plus, there is multicellular resistance, the drugs affecting only the cells on the outside may not kill these cells if they are in contact with cells on the inside, which are protected from the drug. The cells may pass small molecules back and forth (in the same way that neighbors can share food).

Exciting results have come from studies of multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitors, "small" molecules that act on multiple receptors in the cancerous cells, like Tykerb. The trend has away from the monoclonals to the small molecules, a trend in which new predictive tests may be able to hasten.

Some years ago, GSK had supplied some private cell-based assay labs with small molecule Tykerb so they can work out an assay for it before its impending FDA approval. A variety of metabolic and morphologic measurements were used to determine if it was successful at killing a patient's cancer cells.

Functional profiling can discriminate between the activity of different targeted drugs and identify situations in which it is advantageous to combine the targeted drugs with other types of cancer drugs. It measures over 100,000 genes before and after drug exposure. Gene expression profiles measures the gene expression only in the resting state, prior to drug exposure.

Researchers had put enormous efforts into genetic profiling as a way of predicting patient response to targeted therapies. However, no gene-based test as been described that can discriminate differing levels of anti-tumor activity occurring among different targeted therapy drugs. Nor can an available gene-based test identify situations in which it is advantageous to combine a targeted drug with other types of cancer drugs. Functional profiling tests have demonstrated this critical ability.

The pre-test (EGFRx Anti-Tyrosine Kinase Profile) is able to test molecularly-targeted anti-cancer drug therapies like Tykerb, Sutent and Nexavar, becasue of being small molecules. A variety of metabolic (cell metabolism) and morphologic (structure) measurements are used to determine if a specific drug (or drugs) was successful at killing the patient's cancer cells. The functinal profiling method differs from other tests in that it assesses the activity of a drug upon combined effect of all cellular processes at the cell "population" level (rather than at the "single cell" level).

Other tests, such as those which identify DNA or RNA sequences or expression of individual proteins often examine only one component of a much larger, interactive process. Functional profiling measures genes before and after drug exposure. Gene expression profiles measure the gene expression only in the resting state, prior to drug exposure.

Unlike (reversible) Herceptin, which only goes after the Her2 gene, also known as epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) type 2, (irreversible) Tykerb goes after Her1 (EGFR) but also Her2 (EGFR type 2). Tykerb irreversibly binds to EGFR and Her2. It works by blocking these receptors, preventing their activation and hopefully inhibiting the unwanted signaling pathways. And Tykerb is a BBB crossing drug.

So, will Tykerb be better than Herceptin? You be the judge.

http://weisenthalcancer.com/Services.html
gdpawel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-22-2013, 01:13 PM   #4
gdpawel
Senior Member
 
gdpawel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,080
FDA Approves Another Treatment for Metastatic HER2 Breast Cancer

The FDA just approved the new treatment for about 20% of breast cancer patients who have a particular form of the disease that overproduces the protein HER-2.

The drug now called Kadcyla, combines the Herceptin with a powerful chemotherapy toxin and a third chemical linking the medicines together. The chemical keeps the drugs intact until they bind to a cancer cell, where the medication is released.

The cost of the drug is about $9,800 a month or $94,000 for a typical course of treatment. It is about twice the price of Herceptin itself and similar to the price of some other new cancer drugs.

The label of Kadcyla has a warning saying the drug can cause liver toxicity, heart toxicity and death. It can also cause serious birth defects or fetal death for women of childbearing age.

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsro.../ucm340704.htm

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) today approved ado-trastuzumab emtansine (Kadcyla, Genentech), also known as T-DM1, for the treatment of patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

T-DM1 is indicated for patients who were previously treated with the anti-HER2 therapy trastuzumab (Herceptin, Genentech) and a taxane chemotherapy.

This product offers a new twist on an older product; it is an antibody–drug conjugate in which the HER2-targeted antibody trastuzumab is chemically linked to the cytotoxin mertansine (DM1). The antibody homes in on HER2 breast cancer cells, delivering the chemotherapy directly to the tumor, which reduces the risk for toxicity.

T-DM1 "delivers the drug to the cancer site to shrink the tumor, slow disease progression, and prolong survival," said Richard Pazdur, MD, director of the Office of Hematology and Oncology Products at the FDA Center for Drug Evaluation and Research, in a press statement. "It is the fourth approved drug that targets the HER2 protein."

In the pivotal phase 3 EMILIA study, patients receiving T-DM1 survived nearly 6 months longer than patients receiving the standard therapy of lapatinib (Tykerb) plus capecitabine (Xeloda) (median overall survival, 30.9 vs 25.1 months). Also, there were fewer grade 3 or higher (severe) adverse events with TDM-1 than with standard therapy (43.1% vs. 59.2%), according to the company.

The approval represents a "momentous" day in breast cancer, said Kathy Miller, MD, from Indiana University in Indianapolis, in her Miller on Oncology Medscape blog.

"Our HER2-positive patients with metastatic disease have another very powerful therapy that offers the real hope for prolonged disease control with less toxicity," she said.

"This is the classic light-beer scenario; it's less filling and tastes great," she summarized, adding that T-DM1 was more effective in EMILIA than standard therapy on every outcome: overall response rate, disease-free survival, progression-free survival, and overall survival.

However, another expert sees T-DM1 in a less dramatic light.

Steve Vogl, MD, a private practitioner and former academic who practices in the Bronx, New York, called T-DM1 a "nice" drug when he discussed the product in an online essay last year.

T-DM1 causes "no alopecia, little neutropenia, and only moderate thrombocytopenia. It requires only a short infusion every 3 weeks, lacks cumulative toxicity, and has a response rate as first-line chemotherapy that is about the same as that of docetaxel and trastuzumab, with apparently longer remissions," he wrote.

However, Dr. Vogl called the EMILIA control regimen (lapatinib and capecitabine) "distinctly suboptimal" and not a standard of care, even though it is an FDA-approved treatment option in this setting.

"TDM-1 does not meet [the] goals of a major advance," wrote Dr. Vogl, who explained that such an advance must cure some patients, increase the rate of clinical complete remission, or produce a high rate of very long partial response.

TDM-1 does not provide a "major change in prognosis" for women with metastatic disease who have progressed on trastuzumab treatment, he wrote, adding that it is likely to be "very expensive."

Study Data and Boxed Warning

The international open-label EMILIA study involved 991 patients with HER2-positive locally advanced breast cancer or metastatic breast cancer who had previously been treated with trastuzumab and a taxane chemotherapy. The study met the coprimary efficacy end points of overall survival and progression-free survival (assessed by an independent review committee).

Median progression-free survival was longer with TDM-1 than with lapatinib plus capecitabine (9.6 vs 6.4 months). In addition, patients treated with TDM-1 lived significantly longer without their disease getting worse (hazard ratio [HR], 0.65; reduction in risk of disease worsening or death, 35%; P < .0001).

The risk of dying was 32% lower with TDM-1 than with lapatinib and capecitabine (HR, 0.68; P = .0006).

For patients receiving TDM-1, the most common adverse events (occurring in more than 2% of participants) of grade 3 or higher were low platelet count (14.5%), increased levels of enzymes released by the liver and other organs (8%), low red blood cell count (4.1%), low levels of potassium in the blood (2.7%), nerve problems (2.2%), and tiredness (2.5%).

T-DM1 was reviewed under the FDA's priority review program, which provides for an expedited 6-month review of drugs that might provide safe and effective therapy when no satisfactory alternative exists, or that offer significant improvement over comparable products on the market.

T-DM1 is being approved with a boxed warning that alerts patients and healthcare professionals that the drug can cause liver toxicity, heart toxicity, and death. The drug can also cause severe life-threatening birth defects, so pregnancy status should be verified prior to starting T-DM1 treatment.

Dr. Vogl has disclosed no relevant financial relationships. Dr. Miller reports financial ties with Genentech, Bristol-Myers Squibb, AstraZeneca, Roche, and Clovis Oncology.

Citation: FDA Approves New Treatment for Metastatic HER2 Breast Cancer. Medscape. Feb 22, 2013.

http://cancerfocus.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3768
gdpawel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 04:59 AM   #5
annmask
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: New hampshire
Posts: 44
Re: Genentech’s T-DM1 Phase III study on HER2-positive mBC meets primary endpoint

The problem of crossing bbb continues to be problematic, but Kadcyla is a wonderful new life extender, and QOA improver for us. We are all very grateful to have this option, and angry that it took so long to get here. The cost of these drugs is significantly increased by lengthly trial processes that result in many women dying while waiting for a chance to give a promising, well vetted new drug a try. While Tykerb crosses the bbb, many if not most suffer awful GI problems, and the activity in the brain is very weak- about 19%, explaining why it has been so disappointing as a brain treatment. Clearly we need new. more effective and less toxic small molecule drugs to fight HER2 disease, and many companies are working on this. Kadcyla is by fart the best yet for mets in the body for high expressing HER2+ MBC. May even be curative if given earlier in the disease process, that will be several year down the road as thing are currently going.
annmask is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-10-2013, 07:23 AM   #6
gdpawel
Senior Member
 
gdpawel's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Posts: 1,080
The future of anti-HER2 therapy lies in "combination" therapy more than from just relying on compounds such as Kadcyla, or Herceptin, or Tykerb or Perjeta. It is the good outcome of the patient not the therapy applied that constitute successful application of medicine. We can still hope for a good outcome if you use all the available drugs at our disposal that best meet the needs of the patient.

And relying on a companion diagnostic to identify cancer patients with HER2-positive metastatic cancer who "may" be eligible just for Kadcyla treatment is ambiguous. It examines "dead" tissue that is preserved in paraffin or formalin. which ruins sequencing capabilities, denatures everything and ruins the sample.

How is that going to be predictive to the behavior of your "living" cells in spontaneously formed colonies in the body? No gene-based test can discriminate differing levels of anti-tumor activity occurring among different targeted therapy drugs. Nor can it identify situations in which it is advantageous to combine a targeted drug with other types of cancer drugs.
gdpawel is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:12 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Copyright HER2 Support Group 2007 - 2021
free webpage hit counter