4.7 Article

Phase I study of afatinib combined with nintedanib in patients with advanced solid tumours

Journal

BRITISH JOURNAL OF CANCER
Volume 113, Issue 10, Pages 1413-1420

Publisher

NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP
DOI: 10.1038/bjc.2015.374

Keywords

afatinib; nintedanib; ErbB family blocker; angiokinase inhibitor; angiogenesis; Phase I; circulating tumour cells

Categories

Funding

  1. Boehringer Ingelheim [2009-011321-14]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: This Phase I study evaluated continuous-and intermittent-dosing (every other week) of afatinib plus nintedanib in patients with advanced solid tumours. Methods: In the dose-escalation phase (n = 45), maximum tolerated doses (MTDs) were determined for continuous/intermittent afatinib 10, 20, 30 or 40mg once daily plus continuous nintedanib 150 or 200mg twice daily. Secondary objectives included safety and efficacy. Clinical activity of continuous afatinib plus nintedanib at the MTD was further evaluated in an expansion phase (n = 25). Results: The most frequent dose-limiting toxicities were diarrhoea (11%) and transaminase elevations (7%). Maximum tolerated doses were afatinib 30mg continuously plus nintedanib 150 mg, and afatinib 40mg intermittently plus nintedanib 150 mg. Treatment-related adverse events (mostly Grade <= 3) included diarrhoea (98%), asthenia (64%), nausea (62%) and vomiting (60%). In the dose-escalation phase, two patients had partial responses (PRs) and 27 (60%) had stable disease (SD). In the expansion phase, one complete response and three PRs were observed (all non-small cell lung cancer), with SD in 13 (52%) patients. No pharmacokinetic interactions were observed. Conclusions: MTDs of continuous or intermittent afatinib plus nintedanib demonstrated a manageable safety profile with proactive management of diarrhoea. Antitumour activity was observed in patients with solid tumours.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available