Abstract P4-14-24: Optimization of intermittent high dose lapatinib administration with or without capecitabine: A rational approach to drug dosing and scheduling using Norton-Simon modeling

Optimal Strategy and Benefit of Pulsed Therapy Depend On Tumor Heterogeneity and Aggressiveness at Time of Treatment Initiation

Therapeutic resistance is a fundamental obstacle in cancer treatment. Tumors that initially respond to treatment may have a preexisting resistant subclone or acquire resistance during treatment, making relapse theoretically inevitable. Here, we investigate treatment strategies that may delay relapse using mathematical modeling. We find that for a single-drug therapy, pulse treatment-short, elevated doses followed by a complete break from treatment-delays relapse compared with continuous treatment with the same total dose over a length of time. For tumors treated with more than one drug, continuous combination treatment is only sometimes better than sequential treatment, while pulsed combination treatment or simply alternating between the two therapies at defined intervals delays relapse the longest. These results are independent of the fitness cost or benefit of resistance, and are robust to noise. Machine-learning analysis of simulations shows that the initial tumor response and heterogeneity at the start of treatment suffice to determine the benefit of pulsed or alternating treatment strategies over continuous treatment. Analysis of eight tumor burden trajectories of breast cancer patients treated at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center shows the model can predict time to resistance using initial responses to treatment and estimated preexisting resistant populations. The model calculated that pulse treatment would delay relapse in all eight cases. Overall, our results support that pulsed treatments optimized by mathematical models could delay therapeutic resistance.

Phase I Study of Intermittent High-Dose Lapatinib Alternating with Capecitabine for HER2-Positive Breast Cancer Patients with Central Nervous System Metastases

PURPOSE

Lapatinib and capecitabine cross the blood-tumor barrier in breast cancer brain metastasis but have modest clinical efficacy. Administration of high-dose tyrosine kinase inhibitor has been evaluated in brain metastases and primary brain tumors as a strategy to improve drug exposure in the central nervous system (CNS). We derived a rational drug scheduling of intermittent high-dose lapatinib alternating with capecitabine based on our preclinical data and Norton-Simon mathematical modeling. We tested this intermittent, sequential drug schedule in patients with breast cancer with CNS metastasis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We conducted a phase I trial using an accelerated dose escalation design in patients with HER2-positive (HER2+) breast cancer with CNS metastasis. Lapatinib was given on day 1-3 and day 15-17 with capecitabine on day 8-14 and day 22-28 on an every 28-day cycle. Lapatinib dose was escalated, and capecitabine given as a flat dose at 1,500 mg BID. Toxicity and efficacy were evaluated.

RESULTS

Eleven patients were enrolled: brain only (4 patients, 36%), leptomeningeal (5 patients, 45%), and intramedullary spinal cord (2 patients, 18%). Grade 3 nausea and vomiting were dose-limiting toxicities. The MTD of lapatinib was 1,500 mg BID. Three patients remained on therapy for greater than 6 months.

CONCLUSIONS

High-dose lapatinib is tolerable when given intermittently and sequentially with capecitabine. Antitumor activity was noted in both CNS and non-CNS sites of disease. This novel administration regimen is feasible and efficacious in patients with HER2+ breast cancer with CNS metastasis and warrants further investigation.