Thrombotic events in patients using cyclin dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors, analysis of existing ambulatory risk assessment models and the potential influences of tumor specific risk factors

Cyclin dependent kinase 4 of 6 inhibitors (CDKi) are key therapeutics in the treatment of advanced breast cancer and have recently been approved in small cell lung cancer for the prevention of myelosuppression. Thrombotic events have emerged as a significant treatment related adverse event in up to 5% of patients in clinical trials and has been reported at higher rates, up to 10%, in real world analysis. The prothrombotic mechanisms of CDKis, however, remain unknown. Cancer specific risk assessment models exist to identify who may be at highest risk of thrombosis and who could potentially benefit from prophylactic anticoagulation. However, these models may not be accurate in patients taking CDKis and may not fully capture recently identified thrombotic risk factors such as tumor specific somatic mutations. In the following manuscript, we summarize the literature on thrombotic events with CDKis in clinical trials and real-world settings, review the existing thrombosis risk assessment models for ambulatory cancer patients, and discuss the literature on tumor mutations and role in cancer associated thrombosis.

Cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitors for cancer therapy: a patent review (2015 - 2019)

INTRODUCTION

Cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 (CDK4/6) along with their upstream/downstream components are pivotal regulators for the cell cycle progression. The dysfunction of CDK4/6 is the common feature and promoting factor in various cancer types. In-depth research on CDK4/6 inhibitors has afforded therapeutic agents, while new challenges and ideas are emerging concomitantly.

AREAS COVERED

This review focuses on patent publications related to CDK4/6 inhibitors which could be utilized for anti-cancer purposes during the period 2015-2019.

EXPERT OPINION

The increasingly comprehensive and thorough understanding of CDK4/6 inhibitors facilitates them to break through the current limitations. Hence the utilization of CDK4/6 inhibitors for cancer therapy in the near future is likely to be performed in diverse forms and for distinct purposes. Selectivity over kinases is still crucial to new agent development but shall be prudently dealt with. The gradually revealing of resistance and adverse events proposed another issue that calls for new tackling strategies.

Cyclin dependent kinase (CDK) inhibitors as anticancer drugs: Recent advances (2015-2019)

Sustained proliferative capacity and gene dysregulation are hallmarks of cancer. In mammalian cells, cyclin-dependent kinases (CDKs) control critical cell cycle checkpoints and key transcriptional events in response to extracellular and intracellular signals leading to proliferation. Significant clinical activity for the treatment of hormone receptor positive metastatic breast cancer has been demonstrated by palbociclib, ribociclib and abemaciclib, dual CDK4/6 inhibitors recently FDA-approved. SY-1365, a CDK7 inhibitor has shown initial encouraging data in phase I for solid tumors treatment. These results have rejuvenated the CDKs research field. This review provides an overview of relevant advances on CDK inhibitor research since 2015 to 2019, with special emphasis on transcriptional CDK inhibitors, new emerging strategies such as target protein degradation and compounds under clinical evaluation.

Phase II Study of Roniciclib in Combination with Cisplatin/Etoposide or Carboplatin/Etoposide as First-Line Therapy in Patients with Extensive-Disease Small Cell Lung Cancer

INTRODUCTION

This phase II study evaluated the efficacy and safety of the pan-cyclin-dependent kinase inhibitor roniciclib with platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with extensive-disease SCLC.

METHODS

In this randomized, double-blind study, unselected patients with previously untreated extensive-disease SCLC received roniciclib, 5 mg, or placebo twice daily according to a 3 days-on, 4 days-off schedule in 21-day cycles, with concomitant cisplatin or carboplatin on day 1 and etoposide on days 1 to 3. The primary end point was progression-free survival. Other end points included overall survival, objective response rate, and safety.

RESULTS

A total of 140 patients received treatment: 70 with roniciclib plus chemotherapy and 70 with placebo plus chemotherapy. Median progression-free survival times was 4.9 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 4.2-5.5) with roniciclib plus chemotherapy and 5.5 months (95% CI: 4.6-5.6) with placebo plus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.242, 95% CI: 0.820-1.881, p = 0.8653). Median overall survival times was 9.7 months (95% CI: 7.9-11.1) with roniciclib plus chemotherapy and 10.3 months (95% CI: 8.7-11.9) with placebo plus chemotherapy (HR = 1.281, 95% CI: 0.776-1.912, p = 0.7858). The objective response rates were 60.6% with roniciclib plus chemotherapy and 74.6% with placebo plus chemotherapy. Common treatment-emergent adverse events in both groups included nausea, vomiting, and fatigue. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events were more common with roniciclib plus chemotherapy (57.1%) than with placebo plus chemotherapy (38.6%).

CONCLUSIONS

Roniciclib combined with chemotherapy demonstrated an unfavorable risk-benefit profile in patients with extensive-disease SCLC, and the study was prematurely terminated.

Progress in the Management of Advanced Thoracic Malignancies in 2017

The treatment paradigm of NSCLC underwent a major revolution during the course of 2017. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) brought remarkable improvements in response and overall survival both in unselected pretreated patients and in untreated patients with programmed death ligand 1 expression of 50% or more. Furthermore, compelling preliminary results were reported for new combinations of anti-programmed cell death 1/programmed death ligand 1 agents with chemotherapy or anti-cytotoxic T-lymphocyte associated protein 4 inhibitors. The success of the ICIs appeared to extend to patients with SCLC, mesothelioma, or thymic tumors. Furthermore, in SCLC, encouraging activity was reported for an experimental target therapy (rovalpituzumab teserine) and a new chemotherapeutic agent (lurbinectedin). For oncogene-addicted NSCLC, next-generation tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) (such as osimertinib or alectinib) have demonstrated increased response rates and progression-free survival compared with first-generation TKIs in patients with both EGFR-mutated and ALK receptor tyrosine kinase gene (ALK)-rearranged NSCLC. However, because of the lack of mature overall survival data and considering the high efficacy of these drugs in patients with NSCLC previously exposed to first- or second-generation TKIs, definitive conclusions concerning the best treatment sequence cannot yet be drawn. In addition, new oncogenes such as mutant BRAF, tyrosine-protein kinase met gene (MET) and erb-b2 receptor tyrosine kinase 2 gene (HER2), and ret proto-oncogene (RET) rearrangements have joined the list of potential targetable drivers. In conclusion, the field of thoracic oncology is on the verge of a breakthrough that will open up many promising new therapeutic options for physicians and patients. The characterization of biomarkers predictive of sensitivity or resistance to immunotherapy and the identification of the optimal therapeutic combinations (for ICIs) and treatment sequence (for oncogene-addicted NSCLC) represent the toughest upcoming challenges in the domain of thoracic oncology.