Selinexor in combination with topotecan in patients with advanced or metastatic solid tumors: Results of an open-label, single-center, multi-arm phase Ib study

Selinexor: Changing the paradigm in patients with TP53 wild-type endometrial cancer?

Recurrent endometrial cancer (EC) remains a therapeutic challenge despite advancements in personalized medicine. SIENDO trial showed the potential clinical benefit of selinexor in patients with TP53 wild-type advanced/recurrent EC. The quest for novel therapeutic avenues and approaches continues as researchers seek a glimmer of hope in an area of uncertainty.

Selinexor in combination with weekly paclitaxel in patients with metastatic solid tumors: Results of an open label, single-center, multi-arm phase 1b study with expansion phase in ovarian cancer

OBJECTIVE

Selinexor is a first-in-class, oral selective inhibitor of nuclear export (SINE) compound which blocks Exportin-1 (XPO1). Our objective was to determine maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and recommended phase II dose (RP2D) of selinexor and weekly paclitaxel.

METHODS

This was an open label, single-center, multi-arm phase 1b study utilizing a "3 + 3" design and a "basket-type" expansion in recurrent solid tumors. Selinexor (60 mg or 80 mg twice weekly orally) and weekly paclitaxel (80 mg IV 2 week on, 1 week off) were one of 13 parallel arms. Efficacy was evaluated using RECIST version 1.1.

RESULTS

All 35 patients treated were evaluable for toxicity and 31 (88%) were evaluable for response. Patient diagnoses included platinum-resistant/refractory ovarian (n = 28), breast (n = 4), prostate (n = 2), and cervical (n = 1) cancer. Patients had a median of four prior therapies (range 1-10), and 47% had a prior taxane in the recurrent setting. There were no DLTs and 60 mg was chosen as the RP2D due to long-term tolerability. Ninety-seven percent of patients had at least one treatment-emergent adverse event (TEAE), and the most common grade ≥ 3 TEAE were neutropenia (46%), anemia (31%), and nausea (21%). Among 24 evaluable patients with ovarian cancer, response rate was 17%, CBR was 58%, and median PFS was 6.8 months (95% CI 3.7, not reached (NR)).

CONCLUSIONS

Oral selinexor in combination with weekly paclitaxel demonstrated promising clinical activity with manageable toxicity. This combination should be considered for further exploration in a randomized study, especially in ovarian malignancies.

The efficacy of selinexor (KPT-330), an XPO1 inhibitor, on non-hematologic cancers: a comprehensive review

PURPOSE

Selinexor is a novel XPO1 inhibitor which inhibits the export of tumor suppressor proteins and oncoprotein mRNAs, leading to cell-cycle arrest and apoptosis in cancer cells. While selinexor is currently FDA approved to treat multiple myeloma, compelling preclinical and early clinical studies reveal selinexor's efficacy in treating hematologic and non-hematologic malignancies, including sarcoma, gastric, bladder, prostate, breast, ovarian, skin, lung, and brain cancers. Current reviews of selinexor primarily highlight its use in hematologic malignancies; however, this review seeks to summarize the recent evidence of selinexor treatment in solid tumors.

METHODS

Pertinent literature searches in PubMed and the Karyopharm Therapeutics website for selinexor and non-hematologic malignancies preclinical and clinical trials.

RESULTS

This review provides evidence that selinexor is a promising agent used alone or in combination with other anticancer medications in non-hematologic malignancies.

CONCLUSION

Further clinical investigation of selinexor treatment for solid malignancies is warranted.

Therapeutic Targeting of Exportin-1 in Childhood Cancer

Overexpression of Exportin-1 (XPO1), a key regulator of nuclear-to-cytoplasmic transport, is associated with inferior patient outcomes across a range of adult malignancies. Targeting XPO1 with selinexor has demonstrated promising results in clinical trials, leading to FDA approval of its use for multiple relapsed/refractory cancers. However, XPO1 biology and selinexor sensitivity in childhood cancer is only recently being explored. In this review, we will focus on the differential biology of childhood and adult cancers as it relates to XPO1 and key cargo proteins. We will further explore the current state of pre-clinical and clinical development of XPO1 inhibitors in childhood cancers. Finally, we will outline potentially promising future therapeutic strategies for, as well as potential challenges to, integrating XPO1 inhibition to improve outcomes for children with cancer.