Patent Application
20240261285
The present disclosure belongs to the field of pharmaceutical chemistry. Particularly, the present disclosure relates to use of BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof in the manufacture of a medicament for treating tumors in combination with a chemotherapeutic drug.
Cancer is one of the most serious diseases that threaten human life and health. Seven million people die from cancer worldwide every year. At present, there are four main methods of cancer treatment: surgery, drug therapy, radiation therapy and immunotherapy, in addition to adjuvant therapy. Among them, the drug therapy of cancer includes targeted drug therapy and chemotherapy. Among the current treatment methods, targeted drug therapy and chemotherapy still occupy an important position and are important standard therapies for cancer. For example, the combined chemotherapy of carboplatin/paclitaxel is the first-line treatment regimen for ovarian cancer, and chemotherapeutic drugs such as paclitaxel are also indispensable in the treatment regimen for gastric cancer. However, the biggest problem of targeted drug therapy and chemotherapeutic drug monotherapy is drug resistance, including spontaneous drug resistance and adaptive drug resistance, which results in a low overall remission rate and a limited duration of remission.
Therefore, finding a way to improve the efficacy of a single drug in chemotherapy and further overcome the problem of drug resistance is a technical problem that urgently needs to be solved in cancer treatment.
In one aspect, the present disclosure provides use of BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof in the manufacture of a medicament for treating tumors in combination with a chemotherapeutic drug, wherein the BI853520 is 2-fluoro-5-methoxy-4-[(4-(2-methyl-3-oxo-2,3-dihydro-1H-isoindole-4-oxy)-5-trifluoromethyl-pyrimidin-2-yl)amino]-N-(1-methyl-piperidin-4-yl)benzamide (see WO2010058032) and has a structure of:
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD, taxane or cisplatin.
Optionally, the tumor does not include an NRAS-mutated tumor.
Optionally, the tumor is acute lymphocytic leukemia, acute myelocytic leukemia, malignant lymphoma, breast cancer, lung cancer, colon cancer, colorectal cancer, ovarian cancer, soft tissue sarcoma, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, Ewing's sarcoma, blastoma, neuroblastoma, bladder cancer, thyroid cancer, prostate cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, nasopharyngeal cancer, esophageal cancer, testicular cancer, gastric cancer, liver cancer, pancreatic cancer or melanoma.
Optionally, the tumor is prostate cancer, esophageal cancer, ovarian cancer, gastric cancer or lung cancer. The lung cancer is preferably squamous cell lung cancer.
Optionally, the tumor is breast cancer, colon cancer or ovarian cancer.
Optionally, the tumor is breast cancer.
Optionally, the tumor is colon cancer.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD.
Optionally, the tumor is ovarian cancer, especially platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is taxane, especially docetaxel or paclitaxel.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is Etoposide.
Optionally, the tumor is prostate cancer, esophageal cancer or gastric cancer.
Optionally, the pharmaceutically acceptable salt is BI853520 tartrate.
In another aspect, the present disclosure provides use of BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof and a chemotherapeutic drug in the manufacture of a medicament for treating tumors, wherein the BI853520 has a structural formula of:
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD, taxane or cisplatin.
Optionally, the tumor does not include an NRAS-mutated tumor.
Optionally, the tumor is acute lymphocytic leukemia, acute myelocytic leukemia, malignant lymphoma, breast cancer, lung cancer, colon cancer, colorectal cancer, ovarian cancer, soft tissue sarcoma, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, Ewing's sarcoma, blastoma, neuroblastoma, bladder cancer, thyroid cancer, prostate cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, nasopharyngeal cancer, esophageal cancer, testicular cancer, gastric cancer, liver cancer, pancreatic cancer or melanoma.
Optionally, the tumor is prostate cancer, esophageal cancer, ovarian cancer, gastric cancer or lung cancer. The lung cancer is preferably squamous cell lung cancer.
Optionally, the tumor is breast cancer, colon cancer or ovarian cancer.
Optionally, the tumor is breast cancer.
Optionally, the tumor is colon cancer.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD.
Optionally, the tumor is ovarian cancer, especially platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is taxane, especially docetaxel or paclitaxel.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is Etoposide.
Optionally, the tumor is prostate cancer, esophageal cancer or gastric cancer.
Optionally, the pharmaceutically acceptable salt is BI853520 tartrate.
In another aspect, the present disclosure provides a pharmaceutical combination including BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, and a chemotherapeutic drug; wherein the BI853520 has a structural formula of:
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD, taxane or cisplatin.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is taxane, especially docetaxel or paclitaxel. Optionally, the pharmaceutically acceptable salt is BI853520 tartrate.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is Etoposide.
In another aspect, the present disclosure provides a method for treating tumors, which comprises administering to a subject BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof and a chemotherapeutic drug; wherein the BI853520 has a structural formula of:
Optionally, the method comprises administering to the subject the BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof and an effective amount of the chemotherapeutic drug.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD, taxane or cisplatin.
Optionally, especially an effective amount of BI853520 and an effective amount of PLD, taxane or cisplatin are administered.
Optionally, the tumor does not include an NRAS-mutated tumor.
Optionally, the tumor is acute lymphocytic leukemia, acute myelocytic leukemia, malignant lymphoma, breast cancer, lung cancer, colon cancer, colorectal cancer, ovarian cancer, soft tissue sarcoma, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, Ewing's sarcoma, blastoma, neuroblastoma, bladder cancer, thyroid cancer, prostate cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, nasopharyngeal cancer, esophageal cancer, testicular cancer, gastric cancer, liver cancer, pancreatic cancer or melanoma.
Optionally, the tumor is prostate cancer, esophageal cancer, ovarian cancer, gastric cancer or lung cancer. The lung cancer is preferably squamous cell lung cancer.
Optionally, the tumor is breast cancer, colon cancer or ovarian cancer.
Optionally, the tumor is breast cancer.
Optionally, the tumor is colon cancer.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD.
Optionally, the tumor is ovarian cancer, especially platinum-resistant ovarian cancer.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is taxane, especially docetaxel or paclitaxel.
Optionally, the chemotherapeutic drug is Etoposide.
Optionally, the tumor is prostate cancer, esophageal cancer or gastric cancer.
Optionally, the BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof and the chemotherapeutic drug are administered simultaneously, alternately or sequentially.
Optionally, it is characterized in that the pharmaceutically acceptable salt is BI853520 tartrate.
The following examples are provided to further illustrate the present disclosure. It should be understood that these examples are only used to illustrate the present disclosure and not to limit the scope of the present disclosure.
The experimental methods without specific conditions in the following examples can be carried out according to the conventional conditions of this type of reaction or according to the conditions suggested by the manufacturers
The experimental materials and reagents used in the following examples can be obtained from commercial sources unless otherwise specified.
The present disclosure relates to the use of BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof in the manufacture of a medicament for treating tumors in combination with a chemotherapeutic drug. The present disclosure also relates to the use of BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof and a chemotherapeutic drug in the manufacture of a medicament for treating tumors. The present disclosure also relates to a method for treating tumors, which comprises administering to a subject an effective amount of BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof and a chemotherapeutic drug.
The term “chemotherapy” as used herein refers to a systemic treatment of malignant tumors, which distributes a chemotherapeutic drug into most organs and tissues throughout the body via blood circulation after the chemotherapeutic drug is administered orally, intravenously, or through body cavity. Chemotherapeutic drugs may function at different phases of tumor cell growth and reproduction, inhibiting or killing tumor cells. It is one of the most effective methods for treating malignant tumors. In some embodiments, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD, docetaxel, paclitaxel, Etoposide, or cisplatin.
In some embodiments, the tumor does not include an NRAS-mutated tumor. In some embodiments, the tumor is selected from acute lymphocytic leukemia, acute myelocytic leukemia, malignant lymphoma, breast cancer, undifferentiated small cell bronchopulmonary carcinoma, non-small cell bronchopulmonary carcinoma, non-small cell lung cancer, squamous cell lung cancer, colon cancer, colorectal cancer, ovarian cancer, soft tissue sarcoma, osteosarcoma, rhabdomyosarcoma, Ewing's sarcoma, blastoma, neuroblastoma, bladder cancer, thyroid cancer, prostate cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, nasopharyngeal cancer, esophageal cancer, testicular cancer, gastric cancer, liver cancer, pancreatic cancer and melanoma. In some embodiments, the tumor is ovarian cancer, gastric cancer, or squamous cell lung cancer.
In another embodiment of the present disclosure, the chemotherapeutic drug is PLD.
The term “PLD” as used herein refers to pegylated liposomal doxorubicin, also known as doxorubicin liposome.
The terms “combination”, “combination therapy” and “combination administration” as used herein refer to using two or more drugs for the treatment of one disease. In some embodiments, the BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof is used in combination with a chemotherapeutic drug, which may further include other drug(s). In some embodiments, the BI853520 or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof and the chemotherapeutic drug may be administered simultaneously, alternately or sequentially.
The term “NRAS” as used herein refers to an oncogene that is a member of the RAS oncogene family which also includes two other genes: KRAS and HRAS. These genes play important roles in cell division, cell differentiation and apoptosis.
The term “NRAS mutation” as used herein means that when a pathogenic mutation occurs in the NRAS gene, the N-Ras protein encoded by it will be in a state of continuous activation, resulting in uncontrolled cell proliferation and tumor formation.
As used herein, the term “pharmaceutically acceptable” means non-toxic, biologically tolerable and suitable for administration to a subject.
As used herein, the term “pharmaceutically acceptable salt” refers to a salt that is non-toxic, biologically tolerable and suitable for administration to a subject. The pharmaceutically acceptable salts of the compounds refer to an acid addition salt that is non-toxic, biologically tolerable and suitable for administration to a subject, including but not limited to: acid addition salts formed by the compounds with an inorganic acid, such as hydrochloride, hydrobromide, carbonate, bicarbonate, phosphate, sulfate, sulfite, nitrate, and the like, as well as acid addition salts formed by the compounds with an organic acid, such as formate, acetate, malate, maleate, fumarate, tartrate, succinate, citrate, lactate, methanesulfonate, p-toluenesulfonate, 2-hydroxyethanesulfonate, benzoate, salicylate, stearate, and salts formed with alkane-dicarboxylic acid of formula HOOC—(CH2)n—COOH (wherein n is 0-4), etc. Pharmaceutically acceptable salts can be obtained by conventional methods well known in the art, for example by reacting a sufficiently basic compound such as an amine with a suitable acid which provides a physiologically acceptable anion. In some embodiments, the salt is a tartrate salt.
As used herein, the term “subject” refers to mammals and non-mammals. Mammals means any member of the mammalian class including, but not limited to, humans; non-human primates such as chimpanzees and other apes and monkey species; farm animals such as cattle, horses, sheep, goats, and swine; domestic animals such as rabbits, dogs, and cats; laboratory animals including rodents, such as rats, mice, and guinea pigs; and the like. Examples of non-mammals include, but are not limited to, birds, and the like. The term “subject” does not denote a particular age or sex. In some embodiments, the subject is a human.
The term “treat”, “treating” or “treatment” as used herein refers to obtaining a desired pharmacological and/or physiological effect. The effect may be therapeutic and includes partial or substantial achievement of one or more of the following: partial or total reduction in the extent of the disease, condition or syndrome; improvement in clinical symptoms or indicators associated with the disease; or delaying, inhibiting or reducing likelihood of progression of the disease, condition or syndrome.
The term “effective amount” as used herein refers to an amount of the BI853520 (or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof), or the chemotherapeutic drug (especially PLD, docetaxel, Etoposide or cisplatin) sufficient to reduce or ameliorate the severity, duration, progression, or onset of the disease or condition, to delay or arrest the progression of the disease or condition, to cause regression of the disease or condition or delay the recurrence or progression of symptoms, or to enhance or improve the therapeutic effect of another therapy. The precise amount of the BI853520 (or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof) and the chemotherapeutic drug (especially PLD, docetaxel, Etoposide or cisplatin) administered to a subject will depend on various factors, such as the given agent or compound, pharmaceutic preparation, route of administration, the type of disease, the condition, the identity of the subject or host being treated, etc., but can still be routinely determined by those skilled in the art. For example, determination of an effective amount will also depend on the degree, severity, and type of cell proliferation. The skilled artisan will be able to determine the appropriate dosage based on these and other factors. When co-administered with other therapeutic agents, e.g., when co-administered with an anticancer agent, the “effective amount” of any other therapeutic agent will depend on the type of the agent used. Appropriate dosages are known for approved therapeutics and can be adjusted by the skilled artisan depending on the condition of the subject, the type of condition being treated, and the amount of the compound or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof. In cases where the amount is not explicitly stated, the amount should be assumed to be an effective amount. An effective dose of the BI853520 (or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof) may range from 10 μg to 2000 mg. This example is non-limiting. Effective amounts of the chemotherapeutic drug (especially PLD, docetaxel, Etoposide or cisplatin) are known to those skilled in the art.
The BI853520 (or pharmaceutically acceptable salts thereof) can be administered by any suitable method of administration. Suitable methods include oral, intravenous, intramuscular or subcutaneous administration to the subject.
Thus, the BI853520 (or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof) can be administered orally with a pharmaceutically acceptable carrier such as an inert diluent or an absorbable edible carrier. They can be enclosed in hard- or soft-shell gelatin capsules, compressed into tablets, or mixed directly with the patient's food. For oral therapeutic administration, the compound, or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof, can be in combination with one or more excipients and used in a form of ingestible tablets, buccal tablets, lozenges, capsules, elixirs, suspensions, syrups or wafers. These preparations contain an effective amount of the BI853520 (or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof).
Tablets, lozenges, pills, capsules, etc. may further comprise: binders such as tragacanth, acacia, cornstarch or gelatin; excipients such as dicalcium phosphate; disintegrants such as corn starch, potato starch, alginic acid, etc.; lubricants, such as magnesium stearate; or sweeteners, such as sucrose, fructose, lactose or aspartame; or flavoring agents.
The BI853520 (or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof) may also be administered intravenously or intraperitoneally by infusion or injection. Solutions of the BI853520 (or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof) and the chemotherapeutic drug (especially PLD, docetaxel, Etoposide or cisplatin) can be prepared in water, optionally mixed with a nontoxic surfactant.
Exemplary pharmaceutical dosage forms for injection or infusion include: sterile aqueous solutions, dispersions, or sterile powders containing the active ingredient suitable for the extemporaneous preparation of sterile injectable or infusion solutions or dispersions. In any event, the final dosage form should be sterile, fluid, and stable under the conditions of manufacture and storage.
Sterile injectable solutions can be prepared by incorporating a required amount of the BI853520 (or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof) in an appropriate solvent together with other desired ingredients enumerated above and then being filtrated and sterilized. In the case of sterile powders for preparing sterile injectable solutions, the preferred methods of preparation may be vacuum drying and the freeze-drying techniques, which yield a powder of the active ingredient plus any other desired ingredients previously present after sterile filtration.
The amount of the BI853520 (or a pharmaceutically acceptable salt thereof), or the chemotherapeutic drug (especially PLD, docetaxel, Etoposide or cisplatin) may vary not only with the particular salt chosen, but also with the route of administration, the nature of the disease being treated, and the age and condition of the patient, and is ultimately at the discretion of the attending physician or clinician. However, the dosage may generally range from about 0.1 to about 50 mg/kg body weight per day.
The desired dose may conveniently be presented as a single dose or as divided doses for administration at appropriate intervals.
The meanings of the abbreviations used herein are as follows:
Athymic female BomTac: NMRI-Foxnlnu mice were purchased from Taconic, Denmark. After arriving in the animal room, mice were acclimated to the new environment for at least 3 days before being used for assay. The animals were housed under standard conditions (temperature 21.5±1.5° C. and 55±10% humidity), and provided with standard diet and autoclaved tap water ad libitum. A transponder Datamars T-IS 8010 FDX-B implanted subcutaneously in the neck region and a LabMax II fixed reader were used to identify each mouse. The cage card showed study number, animal identification number, compound and dose level, route of administration, and dosing schedule for animals throughout the assay.
To establish subcutaneous tumors, human cancer cells were harvested by trypsinization, centrifuged, washed and suspended in a suitable medium. 100 μl of the cell suspension containing 5×106-1×107 cells were then injected subcutaneously into the right flank of nude mice (1 site per mouse). When tumors grew to an appropriate size, mice were randomly assigned to a treatment group or a control group.
BI853520 was synthesized according to the method in patent WO2010058032. The dry powder was suspended in an equimolar volume of 1 M HCl and diluted in an appropriate volume of 0.5% Natrosol to achieve the desired concentration for each assay.
Tumor diameters were measured with calipers three times a week (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday). The volume of each tumor [in mm3] was calculated according to the equation, “tumor volume=length × diameter2×π/6”. To monitor the side effects of the treatment, the mice were checked daily for abnormalities and their body weights were measured three times a week (Monday, Wednesday, and Friday). Animals were sacrificed at the end of the study (approximately three weeks after the start of treatment). During the study animals with tumor necrosis or tumors larger than 2000 mm3 were sacrificed ahead of schedule for ethical reasons.
At the end of the assay, statistical evaluation of tumor volume and body weight parameters was performed. Absolute tumor volume and percent change in body weight (referenced to initial weight on day 1) were used. A nonparametric approach was used, and the number of observations, median, minimum and maximum values were calculated. For a quick overview of possible treatment effects, the median tumor volume for each treatment group T and the median tumor volume for the control group C were used to calculate the TGI from day 1 to day d:
At the end of the assay, statistical evaluation of tumor volume and body weight parameters was performed. For tumor volume, absolute values were used. A nonparametric approach was used, and the number of observations, median, minimum and maximum values were calculated. For a quick overview of possible treatment effects, the median tumor volume for each treatment group T and the median tumor volume for the control group C were used to calculate the TGI from day 1 to day d:
TGI from day 1 to day d:
wherein, C1, T1=median tumor volume in control and treatment groups at the start of the assay (day 1)
Cd, Td=median tumor volume in control and treatment groups at the end of the assay (day d)
Appropriate statistical methods were used for evaluation. Significance level was fixed at α=5%. A p-value (adjusted) of less than 0.05 was considered to show a statistically significant difference between groups, and 0.05≤p-value<0.10 was considered as an indicative difference.
Antitumor Research Methods in Generic Xenograft Models were adopted. Mice were approximately 6 weeks old. Each group had 7-10 mice.
TOV-21G cells harboring KRAS and PIK3CA gene mutations were obtained from ATCC (CRL-11730). MCB and WCB were established according to BI RCV GmbH & Co KG standard. Cells were incubated in a T175 tissue culture flask in a medium: RPMI-1640 supplemented with L-glutamine, sodium pyruvate, non-essential amino acids and 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum. Cells were incubated at 37° C. and 5% CO2.
A2780 cells harboring PTEN gene mutations were obtained from ECACC (93112519). MCB and WCB were established according to BI RCV GmbH & Co KG standard. Cells were incubated in a T175 tissue culture flask in a medium: RPMI-1640+ Glutamax supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum. Cells were incubated at 37° C. and 5% CO2.
SKOV-3 cells harboring CDKN2, MLH1, PIK3CA and TP53 gene mutations were obtained from ATCC (HTB-77). MCB and WCB were established according to BIRCV GmbH & Co KG standard. Cells were incubated in a T175 tissue culture flask in a medium: IMDM+L-Glutamax and non-essential amino acids supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum. Cells were incubated at 37° C. and 5% CO2.
A2780 cells were suspended in ice-cold PBS+5% FCS and growth factor-reduced Matrigel (1:1) at a cell inoculation level of 5×106 cells/ml. The TOV-21G cells were suspended in ice-cold PBS+5% FCS at a cell inoculation level of 5×106 cells/ml. When tumors were established and reached 5-8 mm in diameter, mice were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups.
The pH of the BI853520 formulation was between 3 and 4.
PLD (Doxil) was purchased from Johnson & Johnson and dissolved in sterile 5% glucose solution.
Treatment was initiated when the median tumor volume was between 70 and 110 mm3.
There were 10 animals in the control group and 7 animals in each treatment group.
There were 10 animals in the control group and 7 animals in each treatment group.
There were 10 animals in each of the control group and the treatment groups.
The three tests used the same method but were evaluated separately. Tumor volume and body weight parameters were statistically evaluated at the end of the test (day 15 or 22).
In cell line A2780, values for animals 2, 6, 7 and 8 (reference values: 0.5% Natrosol; 0.9% NaCl), animals 12 and 17 (12.5 mg/kg BI 853520) and animal 36 (50 mg/kg BI 853520), were sacrificed for ethical reasons since their tumor had reached a critical volume.
Each dose of test compound was compared to the control group using a one-sided descending wilcoxon test, taking reduction in tumor volume as a treatment effect and weight loss as a side effect. The P-values for tumor volume (the efficacy parameter) were compared and adjusted for multiple times according to Bonferroni-Holm, while the P-values for body weight (the tolerance parameter) were not adjusted so as not to overlook possible side effects.
Animals in group A had lost 1.5% body weight (
There was no tumor regression in group B with a TGI of 67% (p=0.0023) (
Group C had a TGI of 83% (p=0.002) with no tumor regression (
Group D had a TGI of 106% (p=0.0002 vs. group A; p=0.0006 vs. group B; p=0.0006 vs. group C), and tumor regression occurred in 6 of 7 animals (
Studies have shown that the TOV-21G cell line was very sensitive to both BI 853520 and PLD. Therefore, both drugs as a single drug showed good efficacy at low doses (12.5 mg/kg; 1 mg/kg), but tumor regression was not induced. In contrast, the combination of the two drugs resulted in tumor regression in 6 of 7 animals and was well tolerated.
Group A had gained 0.3% body weight (Table 5), and the tumors had reached a median volume of 608 mm3 on day 22 of treatment (
Group B had a TGI of 57% (p=0.0136) with no tumor regression (
Group C had a TGI of 66% (p=0.0136) with no tumor regression (
Group D had a TGI of 90% (p=0.0003 vs. group A; p=0.0070 vs. groups B and C), with tumor regression in 1 of 7 animals (
Studies have shown that the SKOV-3 cell line was less sensitive to both BI 853520 and PLD, and required higher drug doses (50 mg/kg, 5 mg/kg). Combination therapy was significantly more effective than monotherapy and the tolerance was not bad.
Group A gained 12.5% body weight (
Group B had a TGI of 19% (p=0.1965) with no tumor regression (
Group C had a TGI of 83% (p=0.0134) with no tumor regression (
Group D had a TGI of 85% (p=0.0185) with no tumor regression (
Group E had a TGI of 99% (p<0.0001), with tumor regression in 4 of 10 animals (
Group F had a TGI of 100% (p<0.0001 vs. group A; p<0.0001 vs. group B; p=0.0376 vs. group C). Tumors regression occurred in 6 of 10 animals (
Studies have shown that in the A2780 cell line, efficacy of BI 853520 was observed at medium and high dose levels (25 mg/kg, 50 mg/kg), but no tumor regression was found. High doses of PLD were highly potent, resulting in 40% tumor regression. Combination of BI 853520 and PLD resulted in higher efficacy with 60% regression while remaining well tolerated.
The combination of BI 853520 and PLD showed synergistic effects in ovarian cancer models of all three cell lines, with unaffected tolerance.
The generic test method is as follows:
Female BomTac: approximately 7 weeks old (at start of dosing) NMRI-Foxnlnu mice were purchased from Taconic, Denmark. Body weights (at start of dosing) were approximately 20 grams. After arriving in the animal room, mice were acclimated to the new environment for at least 3 days. Immunocompromised female mice were housed in HEPA ventilated cages (Innocage®IVC, Innovive USA) at 68-74° F. (20-23° C.) and 30-70% humidity under a 12-hour light/12-hour dark cycle. Animals were provided with water (reverse osmosis, 2 ppm Cl2) and a standard diet (Teklad 2919; 19% protein, 9% fat and 4% fiber) ad libitum. Animals with ≥10% body weight loss compared to day 0 received DietAel 76A (ClearH2O®, Portland, ME) for free. There were 3 mice in each group.
Mice were implanted with tumor cells from the ChampionsTumorGraft ovarian model, which was established from patients previously treated with platinum-based therapy. After tumors reached 1000-1500 mm3, they were collected, and tumor fragments SCs were implanted in the left flank of female pre-study mice. Each study animal was implanted with a specific passage batch. Tumor volume was measured twice a week with calipers to monitor tumor growth, and tumor volume (TV) was calculated using the formula (0.52×[length× width2]). When TV reached approximately 250-350 mm3 (average 300 mm3), animals were matched to tumor size and assigned to the control or treatment groups (study mice) and dosing started on day 0. After initiation of dosing, animals were weighed daily using a digital scale and TV was measured twice weekly. The study was terminated when the mean tumor volume in the control group reached approximately 1500 mm3 or until day 60. In some models, the study was extended beyond Day 60 and dosing was also extended to the end of the study. Individual animals could be removed from the study when tumor volume reaches approximately 1500 mm3. The design of the antitumor effect study is shown in Table 3.
Control 1: 0.5% Natrosol; control 2: 5% sterile glucose.
BI853520 was synthesized according to the method in the patent WO2010058032 and stored at room temperature in the dark.
The control group for oral administration was 0.5% Natrosol. The control group for intravenous administration was 5% sterile glucose.
Carboplatin was a pre-formulated 10 mg/mL stock solution. PLD was a pre-formulated 2 mg/mL stock solution. Paclitaxel was a pre-formulated 6 mg/mL stock solution. These standard chemotherapeutic drugs were provided by Champions.
To monitor side effects of the treatment, animals were observed daily from day 0 and weighed twice weekly. Data for each group, including body weight for each animal and mean body weight, were recorded, and the percentage change in mean body weight (% vD0) for each group relative to Day 0 was recorded, and the % vD0 was plotted at the completion of the study. Animal deaths were recorded daily and determined as drug-related (D), technical (T), tumor-related (B), or unknown (U) based on weight loss and by visual inspection. Mean % vD0>20% and/or >10% mortality in the monotherapy or combination therapy groups were considered higher than the MTD of the treatment in the evaluated regimen. The maximum mean % vD0 (body weight nadir) for each treatment group was reported at the end of the study.
Inhibitory effect on tumor growth was determined by calculating TGI (100%×[1− (final MTV − initial MTV of the treatment group)/(final MTV − initial MTV of the control group)]). Treatment was started on day 0. Tumor volumes in the treatment group were compared with those in the control group on the day the study was completed.
Other endpoints used to assess efficacy included number of CR, PR and TFS. PR and TFS were considered to exclude CR.
Data were used for statistical analysis at the end of the study. Statistical comparisons of tumor volumes were performed using one-way analysis of variance followed by Newman-Keuls multiple comparison test to compare differences between all groups. Selected endpoints included as many groups as possible and as many animals per group as possible. Tumor volumes from animals removed early due to tumor volume≥1500 mm3 were carried forward for analysis, but not more than 4 consecutive measurement time points. The tumor volumes of the combination group of BI 853520+PLD, the BI 853520 group and the PLD group, and the sum of the tumor volumes of the BI 853520 group and the PLD group were compared.
Take the model CTG-1166 as an example:
The control group reached the endpoint on day 17. Treatment with PLD, and carboplatin/paclitaxel had no apparent antitumor activity (
Following the generic test method described above, the tumor inhibitory activity was also tested in CTG-0252, CTG-0257, CTG-0791, CTG-0868, CTG-0956, CTG-0958, CTG-0964, CTG-0992, CTG-1086, CTG-1180, CTG-1301, CTG-1395, CTG-1427, CTG-1433, CTG-1498, CTG-1602, CTG-1624, CTG-1627, CTG-1649, CTG-1677, CTG-1678, and CTG-1809, respectively. The results showed that in the above models, the combination group of BI 853520 and PLD had a significant synergistic effect and good antitumor activity (TGI>70%); for carboplatin and paclitaxel-resistant models (CTG-0791, CTG-0956, CTG-0964, CTG-0992, CTG-1180, CTG-1301, CTG-1433, CTG-1498 and CTG-1809), the combination group of BI 853520 and PLD still had good antitumor activity (TGI>70%) (Table 6).
Studies have shown that in different PDX models, the combination of BI 853520 and PLD could produce higher efficacy, and it was still well tolerated. Especially for carboplatin and paclitaxel-resistant models, it still showed good antitumor activity.
Female Bom Tac: NMRI-Foxn Inu mice were purchased from Taconic, Denmark. Mice were housed in individual ventilated cages (TECNIPLAST Sealsafe™-IVC-System, TECNIPLAST, Hohenpeissenberg, Germany), and type II or III cages were selected according to the number of experimental animals. The cages were under the conditions: 14 L:10 D light-dark cycle, air exchange (AC) rate of 60-65 AC/hr in the cage, 25±1° C. and 40-70% humidity. Animals were provided with water (sterilized tap water filtered and acidified (pH 2.5)) and animal diet (Teklad Global 19% protein squeeze diet (T.2019S.12)) ad libitum. Water and diet were changed twice a week, and all materials were autoclaved before use.
The GXA 3039 gastric cancer PDX model was used in this study. Tumor cells from the GXA 3039 gastric cancer PDX model were implanted into immunodeficient mice, and after primary implantation, tumor cells were established and characterized (passage 1). When tumor cells were passaged until a stable growth pattern was established, tumors were removed from mice and cut into segments (3-4 mm in edge length) and placed in PBS containing 10% penicillin/streptomycin. Tumor fragments were implanted subcutaneously into the flank of female pre-study mice. Tumor volume was measured daily with calipers to monitor tumor growth, and when TV reached 50-250 mm3 (preferably 80-200 mm3), they were randomized to the control or the treatment groups (so that the median and mean tumor volumes in each group were approximately 100-150 mm3). Animals that were not randomized were euthanized. The date of randomization was designated as day 0 of the test, and dosing began on day 1. After initiation of dosing, animals were observed and measured twice weekly for weight (daily if greater than 15% body weight loss was recorded) and absolute tumor volume (ATV). Animals were sacrificed ahead of schedule when the tumor ulcerated, or the tumor penetrated the skin, or the tumor volume was greater than 1500 mm3, or the weight loss was greater than 18%, or severe conditions such as numbness and pain occurred. If less than 70% of the original number of mice survived (i.e. less than 6 out of 8), the entire group was terminated. In order to be able to monitor tumor repopulation after the end of dosing, le Kaplan-Meier statistics were performed (this rule did not apply to the group in which the tumor had been remitted). Tolerability was assessed using the group with the largest median body weight loss (BWL) among groups.
Inhibition of tumor growth was determined by calculating TGI. TGI was calculated using the median absolute tumor volume (ATV) as follows:
TGI values have the following meanings (assuming Cx>C0):
Additional endpoints used to assess efficacy included: time to tumor volume doubling/quadrupling and tumor growth delay/time to tumor progression/tumor repopulation.
Time to tumor volume doubling/quadrupling: The time to tumor volume doubling/quadrupling (Td/Tq) for the test and control groups was defined as the time interval (in days) required for each group to reach 200%/400% of the median RTV. The relative volume of a single tumor on day X (RTVx [%]) was obtained by dividing the absolute volume of the tumor on day X (Tx) by the absolute volume of the tumor on day 0 (T0) and then multiplying it by 100, as follows:
Tumor growth delay/time to tumor progression/tumor repopulation: To assess the difference in time to tumor progression/tumor repopulation after tumor regression during the no-dose observation period (tumor growth delay, TGD), Kaplan-Meier survival analysis was used. A relative tumor volume of 400% was defined as the endpoint.
The design of the antitumor effect study is shown in Table 7.
BI853520 was synthesized according to the method in the patent WO2010058032 and stored at room temperature in the dark. BI 853520 was dissolved in 0.5% Natrosol to prepare a 5 mg/ml solution and administered at a dose of 50 mg/kg. The solution was divided into two equal parts, stored at room temperature in the dark, and used within one week.
Docetaxel was purchased from Sanofi Avents, and stored at 4° C. By diluting the docetaxel solution with 0.9% saline, a solution at a concentration of 1 mg/ml was prepared on the dosing day, and was administered at a dose of 10 mg/kg.
The control group for oral administration was 0.5% Natrosol. The control group for intravenous administration was 0.9% saline. Each dose was 10 ml/kg. For the combination group, docetaxel was administered immediately after BI 853520.
When significant weight loss was recorded in the test, the following measures will be taken:
Data were used for statistical analysis at the end of the study. The one-tailed nonparametric Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon U test was used with the significance level a set at 0.05. The p-values obtained from the U-test were adjusted using the Bonferroni-Holm correction.
To assess the statistical significance of differences in time to tumor progression/tumor growth delay (TGD) using 400% of RTV as the trial endpoint, the Kaplan-Meier survival mode statistic was used in conjunction with the log-rank Mantel-Cox test for pairwise comparisons.
Additionally, to assess tolerance to treatment, a two-tailed nonparametric Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon U test was performed using body weights determined at the end of the dosing period (i.e., on the day TGI values were calculated). In order not to overlook possible adverse effects of treatment, the Bonferroni-Holm method was not used to adjust the p-value for body weight, and weight loss was considered indicative if the p-value was within the range of 0.10≥p-value≥0.05.
By convention, p-values≤0.05 represented significant tumor inhibition or weight loss. Statistical calculations were performed using GraphPad Prism Bioanalysis software (version 6.01 for Windows, GraphPad Software, San Diego, CA, USA, www.graphpad.com).
The study showed that the BI 853520 group had a TGI of 0%, which did not show any antitumor efficacy (Table 8,
No or very few BWLs with a median maximum of 2.9% were observed in all groups. No median BWL was recorded in any of the BI 853520 groups (Table 9). Tolerance was good for all groups.
The combination of BI 853520 and docetaxel showed a synergistic effect in the GXA 3039 gastric cancer PDX model, and had a good inhibitory effect on tumor repopulation after drug withdrawal. Tolerance was not affected in the combination group.
Antitumor Research Methods with Generic Xenograft Models were adopted. Mice were approximately 6 weeks old. There were 5 mice in each group.
NCI-H520 cells were obtained from ATCC (HTB-182). MCB and WCB were established according to BI RCV GmbH & Co KG standard. Cells were incubated in a T175 tissue culture flask in a medium: GlutaMAX+F175K supplemented with 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum and 1.5 g/l sodium bicarbonate. Cells were incubated at 37° C. and 5% CO2. The cell concentration of the culture was maintained between 8×106 to 12×107 cells/tissue culture flask.
NCI-H520 cells were suspended in ice-cold PBS+5% FCS, and 100 μl of the cell suspension containing 5×106 cells was injected subcutaneously into the right flank of nude mice (1 site per mouse). When tumors formed and reached a median volume of 50 mm3 (14 days after cell injection), mice were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups.
The pH of the BI853520 formulation was 3.
Cisplatin was dissolved in 0.9% saline.
There were 10 animals in the control group and 7 animals in each treatment group.
Tumor volume was statistically evaluated at the end of the test on day 22. Statistical evaluation was performed using the Student's t-test function in Microsoft Excel, utilizing a two-tailed distribution and a two-sample equal variance type.
Animals in group A gained 5.8% body weight (Table 10), and the tumors had reached a median volume of 721 mm3 by day 22 of treatment (Table 10).
Group B had a TGI of 54% (p=0.007) (
Group C significantly inhibited tumor growth with a TGI of 74% (p=0.0004, Table 10,
Group D had a TGI of 90% (p=0.00003) and tumor regression in 2/7 (Table 10,
The study showed that BI 853520 showed statistically significant tumor inhibitory activity (p<0.05) at 50 mg/kg, and was well tolerated. In addition, when BI 853520 was used in combination with cisplatin (5 mg/kg, IP, q7 d), better tumor inhibitory activity was observed with good tolerance and no significant weight loss.
BI 853520 was potent in the NCI-H520 human squamous cell lung cancer xenograft model, and its combination with cisplatin showed better antitumor effect than either single drug.
Antitumor Research Methods with Generic Xenograft Models were adopted. Mice were approximately 8-10 weeks old. There were 7-10 mice in each group.
KYSE-270 was a cell line for esophageal cancer (Public Health England, Cat. No. 94072021). Cells were incubated in a T175 tissue culture flask in a medium: RPMI-1640+HAMF2 (1:1) supplemented with 2% calf serum and 2 nM glutamine. Cells were incubated at 37° C. and 5% CO2.
KYSE-270 cells were suspended in PBS+5% FCS at a cell inoculation level of 5×106 cells/ml. When tumors formed and reached 94-252 mm3 (13 days after cell injection), mice were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups.
There were 10 animals in the control group and 7 animals in each treatment group.
At the end of the trial, comparisons were made by the exact Wilcoxon test.
In group A, the tumors had reached a median volume of 1032 mm3 by day 13 of treatment (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group B compared to the control group, with a TGI of 106% (p=0.0003) (
There was no effect on tumor growth in group C compared to the control group, with a TGI of 2% (p=0.3788), and no tumor regression (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group D compared to the control group, with a TGI of 110% (p=0.0003 vs. Group A) and tumor regression had occurred in 7 of 7 animals (
Studies have shown that in the subcutaneous human KYSE-270 esophageal cancer model, 50 mg/kg BI 853520 as a single drug had inhibitory effect on tumor growth, but 10 mg/kg paclitaxel as a single drug had no effect. In contrast, the combination of the two drugs had better inhibitory effect, and tumor regression had occurred in 7 of the 7 animals with good tolerance. Especially after drug withdrawal, the tumor size did not increase significantly.
Antitumor Research Methods with Generic Xenograft Models were adopted.
KYSE-70: Approximately 8-10 week old mice. There were 7-10 mice in each group.
PC-3: Approximately 6 week old mice. There were 7-10 mice in each group.
HS 746T: Approximately 6 week old mice. There were 7-10 mice in each group.
KYSE-70 was a cell line for esophageal cancer (HPA strain deposit, Cat. No. 94072012). Both PC-3 and HS 746T were purchased from ATCC. Cells were incubated in a T175 tissue culture flask in a medium: RPMI-1640 supplemented with 10% calf serum. Cells were incubated at 37° C. and 5% CO2.
KYSE-70 cells were suspended in PBS+5% FCS at a cell inoculation level of 5×106 cells/(50 μL culture medium+50 μL Matrigel). When tumors formed and reached 67-93 mm3 (11 days after cell injection), mice were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups.
PC-3 cells were suspended in PBS+5% FCS at a cell inoculation level of 5×106 cells/(50 μL culture medium+50 μL Matrigel). When tumors formed and reached 100 mm3 (11 days after cell injection), mice were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups.
HS 746T cells were suspended in PBS+5% FCS at a cell inoculation level of 1×107 cells/(50 μL culture medium+50 μL Matrigel). When tumors formed and reached 117 mm3 (10 days after cell injection), mice were randomly assigned to treatment and control groups.
There were 10 animals in the control group and 7 animals in each treatment group.
There were 10 animals in the control group and 7 animals in each treatment group.
At the end of the trial, comparisons were made by the exact Wilcoxon test.
In group A, the tumors had grown from a median volume of 76 mm3 to a median volume of 798 mm3 by day 42 (
Tumor growth was not significantly delayed in group B compared to the control group, with a TGI of 42% (p=0.1574) (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group C compared to the control group, with a TGI of 100% (p=0.0002), and tumor regression had occurred in 4 of 7 animals by day 28 (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group D compared to the control group, with a TGI of 111% (p=0.0002 vs. group A) and tumor regression had occurred in 7 of 7 animals (
Studies have shown that in the subcutaneous human KYSE-70 esophageal cancer model, 50 mg/kg BI 853520 as a single drug had no inhibitory effect on tumor growth, but 10 mg/kg docetaxel as a single drug had inhibitory effect. In contrast, the combination of the two drugs had a better inhibitory effect (tumor regression occurred in 6 of the 7 animals, and the median tumor volume reached 0 with good tolerance).
In group A, the tumors had grown from a median volume of 70 mm3 to a median volume of 809 mm3 by day 35 (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group B compared to the control group with a TGI of 66% (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group C compared to the control group, with a TGI of 92%, and tumor regression had occurred in 3 of 7 animals by day 28 (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group D compared to the control group with a TGI of 108%, and tumor regression had occurred in 6 of 7 animals (
Studies have shown that in the subcutaneous human PC-3 prostate cancer model, 25 mg/kg BI 853520 as a single drug and 7.5 mg/kg docetaxel as a single drug had a certain inhibitory effect on tumor growth. The combination of the two drugs had obvious synergistic effect, with tumor regression occurred in 6 of 7 animals, and tumor growth was still inhibited after drug withdrawal. The tolerance was good.
In group A, the tumors had grown from a median volume of 117 mm3 to a median volume of 1684 mm3 by day 24 (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group B compared to the control group with a TGI of 93% (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group C compared to the control group, with a TGI of 108%, and tumor regression had occurred in all 8 animals by day 28 (
Tumor growth was significantly delayed in group D compared to the control group with a TGI of 108%, and tumor regression had occurred in all 8 animals (
Studies have shown that in subcutaneous human HS 746T gastric cancer model, 50 mg/kg BI 853520 as a single drug or 10 mg/kg docetaxel as a single drug had inhibitory effect. In contrast, the combination of the two drugs had better inhibitory effect (All of the 8 animals showed tumor regression, and the tumor growth was still inhibited after drug withdrawal. There was a longer-lasting antitumor effect especially in the combination group, and the tolerance was good).
The aim of this study was to evaluate the in vivo efficacy of Etoposide and BI 853520 alone or in combination treatment in a breast carcinoma 4T1 cell subcutaneous allograft model in BALB/c mice.
Female BALB/c mice, 7-8 weeks old, were used in this study. The mice, marked by ear coding, were kept in polycarbonate cages at constant temperature (20-26° C.), humidity (40%-70%) and 12 h/12 h day-night circle, with 5 animals in each cage. Animals had free access to irradiation sterilized food and water during the entire study period.
Breast cancer 4T1 cells was purchased from Nanjing Cobioer biomart (cat: CBP60352). The cells were cultured at 37° C. in a 5% CO2 incubator with RPMI-1640 medium containing 10% heat-inactivated fetal bovine serum. The cells in exponential growth phase were harvested and re-suspended in DPBS, and quantitated by cell counter before tumor inoculation.
Each mouse was inoculated subcutaneously in the right flank region with 2*105 4T1 tumor cells in 0.1 mL PBS for tumor development. When the average tumor volume reached approximately 300 mm3 (15 days after inoculation), mice with moderate tumor volumes were selected for enrollment and the treatments started. The groups and regimen information were shown in Table 13.
The protocol and any modifications have been approved by the IACUC evaluation of Tran-medical and the use and welfare of laboratory animals should be governed by AAALAC regulations. The health and mortality of the animals should be monitored every day. Routine examinations include observation of tumor growth and animals' daily behavior such as activity, food and water intake (visual only), changes in body weight, physical signs, or other abnormalities. Animal deaths and side effects were recorded based on the number of animals in each group.
Humanitarian termination, animals should be euthanized if any one or more of the following conditions occurred during the experiment:
Tumor volume: The tumor volume was measured 2 or 3 times per week using digital caliper after randomization. The volume was expressed in mm3 using the formula: V=0.5 a*b2, where a and b were the long and short diameters of the tumor rounding up to 2 decimal places, respectively.
Relative tumor inhibition rate (TGItv): TGItv (%)=[1−(Ti−T0)/(Vi−V0)]*100%
(Ti: average tumor volume in the treatment group on day i after dosing, T0: average tumor volume in the treatment group on pg-Day0, Vi: average tumor volume in the control group on day i after dosing, V0: average tumor volume in the control group on pg-Day0).
Evaluation of lung metastasis rate: all animals were euthanized at end point day and each lung was isolated and infused with Bouin's solution. Lung metastases were scored and photographed by two independent experimenters and lung metastases were evaluated by the total score of metastases. Standard for evaluation was as following Table 14.
Data of tumor volume and body weight were expressed as Mean±SD. All data was analyzed with GraphPad Prism and the statistical analysis of differences of tumor volume in each group during the whole experiment was conducted by Two-way ANOVA, Fisher's LSD test. P<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
The statistical analysis of differences of lung metastasis score in each group was conducted by t-test, Mann Whitney test. P<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
On day 15 after inoculation, the average tumor volume reached approximately 300 mm3, mice with moderate tumor volumes were selected for enrollment into each treatment group and began to dose. On day 28 (day 13 after dosing) animals in vehicle control group were euthanized and other treatment groups were euthanized on day 33 (day 18 after dosing) due to the exceeded tumor volumes and the experiment was terminated.
On day 28 after inoculation (day 13 after randomization), the mean tumor volume of vehicle control group reached 2081.4±560.7 mm3. The mean tumor volume of monotherapy group Etoposide (3 mg/kg) reached 1252.9±327.6 mm3; and the average tumor volume of combination treatment group Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) reached 829.7±118.9 mm3. Compared with vehicle control group, the relative tumor inhibition rate (TGITV) of each treatment group Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) was 46.9% (p<0.0001) and 70.5% (p<0.0001), respectively.
On day 33 after inoculation (day 18 after randomization), the tumor volume of monotherapy group Etoposide (3 mg/kg) was 2197.1±265.9 mm3; and the average tumor volume of combination treatment group Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) reached 1409.5±223.7 mm3. Statistical comparison was made between the two groups, and the P value was p<0.0001. (Table 15,
During the experiment, the animals were observed for food and water consumption and experimental observation every day, and the body weights of the animals were recorded 2 or 3 times a week. On day 4 after randomization, the average body weight of vehicle control group was changed from 18.4 g to 19.5 g, and the body weight change rate was 6.4%; but the average body weight of treatment group Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) was changed from 17.6 g and 18.4 g to 15.0 g and 15.8 g, with a −14.6% and −14.1% body weight gain, respectively. Due to the decrease body weight, the administration of all Etoposide (3 mg/kg) related treatment groups were suspended, however, BI 853520 25 mg/kg was continued in the combined treatment Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) group.
On day 2 of discontinuation of 3 mg/kg Etoposide (6 days after randomization), one animal in the combination treatment group Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) died due to previous weight loss.
On day 11 after the start of treatment (6 days after Etoposide 3 mg/kg treatment suspended), the average body weight of treatment group Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) recovered to 18.1 g and 18.8 g, respectively, and the body weight change rates was 2.7% and 2.5%, respectively. Etoposide 3 mg/kg was continued to dose till the end of the study. On day 18 after the start of treatment (the day experiment ended), the average body weight of treatment group Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) was 19.1 g and 20.2 g, the body weight change rates was 9.0% and 10.2%, respectively.
Animals in each treatment group were given 3 mg/kg Etoposide in the first stage (from day 1 to day 4 after group administration), the animals' mental state was depressed and activity decreased. However, the animals' mental state and activity were moderate from day 11 (the day after resuming the dosing Etoposide 3 mg/kg) to the end of the experiment (day 18 after the start of treatment). (Table 16 &
1Number of animals survival on day18/Number of animals survival on day0;
2mean ± SD;
3Body Weight Change Rate = (W18 − W0)/W0 * 100%;
4Calculated based on tumor volumes on Day 13 after randomization.
On day 13 after the start of treatment, the vehicle control group were euthanized due to the exceeded tumor volumes and the lung of each animal was isolated and infused with Bouin's solution and did the same for treatment group Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) on day 18 after the start of treatment.
Lung metastases in each of the three groups were then counted and scored by two independent experimenters. Standard for evaluation was shown on Table 14. The lung metastasis scores of each group were analyzed, the vehicle control group measured by experimenter 1 had a score of 218.7, the Etoposide (3 mg/kg) group had a score of 182.0 and the Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) group had a score of 65.0; as the experimenter 2 analyzed, the score of vehicle control group was 165.3 and the treatment group Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) was 96.5 and 33, respectively. Compared with vehicle control group by statistical analysis, the p values of Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) groups measured by experimenter 1 were p=0.6286 and p=0.2000, respectively; and the p values of Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) groups measured by experimenter 2 were p=0.6286 and p=0.1000, respectively. Compared with the combination group Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) by statistical analysis, the p values of vehicle control group and Etoposide (3 mg/kg) group measured by experimenter 1 were p=0.2000 and p=0.4000, respectively; and the p values of Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) groups measured by experimenter 2 were p=0.1000 and p=0.4000, respectively. (Table 17 &
1Calculated and statisticsed based on lung metastasis scores on day 13, G1 was vehicle control group;
2Calculated and statisticsed based on lung metastasis scores on day 18, G2 was Etoposide (3 mg/kg) group and G3 was Etoposide + BI 853520 (3 + 25 mg/kg) group;
3Score = Total score of lung metastasis in the group/animal number per group; t-test, Mann Whitney test. P < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
In this study, the anti-tumor effects of monotherapy Etoposide and the combination treatment Etoposide+BI 853520 were evaluated in a 4T1 breast cancer subcutaneous allograft mice model.
The combination therapy showed the best anti-tumor efficacy among all the tested groups. The efficacy data indicated that BI 853520 synergizes with Etoposide in the treatment of cancer.
The body weight changes/change rate of each group at different time points post grouping showed that Etoposide caused the animals to lose weight but after a period of suspension and resumption of dosing Etoposide, the animals' body weight increased and their mental and physical performance were moderate. These results indicated that the animals showed a certain tolerance to Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg).
Scores and representative images of lung metastases in each group at the end of the experiment showed that there was no significant difference between the two independent experimenters in the statistical analysis each, due to the sample size in the group is too small. But the lung metastases score of the treatment group Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) was always the smallest. These results indicated that the treatment Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) can inhibit of lung metastasis better than monotherapy.
The following experiment was conducted to evaluate the in vivo efficacy of Etoposide and BI 853520 alone or the combination treatment in a MC38 colon cancer subcutaneous allograft model in C57BL/6 mice.
Colon cancer MC38 cells was purchased from Nanjing Cobioer biomart (cat: CBP60825). Monolayer of cells was cultured in vitro, under the conditions of DMEM medium with 10% fetal bovine serum, at 37° C., and 5% CO2 in an incubator. Routine digestion treatment with trypsin-EDTA twice to three times a week was conducted for passaging. The cells in exponential growth phase were harvested and re-suspended in DPBS, and quantitated by cell counter before tumor inoculation.
Each mouse was inoculated subcutaneously in the right flank region with 2*105 tumor cells in 0.1 mL PBS for tumor development. When the average tumor volume reached approximately 50 mm3 (9 days after inoculation), mice were selected for enrollment based on tumor volumes and the treatments started. The groups and regimen information were shown in Table 18.
The protocol and any modifications have been approved by the IACUC evaluation of Tran-medical and the use and welfare of laboratory animals should be governed by AAALAC regulations. The health and mortality of the animals should be monitored every day. Routine examinations include observation of tumor growth and animals' daily behavior such as activity, food and water intake (visual only), changes in body weight, physical signs, or other abnormalities. Animal deaths and side effects were recorded based on the number of animals in each group.
Animals should be euthanized if the animals' health condition continues to deteriorate, or if the tumor volume exceeds 3000 mm3, or if there is serious illness or pain. Animals should be euthanized and the experiment was terminated if the animals have obvious emaciation, weight loss greater than 20%; is unable to freely feed and drink water; the average tumor volume in the control group reached 3000 mm3; and animals exhibit the following clinical manifestations that continue to worsen: standing hair, arched back, white ears, nose, eyes or feet, shortness of breath, convulsions, continuous diarrhea, dehydration, delayed movement, and vocalization.
The experimental indicators are to examine whether tumor growth is inhibited, delayed, or tumor is cured. The tumor was measured 3 times per week using digital caliper. The volume was expressed in mm3 using the formula: V=0.5×a×b2, where a and b were the long and short diameters.
The antitumor efficacy of the compound was evaluated using TGI (%), reflecting the tumor growth inhibition rate. According to the tumor volume on the first day after grouping, the tumor growth inhibition rate TGI (%) was calculated using the following formula. TGI (%)=[1− (average tumor volume of a given treatment group − average tumor volume at the start of treatment of the given treatment group)/(average tumor volume of the solvent control group − average tumor volume at the start of treatment in the solvent control group)] ×100%.
Tumor volume was analyzed at the end of the experiment with Prism Graphpad. The statistical analysis of differences of tumor volume in each group was conducted by Two-way ANOVA, Fisher's LSD test. P<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
After cell inoculation, tumor growth was observed daily. On day 9 after inoculation, animals were grouped according to the tumor volume, with an average tumor volume of approximately 50 mm3. Due to tumor burden, the control group was euthanized on the day 26 after inoculation, which was the day 17 after dosing, and the experiment was terminated.
On day 17 after dosing, the tumor volume in the control group was 2670.9±1438.9 mm3. The tumor volume of Etoposide (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group was 2420.2±1377.3 mm3; and the tumor volume of Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group was 1865.0±839.9 mm3. Comparing the overall tumor volume with the control group, the tumor inhibition rates (TGI) of Etoposide (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group were 9.5% (p=0.4487); and the tumor inhibition rate (TGI) of Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group was 30.7% (p=0.0111).
The tumor volumes of each dosing group at different time points are shown in
1Based on the number of days after dosing, all data is shown as mean ± SD;
2TGI (%) = [1 − (T17 − T0)/(V17 − V0)] × 100%;
3*: p < 0.05, vs. Vehicle group, Two-way ANOVA.
The experiment was conducted according to the dosing schedule. During the experiment, the animals were observed for activities such as feeding and drinking water every day, and their weight was recorded three times a week. After 17 days of dosing, the average body weight of the control group changed from 18.7 g on the day of dosing (Day 0) to 23.9 g, with a weight gain rate of 28.8%; the average body weight of Etoposide (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group changed from 19.1 g on Day 0 to 22.8 g on Day 17, with a weight change rate of 19.3%; and the average body weight of Etoposide+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group changed from 18.9 g on Day 0 to 22.5 g on Day 17, with a weight change rate of 19.0%. Throughout the entire dosing cycle, one mouse in the Etoposide (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group was dead on day 12 after dosing due to tumor rupture. The animals in the other groups showed no significant weight loss and were in good condition throughout the entire dosing cycle, demonstrating tolerance to different dosing methods. Please refer to Table 20 for details. The weight changes of each dosing group at different time points are shown in
1Based on the number of days after dosing, Number of animals survival on day 17/Number of animals survival on day 0;
2mean ± SD;
3Body Weight Change Rate = [1 − (W17 − W0)/W0] * 100%
The following experiment was conducted to evaluate the in vivo antitumor effects study of Etoposide and BI 853520 combination therapy in ovarian cancer ID8-Luc cells abdominal allograft transplantation ascites model in C57BL/6 mice.
Female C57BL/6 mice, 6-8 weeks old, were used in this study. The mice, marked by ear coding, were kept in polycarbonate cages at constant temperature (20-26° C.), humidity (40%-70%) and 12 h/12 h day-night circle with 4 animals in each cage. Animals had free access to irradiation sterilized dry granule food and sterile drinking water during the entire study period.
Ovarian cancer cells ID8-Luc were constructed by Guangdong Medical University. Monolayer of cells was cultured in vitro, under the conditions of DMEM medium with 10% fetal bovine serum and 1 μg/ml Puromycin, at 37° C., and 5% CO2 in an incubator. Routine digestion treatment with trypsin-EDTA twice to three times a week was conducted for passaging. The cells in exponential growth phase were harvested and re-suspended in DPBS, and quantitated by cell counter before tumor inoculation.
Each mouse was inoculated intraperitoneally with 5*106 tumor cells in 0.1 mL PBS cell suspension for tumor development. On day 14 after inoculation, mice were selected for enrollment based on body weight and the treatments started. The groups and regimen information were shown in Table 21.
The protocol and any modifications have been approved by the IACUC evaluation of Tran-medical and the use and welfare of laboratory animals should be governed by AAALAC regulations. The health and mortality of the animals should be monitored every day. Routine examinations include observation of tumor growth and animals' daily behavior such as activity, food and water intake (visual only), changes in body weight, physical signs, or other abnormalities. Animal deaths and side effects were recorded based on the number of animals in each group.
Animals should be euthanized if the animals' health condition continues to deteriorate, or if the tumor volume exceeds 3000 mm3, or if there is serious illness or pain. Animals should be euthanized and the experiment was terminated if the animals have obvious emaciation, weight loss greater than 20%; is unable to freely feed and drink water; the average tumor volume in the control group reached 3000 mm3; and animals exhibit the following clinical manifestations that continue to worsen: standing hair, arched back, white ears, nose, eyes or feet, shortness of breath, convulsions, continuous diarrhea, dehydration, delayed movement, and vocalization.
Abdominal girth: Use a soft measuring tape to measure the animal's abdominal girth, i.e., the maximum girth value of the animal's abdomen.
Incidence rate: the incidence rate of animals is calculated by taking the abdominal girth of animals greater than 6.5 cm as the occurrence of ascites. The incidence rate=number of animals with ascites/total number of animals in this group *100%.
Survival rate: Record the mortality rate of animals based on their natural death time. Survival rate=(1− final number of dead animals/total number of animals in the group)*100%.
Median survival period: Calculated using Prism Graphpad software.
Body weight: Record the body weight of animals 1-2 times a week and observe the changes of weight over time and the occurrence of diseases.
Tumor volume was analyzed at the end of the experiment with Prism Graphpad. The statistical analysis of differences of body weight and abdominal girth in each group was conducted by Two-way ANOVA, Fisher's LSD test. P<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. The statistical analysis of differences of survival rate in each group was conducted byLog-rank (Mantel-Cox) test. P<0.05 was considered to be statistically significant.
After cell inoculation, the tumor growth was observed every day. On day 14 after inoculation, the animals were grouped according to their weight, and the weight change, incidence rate, abdominal girth change and survival rate of animals were observed. And on day 106, which is day 92 after dosing, all surviving animals were euthanized, and the experiment was terminated.
During the observation lasting for 92 days, the control group showed ascites symptoms for the first time on day 53 after dosing, and the incidence rate reached 100% on day 63 after dosing, that is all animals showed ascites symptoms; Etop (3 mg/kg) single treatment group began to show ascites symptoms on day 60 after dosing, and then reached the highest incidence rate of 100% on day 70; Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination treatment group showed ascites symptoms on day 63 after dosing, and reached the highest incidence rate of 83.3% on day 81.
During the observation lasting for 92 days, the control group had the first animal die on day 63, and all animals in the group died on day 74, with a survival rate of 0% and a median survival period of 67.5 days; the Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group experienced animal death on day 67 after dosing, and all animals died on day 81, with a survival rate of 0% and a median survival period of 79 days; and the Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group had animals die on day 77 after dosing, and on day 92, two animals still survived, with a survival rate of 33.3% and a median survival period of 91.5 days. Compared with the control group, the survival rate data was statistically analyzed, and the P value of Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group was p=0.0303; and the P value of Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group was p=0.0011. Compared with the Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group, the survival rate data was statistically analyzed, and the P value of the control group was p=0.0011; and the P value of Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group is p=0.0090.
The evaluation of incidence rate and survival rate of each group was shown in Table 22. The incidence rate and survival rate of each dosing group at different time points are shown in
1Incidence rate = number of animals with ascites/total number of animals in this group * 100%;
2Survival rate = (1 − number of final dead animals/total number of animals in the group) * 100%;
3The median survival period is automatically calculated by Prism Graphpad software;
4*: p < 0.05, **: p < 0.01, vs. control group, Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test;
5**: p < 0.01, vs. Etop + BI 853520 (3 + 25 mg/kg) group, Log-rank (Mantel-Cox) test.
During the observation lasting for 92 days, the mice experienced growth in their body weight and abdominal girth due to ascites.
In the later stage of the disease, animals in each group experienced significant changes in the abdominal girth and weight before they die. Therefore, data on day 60 after dosing, when all animals in the control group are alive, was analyzed. On day 60 after dosing, the body weight of animals in the control group changed from 19.5 g after dosing to 26.2 g, with a weight change rate of 34.0%; the body weight of Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group changed from 19.1 g after dosing to 24.3 g, with a weight change rate of 27.6%; and the body weight of the Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group changed from 19.7 g after dosing to 22.5 g, with a weight change rate of 14.6%. Compared with the control group, statistical analysis was conducted for the average body weight, and the P value of Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group was p=0.0203; and the P value of Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group is p<0.0001.
On day 60 after dosing, the abdominal girth of animals in the control group was 7.3±1.0 cm; the abdominal girth of Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group was 6.7±0.5 cm; and the abdominal girth of Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group was 6.2±0.2 cm. Compared with the control group, statistical analysis was conducted for abdominal girth data, and the P value of Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group was p<0.0001; and the P value of Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group is p<0.0001.
From 60 days after dosing, animals in the control group began to die, and on day 77, the survival rate of the control group decreased to 0%, and the other dosing groups began to experience illness and animal death. For example, on day 77 after dosing, when most animals survived in dosing groups other than the control group, the body weight of Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group changed to 36.1 g, with a weight change rate of 96.0%; and the body weight of Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group changed to 24.1 g, with a weight change rate of 23.3%. Statistical analysis was conducted between two dosing groups, with a P value of p<0.0001.
On day 77 after dosing, all animals in the control group had died due to ascites, the abdominal girth of Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group was 10.6±1.0 cm; and the abdominal girth of Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group was 7.1±0.8 cm. Statistical analysis was conducted between two dosing groups, with a P value of p<0.0001.
Evaluation of body weight and abdominal girth of each group are shown in Table 23 and Table 24. The body weight and abdominal girth of each dosing group at different time points are shown in
1mean ± SD;
2****: p < 0.0001, vs. control group, Two-way ANOVA;
3****: p < 0.0001, vs. Etop + BI 853520 (3 + 25 mg/kg) group, Two-way ANOVA.
Compared with the control group, the median survival period of Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group and Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group were higher than that of the control group, and there are significant differences compared with the control group; and the data of body weight and Abdominal girth also showed that the data of the two dosing groups were better than that of the control group, and there are statistical differences compared with the control group, indicating that the combination of Etoposide (3 mg/kg) and BI 853520 (25 mg/kg) has good therapeutic effect. Regarding the data of body weight and ascites on day 77 after dosing, Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) combination group was better than Etop (3 mg/kg) monotherapy group, with statistical differences for both data. The above data showed that Etop+BI 853520 (3+25 mg/kg) has a better effect on inhibiting the occurrence of ascites, and BI 853520 25 mg/kg can significantly enhance the therapeutic effect of Etoposide (3 mg/kg).
The contents of all references (including literature references, issued patents, published patent applications, and co-pending patent applications) cited throughout this application are expressly incorporated herein by reference in their entirety. Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly known to those skilled in the art.
All features disclosed in this specification may be combined in any combination. Each feature disclosed in this specification may be replaced by alternative features serving the same, equivalent or similar purpose. Thus, unless expressly stated otherwise, each feature disclosed is only an example of a series of equivalent or similar features.
From the above description, one skilled in the art can easily ascertain the essential characteristics of this invention, and can make various changes and modifications of the invention without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention to adapt them to various usages and conditions. Accordingly, other embodiments are within the scope of the appended claims.
| Number | Date | Country | Kind |
|---|---|---|---|
| 202010080757.1 | Feb 2020 | CN | national |
This application is a continuation-in-part application of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 17/797,867, filed Aug. 5, 2022, which is a U.S. National Phase Application under 35 U.S.C. § 371 of International Application No. PCT/CN2021/074371, filed Jan. 29, 2021, which claims the priority of Chinese Patent Application No. 202010080757.1 filed on Feb. 5, 2020, the contents of which are incorporated herein by reference as a part of this application.
| Number | Date | Country | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Parent | 17797867 | Aug 2022 | US |
| Child | 18633164 | US |
