Missing content? – Request curation!
Request curation for specific Genes, Variants, or PubMed publications.
Have questions, comments, or suggestions? - Let us know!
Email us at : ckbsupport@jax.org
Ref Type | Journal Article | ||||||||||||
PMID | (32089640) | ||||||||||||
Authors | Kim A, Lu Y, Okuno SH, Reinke D, Maertens O, Perentesis J, Basu M, Wolters PL, De Raedt T, Chawla S, Chugh R, Van Tine BA, O'Sullivan G, Chen A, Cichowski K, Widemann BC | ||||||||||||
Title | Targeting Refractory Sarcomas and Malignant Peripheral Nerve Sheath Tumors in a Phase I/II Study of Sirolimus in Combination with Ganetespib (SARC023). | ||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||
URL | |||||||||||||
Abstract Text | Malignant peripheral nerve sheath tumors (MPNSTs) are aggressive soft tissue sarcomas. Combining Hsp90 inhibitors to enhance endoplasmic reticulum stress with mTOR inhibition results in dramatic MPNST shrinkage in a genetically engineered MPNST mouse model. Ganetespib is an injectable potent small molecule inhibitor of Hsp90. Sirolimus is an oral mTOR inhibitor. We sought to determine the safety, tolerability, and recommended dose of ganetespib and sirolimus in patients with refractory sarcomas and assess clinical benefits in patients with unresectable/refractory MPNSTs. Patients and Methods. In this multi-institutional, open-label, phase 1/2 study of ganetespib and sirolimus, patients ≥16 years with histologically confirmed refractory sarcoma (phase 1) or MPNST (phase 2) were eligible. A conventional 3 + 3 dose escalation design was used for phase 1. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic measures were evaluated. Primary objectives of phase 2 were to determine the clinical benefit rate (CBR) of this combination in MPNSTs. Patient-reported outcomes assessed pain.Twenty patients were enrolled (10 per phase). Toxicities were manageable; most frequent non-DLTs were diarrhea, elevated liver transaminases, and fatigue. The recommended dose of ganetespib was 200 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 with sirolimus 4 mg orally once daily with day 1 loading dose of 12 mg. In phase 1, one patient with leiomyosarcoma achieved a sustained partial response. In phase 2, no responses were observed. The median number of cycles treated was 2 (1-4). Patients did not meet the criteria for clinical benefit as defined per protocol. Pain ratings decreased or were stable.Despite promising preclinical rationale and tolerability of the combination therapy, no responses were observed, and the study did not meet parameters for further evaluation in MPNSTs. This trial was registered with (NCT02008877). |
Molecular Profile | Treatment Approach |
---|
Gene Name | Source | Synonyms | Protein Domains | Gene Description | Gene Role |
---|
Therapy Name | Drugs | Efficacy Evidence | Clinical Trials |
---|
Drug Name | Trade Name | Synonyms | Drug Classes | Drug Description |
---|
Gene | Variant | Impact | Protein Effect | Variant Description | Associated with drug Resistance |
---|
Molecular Profile | Indication/Tumor Type | Response Type | Therapy Name | Approval Status | Evidence Type | Efficacy Evidence | References |
---|