Article
作者: Milhem, Mohammed M. ; Thistlethwaite, Fiona ; Lao, Cristopher ; Vergote, Ignace ; Schöffski, Patrick ; Jerusalem, Guy ; Ahmadi, Tahamtan ; Reiter, Panagiota ; Reijers, Irene ; Brady, Lauren K. ; Pencheva, Nora ; Chen, Andrew William ; Kontos, Despina ; Qutaish, Mohammed ; Roshkovan, Leonid ; Ramalingam, Suresh S. ; Fu, Yali ; Higgs, Brandon W. ; Zhao, Yujie ; Baurain, Jean-Francois ; Gort, Eelke ; Forssmann, Ulf ; Katz, Sharyn I. ; Windfeld, Kristian ; Bajaj, Gaurav ; Choe, Jennifer H. ; Mankowski, Walter C. ; Blank, Christian U. ; Cohen, Eric A. ; Piha-Paul, Sarina A. ; Shaw, Heather M. ; Debruyne, Philip R. ; Castro, Patricia Garrido ; Jure-Kunkel, Maria ; Shum, Elaine ; Rohrberg, Kristoffer Staal ; Lopez, Juanita S. ; Amiri, Katayoun I. ; Jänne, Pasi A. ; Plummer, Ruth
Purpose::AXL, a receptor tyrosine kinase related to oncogenic processes, is aberrantly expressed in various cancers and associated with treatment resistance. Enapotamab vedotin (EnaV), a novel anti-AXL human IgG1 and monomethyl auristatin E antibody–drug conjugate, demonstrated antitumor activity in preclinical models, including non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). This phase 1/2 study assessed the safety and preliminary efficacy of EnaV in solid tumors.
Patients and Methods::This study comprised dose-escalation and dose-expansion phases; both phases investigated EnaV once every 3 weeks (Q3W) and EnaV on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle (3Q4W). Primary objectives determined the maximum tolerated dose (dose escalation) and safety (dose expansion). Pharmacokinetic profile, antitumor activity, and AXL expression were also assessed.
Results::During dose escalation, 32 patients received EnaV Q3W; 15 received EnaV 3Q4W. The maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose were 2.2 mg/kg in Q3W and 1.0 mg/kg in 3Q4W schedules. In dose expansion, 189 patients received EnaV Q3W; 70 received EnaV 3Q4W. Common adverse events in dose expansion included fatigue, constipation, nausea, decreased appetite, and diarrhea. Overall response rates ranged from 4.5% to 12.5% with Q3W dose schedule and from 9.1% to 11.5% with 3Q4W dose schedule. Disease control rates for NSCLC cohorts were 40.9% to 50.0%. NSCLC subset analysis demonstrated correlation between radiomics signature and disease control. The relationship between clinical activity and AXL expression was not apparent.
Conclusions::EnaV had an acceptable safety profile; however, because the evaluation of antitumor activity did not show clinically meaningful responses, clinical development of EnaV was discontinued.
Significance::EnaV, an anti-AXL human IgG1 and monomethyl auristatin E antibody–drug conjugate, showed single-agent antitumor activity in preclinical models. This phase 1/2 study of EnaV demonstrated a manageable safety profile and antitumor activity in selected tumor types. Further studies exploring alternative targeting modalities, patient selection, and/or combinations are needed.