Clinical Pharmacology, Oncology, Global Product Development, Pfizer Inc., 10555 Science Center Drive, San Diego, CA, 92121, USA.
Global Pharmacometrics, Global Product Development, Pfizer Inc., 10555 Science Center Drive, San Diego, CA, 92121, USA.
Invest New Drugs. 2018 Feb;36(1):121-135. doi: 10.1007/s10637-017-0520-6. Epub 2017 Oct 13.
Background Antibody drug conjugates (ADCs) utilize a monoclonal antibody to deliver a cytotoxic payload specifically to tumor cells, limiting exposure to healthy tissues. Major clinical toxicities of ADCs include hematologic, hepatic, neurologic, and ophthalmic events, which are often dose-limiting. These events may be off-target effects caused by premature release of payload in circulation. A meta-analysis was performed to summarize key clinical safety data for ADCs by payload, and data permitting, establish a dose-response model for toxicity incidence as a function of payload, dose/regimen, and cancer type. Methods A literature search was performed to identify and extract data from clinical ADC studies. Toxicity incidence and severity were collected by treatment arm for anemia, neutropenia, thrombocytopenia, leukopenia, hepatic toxicity, peripheral neuropathy, and ocular toxicity. Exploratory plots, descriptive summaries, and logistic regression modelling were used to explore Grade ≥ 3 (G3/4) toxicities and assess the impact of covariates, including cancer type and dose/regimen. Results The dataset contained 70 publications; quantitative analysis included 43 studies with G3/4 toxicity information reported for the endpoints above. G3/4 anemia, neutropenia and peripheral neuropathy were consistently reported for MMAE ADCs, thrombocytopenia and hepatic toxicity for DM1, and ocular toxicity for MMAF. Safety profiles of MMAE, DM1, and DM4 ADCs differed between solid and hematologic cancers. Conclusions Published ADC clinical data is limited by non-uniform reporting for toxicity and lack of dosing information, limiting the ability to develop quantitative models relating toxicity to exposure. However, the current analysis suggests that key G3/4 toxicities of ADCs in the clinic are likely off-target and related to payload.
抗体药物偶联物(ADCs)利用单克隆抗体将细胞毒性有效载荷特异性递送至肿瘤细胞,从而限制对健康组织的暴露。ADC 的主要临床毒性包括血液学、肝脏、神经和眼科事件,这些通常是剂量限制毒性。这些事件可能是由于有效载荷在循环中过早释放而导致的非靶标效应。进行了一项荟萃分析,以总结 ADC 按有效载荷分类的关键临床安全性数据,并在允许的情况下,建立毒性发生率与有效载荷、剂量/方案和癌症类型之间的剂量反应模型。
进行文献检索,以确定并从临床 ADC 研究中提取数据。通过治疗组收集贫血、中性粒细胞减少症、血小板减少症、白细胞减少症、肝毒性、周围神经病和眼部毒性的毒性发生率和严重程度。使用探索性图、描述性总结和逻辑回归模型来探索 G3/4 毒性,并评估包括癌症类型和剂量/方案在内的协变量的影响。
数据集包含 70 篇出版物;定量分析包括 43 项研究,报告了上述终点的 G3/4 毒性信息。MMAE ADC 始终报告 G3/4 贫血、中性粒细胞减少症和周围神经病,DM1 报告血小板减少症和肝毒性,MMAF 报告眼部毒性。MMAE、DM1 和 DM4 ADC 的安全性特征在实体瘤和血液瘤癌症之间存在差异。
已发表的 ADC 临床数据受到毒性和剂量信息报告缺乏的限制,限制了建立与暴露相关的毒性定量模型的能力。然而,目前的分析表明,临床上 ADC 的关键 G3/4 毒性很可能是脱靶的,与有效载荷有关。