A comparison of the pharmacokinetics of the anticancer MET inhibitor foretinib free base tablet formulation to bisphosphate salt capsule formulation in patients with solid tumors

Aung Naing, Kurzrock Razelle Kurzrock, Laurel M. Adams, Joseph F. Kleha, Kevin H. Laubscher, Peter L. Bonate, Steven Weller, Colleen Fitzgerald, Yanmei Xu, Patricia M. LoRusso

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

17 Scopus citations

Abstract

Purpose This phase I, open-label, randomized, 2- part crossover study assessed the safety, pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of single doses of the anticancer MET inhibitor foretinib (formerly known as GSK1363089, EXEL- 2880 and XL-880) free base tablet formulation compared to a bisphosphate salt capsule formulation (Part 1), and assessed the safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetics of the bisphosphate salt capsule administered 3 times a week in cancer patients (Part 2). Patients and Methods In Part 1, patients were randomized in a crossover manner to receive a single oral dose of foretinib formulated as a bisphosphate salt capsule (240 mg; 183 mg free base equivalent) followed one week later by a single dose of a free base tablet (180 mg), or vice versa where the treatment sequence was reversed. In Part 2, patients self-administered oral doses of bisphosphate salt capsules (200 mg) 3 times a week until disease progression. Results Twelve patients with solid tumors were enrolled and completed Part 1, and 10 patients continued into Part 2. Most AEs were mild or moderate in severity. The most common drug-related AEs were fatigue, diarrhea, and nausea. The least-squares (LS) mean total area under the curve was 3144 and 3514 ng*h/mL for the free base tablet and bisphosphate salt capsule, respectively, with a ratio of 0.89 (90% confidence interval, CI: 0.69, 1.16). The LS mean maximal concentration (Cmax) was 81.6 and 98.5 ng/mL for the free base and bisphosphate salt, respectively, with a ratio of 0.83 (90% confidence interval, CI: 0.67, 1.02). The time to reach Cmax was ̃4 h for both formulations. The pharmacokinetics of foretinib were not clinically different between the 2 formulations. Of the 10 patients assessed for efficacy, 3 patients achieved stable disease. Conclusions Foretinib was well tolerated as single doses of both the free base and bisphosphate salt formulations. The pharmacokinetics and relative bioavailability of the 2 formulations were not clinically different. The bisphosphate salt formulation was well tolerated on a 3-times a week dosing schedule, and reached steady-state plasma concentration after 2 weeks.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)327-334
Number of pages8
JournalInvestigational New Drugs
Volume30
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Feb 2012

Keywords

  • Foretinib
  • MET
  • Phase I Trial

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Pharmacology
  • Pharmacology (medical)

MD Anderson CCSG core facilities

  • Clinical and Translational Research Center

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'A comparison of the pharmacokinetics of the anticancer MET inhibitor foretinib free base tablet formulation to bisphosphate salt capsule formulation in patients with solid tumors'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this