Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Amy K. LeBlanc, DVM Diplomate ACVIM (Oncology) What is comparative oncology? What resources are available to those employing a comparative approach for drug development, biomarker discovery, other endeavors? How are such studies designed and executed? How can comparative oncology be an example for other One Health initiatives? Coming in July..... Amy K. LeBlanc DVM, Diplomate ACVIM (Oncology) Staff Scientist - Comparative Oncology Program Oral cavity/mucosal malignant melanoma Biologically aggressive, responsive to immune-based therapies Canine: BRAF(-); c-kit (-); N-ras (-) Image courtesy of Eric Carlson, DMD, MD, FACS A Comparative and Integrated Approach to Cancer Drug Development Nature Reviews Cancer 2008 Comparative Oncology TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES TO INCLUDE NATURALLY OCCURRING CANCER MODELS IN THE STUDY OF CANCER BIOLOGY AND THERAPY Companion Animal Cancer Models Large outbred animals Strong genetic similarities to humans Naturally occurring cancers Immune competant and syngeneic Relevant tumor histology/genetics Relevant response chemotherapy No “Gold Standards” Compressed progression times Tumor heterogeneity Recurrence/Resistance Metastasis biology Expression Profiles for Canine and Human Osteosarcoma are Indistinguishable Normal Tissues BMC Genomics 2009 Osteosarcoma Tumor vaccines administered for canine lymphoma 13,14 Regulatory Guidance 2009 Comparative Oncology Program and Comparative Oncology Trials ConsortiumNCI founded 2003 Canine Genome Release 2005 Cytokine and chemotherapeutic inhalation strategies first assessed in dogs with cancer 76-79 Defined toxicity, activity, PK and tumoral PD with tyrosine kinase inhibition 44, 84 Development of bone marrow transplantation regimes in dogs 11,12 Evaluation of BCG immunotherapy in canine melanoma 9 Measurable and minimal residual disease Descriptive design: size focused 1960 1980 1990 Hyperthermia (thermoradiotherapy) techniques correlated with clinical efficacy in a canine model 69 2000 2012 DNA vaccine L-MTP-PE evaluated approved for use in in MRD osteosarcoma guided canine melanoma 37,99COG studies 94 100 Limb sparing optimized in canine osteosarcoma 71,72 Paoloni and Khanna Nature Reviews Cancer 2008 Integrated Canine Comparative Oncology and Genomics Consortium founded 2006 Projected “Value” of an Integrated Drug Development Path # of Cancer Drugs Reaching This Phase in Development 100 90 40 30 20 Cost (Conventional development pathway) # of Drugs in CONVENTIONAL DRUG PATH 10 # of Drugs in INTEGRATED DRUG PATH Cost (Integrated development pathway) Preclinical Phase I Phase II Phase III Approval Gordon, I et al. PLoS Med 6(10): e1000161. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000161 Projected “Value” of an Integrated Drug Develpment Path $3b 90 $2b 40 30 $1b 20 Cumulative Cost of Cancer Clinical Trials # of Cancer Drugs Reaching This Phase in Development 100 Cost (Conventional development pathway) # of Drugs in CONVENTIONAL DRUG PATH Cost (Integrated development pathway) # of Drugs in INTEGRATED DRUG PATH #Cost of drugs (Integrated development pathway) of CONVENTIONAL DRUG PATH #Cost of drugs (CoventionalDRUG development of INTEGRATED PATH pathway) 10 Preclinical Phase I Phase II Phase III $0b Approval Gordon, I et al. PLoS Med 6(10): e1000161. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1000161 Comparative Oncology Program – Center for Cancer Research Comparative Oncology Trials Consortium (COTC) Reagent/Resources to conduct studies in Comparative Oncology Advocacy for the Appropriate Integration of Comparative Oncology Trials Genomics Proteomics Antibodies Biospecimen Repository PD Core Academia Pharma NCI Regulatory Bodies Canine Comparative Oncology and Genomics Consortium Progress by the Comparative Oncology Trials Consortium (COTC) Initiated of Letters of Intent Initiated study protocols Studies completed Studies published Studies in progress/in press 19 11 9 3 7 Studies of COTC are published under a “Collection” in PLoS One Canine Comparative Oncology & Genomics Consortium (CCOGC) •Pfizer-CCOGC Biospecimen Repository is now open for tissue release •Currently houses over 2,000 patient samples • osteosarcoma, lymphoma, melanoma, pulmonary tumors, mast cell tumor, soft tissue sarcomas and hemangiosarcoma. • tumor and normal tissues (formalin fixed, snap frozen and OCT), frozen serum, plasma, urine and whole blood. Requests for samples/data from fixed sample resource Pfizer CCOGC Repository MTA Frederick MD CCOGC Pathology Review CCOGC BioBank Review MTA/MOU Government Pharma Biotech Academia CCOGC Sample Collection Sites Ownership of tissue and IP is held but may be transferred by CCOGC Repository business model Pfizer CCOGC Biospecimen Repository: Total Number of Canine Patients Collected 600 Tumor and Normal Tissues Blood 500 520 Frozen RNAlater Formalin fixed 400 441 332 300 200 182 100 102 0 92 180 CCOGC Sample Distribution Progress Nearly 1000 canine patient samples have been distributed world-wide since October 2012. Lymphoma Frozen Tumor 40 32 63 Lymphoma Frozen Normal 40 270 48 Melanoma Frozen Tumor 50 Osteosarcoma Frozen Tumor 52 Melanoma Whole Blood 98 227 108 Osteosarcoma Whole Blood Osteosarcoma Frozen Normal Tissues COTC Pharmacodynamic (PD) Core Purpose: To develop an efficient virtual lab that can be responsive to the service and scientific needs of the COTC COTC studies biologically intensive PD “heavy” Previously done internally or contracted out Time consuming Did not engage the quality or expertise in the veterinary academic community COTC PD Core Provide assay services and scientific expertise • Scientific guidance and trial review • Preclinical studies prior to trial initiation • Trial pharmacodynamic and biologic endpoint support Multiple members from COTC member institutions • Prospectively identified via solicitation of collaboration • Development of a “catalog” to streamline process COTC PD Core - areas of interest/expertise Cell Culture/ Proliferation/ Migration/Invasion Cell lines Clinical Pathology* Pathology PARR for clonality IHC / ICC Pathology Flow cytometry Gene Expression Proteomics Western Blot Pharmacology Bone Metabolism qRT-PCR * Majority of clinical pathology performed at GLP veterinary laboratory Clinical Data Collection • GCP-compliant • GLP clinical pathology COTC Study Development: 1. Discuss questions not answered fully through conventional models or human trials. 1. Determine if the dog can be used to answer questions. • Validation of target/drug biology in the dog • CCOGC Biospecimen Repository • PD Core 3. Iterative collaboration to define study overview/endpoints Patient Eligibility checklist Biopsy Tumor/Normal Biopsy Tumor/Normal Patient Enrollment checklist Day 0 Agent administration Day 7 Agent administration Imaging Imaging 4. Develop study protocol and data base Day 14 Agent administration 5. Selection of COTC sites to manage clinical study • Based on study completion goals and protocol intensity 6. Conduct study • Amend protocol with data input 7. Complete study Day 21 Agent administration Biopsy Tumor/Normal Imaging Day 28: patient reassessment Advanced imaging with pathologic correlates is possible and increasing among COTC sites Lawrence J et al: Vet Radiol Ultrasound 50(6): 660, 2009 Comparative Oncology Trials Consortium: Study Examples Antitumor activity and immunomodulatory effects “Evaluation of IL-12 and IL-2 Immunocytokines in Tumor Bearing Dogs” Modeling Personalized Medicine Delivery in Dogs Molecuiarly informed therapy Tumor Specific Targeting – Tolerability “Evaluation of RGD Targeted Delivery of Phage Expressing TNF-a to Tumor Bearing Dogs” Pick the Winner – Biological and Antitumor activity “Preclinical Comparison of Three TOPO-1 inhibitors in Dogs with Lymphoma” Protocol Development Study Implementation and Contract Process COTC007: Novel Topoisomerase I Inhibitors: Integrated Comparative Approach to Identify Lead Agent Toxicity Pharmacokinetics Pharmacodynamics Therapeutic Index Low throughput selection of “lead” Lead Candidate Discrimination/Selection Study: COTC007b Biological Endpoints Serum Pharmacokinetics Tumoral drug Levels Drug Target/Modulation Biological Activity Circulating Tumor Cell Numbers Target Modulation Biological Activity Normal tissue (Bone marrow) Target Modulation Biological Activity Agent X-1 Enrollment Agent X-2 Enrollment 50 20 17.5 mg/m2 15 40 30 10 20 Patient Entry 5 Patienty Entry 10 0 6/13/09 5/13/09 4/13/09 3/13/09 2/13/09 1/13/09 12/13/08 11/13/08 10/13/08 9/13/08 8/13/08 7/13/08 6/13/08 5/13/08 0 Grade 5 event. Not attributable to IND. Expanded cohort 1 (3mg/m2). Grade 4 Neutropenia & Thrombocytopenia (DLT). Cohort 5 expanded. Grade 5 event. Not attributable to IND. Cohort 3 expanded. Currently in cohort 5. Grade 4 Neutropenia & Thrombocytopenia (DLT). Cohort closed. Agent X-3 Enrollment Grade 3 Allergic reaction. Cohort 4 (125mg/m2) expanded. 125 100 75 50 25 0 100 mg/m2 Patient Entry Grade 2 Hypersensitivity reaction. Grade 4 Neutropenia, Thrombocytopenia, AST, ALT (DLT) Grade 4 Neutropenia (DLT). Cohort Closed. Biological Activity: H2AX Cytospin Images Agent X-3 Cohort 3 (75mg/m2/day) Tumor Aspirate Pre-dose Pre-dose D1 2h D1 6h Bone Marrow D6 D6 JI/NCTVL Comparison of Tumoral Drug Exposure: Tumor Levels Across Compounds Compound and Cohort& Cohorts X-1 X-2 X-2 (ng/g) 3 6 9 15 1000 100 1000 100 10 0 24 48 72 96 100000 X-3 (ng/g) X-1 (ng/g) 8 16 24 10000 10000 10 120 0 X-3 24 48 25 50 75 10000 1000 100 0 24 48 72 96 120 72 96 120 Best Overall Response 100 90 Agent Agent 1X-1 Agent Agent 2X-2 Agent Agent3X-3 3mg/m2 8mg/m2 25mg/m2 6mg/m2 16mg/m2 50mg/m2 9mg/m2 24mg/m2 75mg/m2 15mg/m2 40mg/m2 125mg/m2 80 70 50 40 30 20 20mg/m2 0610 **0208 0203 0402 1606 0404 1607 1601 0611 0206 0407 0504 0604 0213 0605 0507 0608 0406 0506 0602 0607 1604 0209 0607 1602 1603 0212 0601 0207 0609 0503 0211 0502 0405 0205 0204 0501 0403 0210 0401 **1605 -10 0902 0 0202 10 0901 Response Assessment (%) 60 Pa ents -20 -30 -40 -50 -60 -70 -80 -90 -100 PR PR COTC007: Novel Topoisomerase I Inhibitors: Integrated Comparative Approach to Identify Lead Agent Toxicity Pharmacokinetics Pharmacodynamics Therapeutic Index COTC007: Novel Topoisomerase I Inhibitors: Integrated Comparative Approach to Identify Lead Agent Opportunities to Answer Questions to Inform Phase III Designs: Toxicity No “Gold Standards” soPharmacokinetics ability to treat in naïve disease Pharmacodynamics Index Compressed progressionTherapeutic times Assess activity of drugs that uniquely target metastatic progression Minimal Residual Disease Combinational Therapies Novel Biomarkers Integrated Approach to Osteosarcoma Drug Development Translational studies of agents that target “vulnerable” metastatic cells. Localized Primary Canine OS Trials Minimal Residual Disease Distant Gross Metastasis Minimal residual disease studies • Comparative Oncology Trials Consortium •5 new agents in 5 yrs • Prioritize agents for human MRD/adjuvant based studies of metastatic progression 12 Months Early Phase Trials Therapeutic Approach: Later Phase Trials Aminobisphosphonates Rapalog inhibition of mTOR Ezrin small molecule inhibitors Measurable Disease Minimal Residual Disease Perceived Risks and Concerns with the Integration of a Comparative Approach Study Duration • Timelines are longer than those in rodent models • Strategic inclusion of pet dogs should allow timely integration of data into human trials Patient to Patient Variability • Tumor-bearing dogs represent a different clinical population compared to research dogs • SNP frequency amongst dogs is similar to that of patients in early phase cancer studies Cancer Prevalence by Histology • Most common: sarcomas and lymphoid neoplasms • Less common: Breast, prostate, gastrointestinal, lung carcinomas • Studies in the less common histologies require more time for completion and more clinical trial centers • Histology is increasingly replaced with biology and not often a primary question for trial design Target biology may be unique and must be defined (“credentialed”) • Canine Comparative Oncology and Genomics Consortium • Pfizer - Canine Oncology and Genomics Consortium Biospecimen Repository • Comparative Oncology Program Tissue Array Resource Perceived Risks and Concerns with Integration of a Comparative Approach Drug and Budget Requirements • Greater drug supply needed • GMP not required • Study costs include: clinical management, serial biopsy of tumors, imaging and other correlative endpoints Control and reporting of data • Good Clinical Practice guidelines • Adverse Event reporting: Assign severity, duration, and attribution • Compliance by pet owners and study investigators is very high Regulatory oversight/reporting • Pre-IND agents - guidance has been proposed and used •(Khanna et al Clin Cancer Res 2009) • Post-IND agents - guidance exists Biotech and aversion to “rocking” the development boat What is comparative oncology? What resources are available to those employing a comparative approach for drug development, biomarker discovery, other endeavors? How are such studies designed and executed? How can comparative oncology be an example for other One Health initiatives? Acknowledgements Tumor and Metastasis Biology Section, Pediatric Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute Comparative Oncology Program CCR, National Cancer Institute Melissa Paoloni Christina Mazcko Ira Gordon Katherine Hansen Monika Jankowski Ling Ren Arnulfo Mendoza Michael Lizardo James Morrow Allyson Koyen Tanasa Osborne Rhadika Gharpure Martin Mendoza Molecular Oncology Section, Pediatric Oncology Branch, National Cancer Institute Sung Hyeok Hong Choh Yeung Manpreet Alhuwalia Lee Helman Jessica Cassavaugh Joseph Briggs Georgetown C3D,- NCI COTC CCOGC Jun Wei Javed Khan Aykut Uren CGB CCR - NCI LCB - NCI Paul Meltzer Liang Cao Sean Davis Yien Cha Tsai Alan Weismann Caryn Steakley Allison Wise Jeffrey Shilling Sawsan Sahin Deven Shah Rohit Paul Amy LeBlanc Jeffrey Phillips Shelley Newman Doug Thamm Susan Plaza Christie Anderson Carolyn Henry Kimberly Selting David Vail Ilene Kurzman Karin Sorenmo Amy LaBlanc Timothy Fan William Kisseberth Barb Kitchell Heather Wilson David Vail Matthew Breen Sue Lana Jaime Modiano Kerstin Linblad-Toh Elizabeth McNeil Phil Bergman Steve Withrow Mark Simpson Cheryl London Bill Kissebirth POB-OGS - NCI Pathology - NCI U. Chicago Hue Luu Stephen Hewitt Frederick - NCI Nancy Colburn Tim Veenstra CSU Dan Gustafson Hansen Last Slide