Cancer Chemotherapy and Pharmacology

, Volume 79, Issue 3, pp 587–594 | Cite as

Population pharmacokinetics of ABT-767 in BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation carriers with advanced solid tumors or in subjects with high grade serous ovarian, primary peritoneal or fallopian tube cancer

  • Rajendar K. Mittapalli
  • Silpa Nuthalapati
  • Stacie Peacock Shepherd
  • Hao Xiong
Original Article
  • 270 Downloads

Abstract

Purpose

The objective of the manuscript is to describe the development of a population pharmacokinetic model for ABT-767, a potent and orally bioavailable inhibitor of poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase enzyme, and to evaluate the potential influence of patient demographics and baseline covariates on the pharmacokinetics of ABT-767.

Methods

A total of 1809 plasma ABT-767 concentrations from 90 subjects were used for population pharmacokinetic modeling. Covariates screened for influence on pharmacokinetic parameters were body weight, lean body weight, body surface area, albumin, creatinine clearance, serum creatinine, liver function tests, and age. The effect of food on absorption and bioavailability were also evaluated. Model validation was performed using bootstrap analysis and visual predictive check.

Results

A two-compartment model with firstorder absorption adequately described the pharmacokinetics of ABT-767. The population estimates of apparent clearance from central compartment (CL/F), volume of central compartment (V c/F), and absorption rate constant (k a) were 7.34 L/h, 25.8 L, 1.45 h−1, respectively. The estimates of interindividual variabilities (%CV) in CL/F, V c/F, and k a were 40.4, 40.5, and 53.8%, respectively. The k a was influenced by food. Albumin on CL/F was a statistically significant covariate; however, it explained only 8% of the variability in the pharmacokinetics of ABT-767.

Conclusions

Albumin on CL/F was the only statistically significant baseline covariate affecting ABT-767 pharmacokinetics, but it only explained a fraction of the pharmacokinetic variability. Dosage adjustments based on body size, age, or mild renal impairment are not needed for ABT-767. The developed model will be used to evaluate ABT-767 exposure–response analyses and to perform simulations for different dose and dosing regimens.

Keywords

Population pharmacokinetics ABT-767 PARP BRCA1 or BRCA2 Food effect 

Notes

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Rajendar K. Mittapalli, Silpa Nuthalapati, and Hao Xiong are employees of AbbVie Inc. Stacie Shepherd is a former Abbvie employee. All authors may hold AbbVie stocks or options.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in the study involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki Declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Statement of human and animal rights

The article does not contain any studies with animals performed by any of the authors.

Statement of informed consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Funding information

This study was sponsored by AbbVie Inc. AbbVie Inc. contributed to the study design; research; data interpretation; and writing, review and approval of the manuscript for publication.

References

  1. 1.
    Jagtap P, Szabó C (2005) Poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase and the therapeutic effects of its inhibitors. Nat Rev Drug Discov 4:421–440. doi: 10.1038/nrd1718 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Curtin NJ (2012) DNA repair dysregulation from cancer driver to therapeutic target. Nat Rev Cancer 12:801–817. doi: 10.1038/nrc3399 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Helleday T, Petermann E, Lundin C et al (2008) DNA repair pathways as targets for cancer therapy. Nat Rev Cancer 8:193–204. doi: 10.1038/nrc2342 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Helleday T (2011) The underlying mechanism for the PARP and BRCA synthetic lethality: clearing up the misunderstandings. Mol Oncol 5:387–393. doi: 10.1016/j.molonc.2011.07.001 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Audeh MW, Carmichael J, Penson RT et al (2010) Oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and recurrent ovarian cancer: a proof-of-concept trial. Lancet 376:245–251. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60893-8 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Tutt A, Robson M, Garber JE et al (2010) Oral poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor olaparib in patients with BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations and advanced breast cancer: a proof-of-concept trial. Lancet Lond Engl 376:235–244. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60892-6 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kim G, Ison G, McKee AE et al (2015) FDA approval summary: olaparib monotherapy in patients with deleterious germline BRCA-mutated advanced ovarian cancer treated with three or more lines of chemotherapy. Clin Cancer Res Off J Am Assoc Cancer Res. doi: 10.1158/1078-0432.CCR-15-0887 Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    (2017) Rucaparib Approved for Ovarian Cancer. Cancer Discov. 7:120-121. doi: 10.1158/2159-8290.CD-NB2016-164
  9. 9.
    Curtin NJ, Wang L-Z, Yiakouvaki A et al (2004) Novel poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase-1 inhibitor, AG14361, restores sensitivity to temozolomide in mismatch repair-deficient cells. Clin Cancer Res Off J Am Assoc Cancer Res 10:881–889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Horton JK, Wilson SH (2013) Strategic combination of DNA-damaging agent and PARP inhibitor results in enhanced cytotoxicity. Front Oncol 3:257. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2013.00257 CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Powell C, Mikropoulos C, Kaye SB et al (2010) Pre-clinical and clinical evaluation of PARP inhibitors as tumour-specific radiosensitisers. Cancer Treat Rev 36:566–575. doi: 10.1016/j.ctrv.2010.03.003 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    de Jonge MJA, van Herpen C, Gietema JA et al (2014) A study of ABT-767 in advanced solid tumors with BRCA 1 and BRCA 2 mutations and high grade serous ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Ann Oncol 25(suppl 4):iv150. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdu331.12 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Daniels MS, Lu KH (2016) Genetic predisposition in gynecologic cancers. Semin Oncol 43:543–547. doi: 10.1053/j.seminoncol.2016.08.005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Janmahasatian S, Duffull SB, Ash S et al (2005) Quantification of lean bodyweight. Clin Pharmacokinet 44:1051–1065. doi: 10.2165/00003088-200544100-00004 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lu J, Eppler SM, Lum BL, Halmilton M, Rakhit A, Gaudreault J (2005) A population pharmacokinetic (PK) model for erlotinib (E), a small molecule inhibitor of the epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR). J Clin Oncol 23.90160:2032–2032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Hong Y, Passos VQ, Huang P-H, Lau YY (2016) Population pharmacokinetics of ceritinib in adult patients with tumors characterized by genetic abnormalities in anaplastic lymphoma kinase. J Clin Pharmacol. doi: 10.1002/jcph.849 PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Morgan DJ, Bray KM (1994) Lean body mass as a predictor of drug dosage. Implications for drug therapy. Clin Pharmacokinet 26:292–307. doi: 10.2165/00003088-199426040-00005 CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Rajendar K. Mittapalli
    • 1
  • Silpa Nuthalapati
    • 1
  • Stacie Peacock Shepherd
    • 2
  • Hao Xiong
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Clinical Pharmacology and PharmacometricsAbbVie Inc.North ChicagoUSA
  2. 2.Oncology DevelopmentAbbvie Inc.North ChicagoUSA

Personalised recommendations