A molecular biology and phase II trial of lapatinib in children with refractory CNS malignancies: a pediatric brain tumor consortium study
High expression of ERBB2 has been reported in medulloblastoma and ependymoma; EGFR is amplified and over-expressed in brainstem glioma suggesting these proteins as potential therapeutic targets. We conducted a molecular biology (MB) and phase II study to estimate inhibition of tumor ERBB signaling and sustained responses by lapatinib in children with recurrent CNS malignancies. In the MB study, patients with recurrent medulloblastoma, ependymoma, and high-grade glioma (HGG) undergoing resection were stratified and randomized to pre-resection treatment with lapatinib 900 mg/m2 dose bid for 7–14 days or no treatment. Western blot analysis of ERBB expression and pathway activity in fresh tumor obtained at surgery estimated ERBB receptor signaling inhibition in vivo. Drug concentration was simultaneously assessed in tumor and plasma. In the phase II study, patients, stratified by histology, received lapatinib continuously, to assess sustained response. Eight patients, on the MB trial (four medulloblastomas, four ependymomas), received a median of two courses (range 1–6+). No intratumoral target inhibition by lapatinib was noted in any patient. Tumor-to-plasma ratios of lapatinib were 10–20 %. In the 34 patients (14 MB, 10 HGG, 10 ependymoma) in the phase II study, lapatinib was well-tolerated at 900 mg/m2 dose bid. The median number of courses in the phase II trial was two (range 1–12). Seven patients (three medulloblastoma, four ependymoma) remained on therapy for at least four courses range (4–26). Lapatinib was well-tolerated in children with recurrent or CNS malignancies, but did not inhibit target in tumor and had little single agent activity.
KeywordsLapatinib Medulloblastoma High-grade glioma Phase II trial
We acknowledge the clinical research assistant support of Helen Gallagher and Christopher Smith and the technical assistance of Inga Luckett and Radhika Thiruvenkatam. This study was supported in part by NIH Grant U01 CA81457 for the Pediatric Brain Tumor Consortium (JB), NCI Grant R21 CA114937 (MF) and American Lebanese Syrian Associated Charities.
Conflict of interest
- 2.Trunzer K, Pavlick AC, Schuchter L, Gonzalez R, McArthur GA, Hutson TE, Moschos SJ, Flaherty KT, Kim KB, Weber JS, Hersey P, Long GV, Lawrence D, Ott PA, Amaravadi RK, Lewis KD, Puzanov I, Lo RS, Koehler A, Kockx M, Spleiss O, Schell-Steven A, Gilbert HN, Cockey L, Bollag G, Lee RJ, Joe AK, Sosman JA, Ribas A (2013) Pharmacodynamic effects and mechanisms of resistance to vemurafenib in patients with metastatic melanoma. J Clin Oncol 31(14):1767–1774PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Lee EQ, Puduvalli VK, Reid JM, Kuhn JG, Lamborn KR, Cloughesy TF, Chang SM, Drappatz J, Yung WK, Gilbert MR, Robins HI, Lieberman FS, Lassman AB, McGovern RM, Xu J, Desideri S, Ye X, Ames MM, Espinoza-Delgado I, Prados MD, Wen PY (2012) Phase I study of vorinostat in combination with temozolomide in patients with high-grade gliomas: North American brain tumor consortium study 04–03. Clin Cancer Res 18:6032–6039PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 4.Fouladi M, Park JR, Stewart CF, Gilbertson RJ, Schaiquevich P, Sun J, Reid JM, Ames MM, Speights R, Ingle AM, Zwiebel J, Blaney SM, Adamson PC (2010) Pediatric phase I trial and pharmacokinetic study of vorinostat: a children’s oncology group phase I consortium report. J Clin Oncol 28:3623–3629PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 5.Galanis E, Jaeckle KA, Maurer MJ, Reid JM, Ames MM, Hardwick JS, Reilly JF, Loboda A, Nebozhyn M, Fantin VR, Richon VM, Scheithauer B, Giannini C, Flynn PJ, Moore DF Jr, Zwiebel J, Buckner JC (2009) Phase II trial of vorinostat in recurrent glioblastoma multiforme: a north central cancer treatment group study. J Clin Oncol 27:2052–2058PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Gajjar A, Hernan R, Kocak M, Fuller C, Lee Y, McKinnon PJ, Wallace D, Lau C, Chintagumpala M, Ashley DM, Kellie SJ, Kun L, Gilbertson RJ (2004) Clinical, histopathologic, and molecular markers of prognosis: toward a new disease risk stratification system for medulloblastoma. J Clin Oncol 22:984–993PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Bachelot T, Romieu G, Campone M, Dieras V, Cropet C, Dalenc F, Jimenez M, Le Rhun E, Pierga JY, Goncalves A, Leheurteur M, Domont J, Gutierrez M, Cure H, Ferrero JM, Labbe-Devilliers C (2013) Lapatinib plus capecitabine in patients with previously untreated brain metastases from HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (landscape): a single-group phase 2 study. Lancet Oncol 14:64–71PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Guo D, Prins RM, Dang J, Kuga D, Iwanami A, Soto H, Lin KY, Huang TT, Akhavan D, Hock MB, Zhu S, Kofman AA, Bensinger SJ, Yong WH, Vinters HV, Horvath S, Watson AD, Kuhn JG, Robins HI, Mehta MP, Wen PY, DeAngelis LM, Prados MD, Mellinghoff IK, Cloughesy TF, Mischel PS (2009) EGFR signaling through an Akt-SREBP-1-dependent, rapamycin-resistant pathway sensitizes glioblastomas to antilipogenic therapy. Sci Signal 2:82CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Taskar KS, Rudraraju V, Mittapalli RK, Samala R, Thorsheim HR, Lockman J, Gril B, Hua E, Palmieri D, Polli JW, Castellino S, Rubin SD, Lockman PR, Steeg PS, Smith QR (2012) Lapatinib distribution in HER2 overexpressing experimental brain metastases of breast cancer. Pharm Res 29:770–781PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar