Skip to main content

A phase I/II trial of the oral antiangiogenic agent TSU-68 in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

Abstract

Purpose

We studied the safety and effectiveness of TSU-68, an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2, platelet-derived growth factor receptor and fibroblast growth factor receptor, in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

Methods

Patients with unresectable or metastatic HCC were eligible for enrollment. In phase I, the safety, tolerability and pharmacokinetics were assessed in patients stratified based on liver function, from no cirrhosis to Child–Pugh class B. The safety and effectiveness were assessed in phase II at the dose determined in phase I.

Results

Twelve patients were enrolled in phase I. Dose-limiting toxicities were found with TSU-68 at the dose of 400 mg bid in Child–Pugh B patients, and 200 mg bid was established as the phase II dose. Phase II included 23 additional patients, and the safety and efficacy were evaluated in a total of 35 patients. One patient (2.9%) had a complete response. Two patients (5.7%) had a partial response, and 15 patients (42.8%) showed a stable disease. The median time to progression was 2.1 months, and the median overall survival was 13.1 months. Common adverse events were hypoalbuminemia, diarrhea, anorexia, abdominal pain, malaise, edema and AST/ALT elevation. The analysis of angiogenesis-related parameters suggests that serum-soluble vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 is a possible marker to show the response.

Conclusions

TSU-68 at a dose of 200 mg bid determined by stratification into liver function, showed promising preliminary efficacy with a high safety profile in patients with HCC who had been heavily pre-treated.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

References

  1. Parkin DM, Bray F, Ferlay J et al (2005) Global cancer statistics, 2002. CA Cancer J Clin 55:74–108

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bruix J, Sherman M (2005) Management of hepatocellular carcinoma. Hepatology 42:1208–1236

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Llovet JM, Ricci S, Mazzaferro V et al (2008) Sorafenib in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. N Engl J Med 359:378–390

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Cheng AL, Kang YK, Chen Z et al (2009) Efficacy and safety of sorafenib in patients in the Asia-Pacific region with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase III randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Lancet Oncol 10:25–34

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Laird AD, Vajkoczy P, Shawver LK et al (2000) SU6668 is a potent antiangiogenic and antitumor agent that induces regression of established tumors. Cancer Res 60:4152–4160

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Naumova E, Ubezio P, Garofalo A et al (2006) The vascular targeting property of paclitaxel is enhanced by SU6668, a receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, causing apoptosis of endothelial cells and inhibition of angiogenesis. Clin Cancer Res 12:1839–1849

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Yorozuya K, Kubota T, Watanabe M et al (2005) TSU-68 (SU6668) inhibits local tumor growth and liver metastasis of human colon cancer xenografts via anti-angiogenesis. Oncol Rep 14:677–682

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Solorzano CC, Jung YD, Bucana CD et al (2001) In vivo intracellular signaling as a marker of antiangiogenetic activity. Cancer Res 61:7048–7051

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Kuenen BC, Giaccone G, Ruijter R et al (2005) Dose-finding study of the multitargeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor SU6668 in patients with advanced malignancies. Clin Cancer Res 11:6240–6246

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Kanai F, Yoshida H, Teratani T et al (2006) New feasibility study design with hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase I/II study of TSU-68, an oral angiogenesis inhibitor [Abstract]. J Clin Oncol 24(Suppl):213S

    Google Scholar 

  11. Kanai F, Yoshida H, Tateishi R et al (2008) Final results of a phase I/II trial of the oral anti-angiogenesis inhibitor TSU-68 in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma [Abstract]. J Clin Oncol 26(Suppl):235S

    Google Scholar 

  12. Kitamura R, Yamamoto Y, Nagayama S et al (2007) Decrease in plasma concentrations of antiangiogenic agent TSU-68 ((Z)-5-[(1, 2-dihydro-2-oxo-3H-indol-3-ylidene)methyl]-2, 4-dimethyl-1H-pyrrole-3-propanoic acid) during oral administration twice a day to rats. Drug Metab Dispos 35:1611–1616

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kitamura R, Asanoma H, Nagayama S et al (2008) Identification of human liver cytochrome P450 isoforms involved in autoinduced metabolism of the antiangiogenic agent (Z)-5-[(1, 2-dihydro-2-oxo-3H-indol-3-ylidene)methyl]-2, 4-dimethyl-1H-pyrrole-3-propanoic acid (TSU-68). Drug Metab Dispos 36:1003–1009

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ueda Y, Shimoyama T, Murakami H et al (2010) Phase I and pharmacokinetic study of TSU-68, a novel multiple receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor, by twice daily oral administration between meals with solid tumors (under submission)

  15. Murakami H, Ueda Y, Shimoyama T et al (2010) Phase I, pharmacokinetic, and biological studies of TSU-68, a novel multiple tyrosine kinase inhibitor, administered after meals with solid tumors (under submission)

  16. Green H, Benedetti J, Crowley J (2002) Clinical trials in oncology, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall, London

    Book  Google Scholar 

  17. Fleming TR (1982) One-sample multiple testing procedures for phase II clinical trials. Biometrics 38:143–151

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. The Liver Cancer Study Group of Japan (2000) The general rules for the clinical and pathological study of primary liver cancer. Version 4. Kanehara & Co., Ltd., Tokyo

  19. Makuuchi M, Belghiti J, Belli G et al (2003) IHPA concordant classification of primary liver cancer: working group report. J Hepatobiliary Pancreat Surg 10:26–30

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Llovet JM, Bruix J (2008) Novel advancements in the management of hepatocellular carcinoma 2008. J Hepatol 48:S20–S37

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Roodhart JM, Langenberg MH, Witteveen E et al (2008) The molecular basis of class side effects due to treatment with inhibitors of VEGF/VEGFR pathway. Curr Clin Pharmacol 3:132–143

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Faivre S, Raymond E, Boucher E et al (2009) Safety and efficacy of sunitinib in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: an open-label, multicentre, phase II study. Lancet Oncol 10:794–800

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Llovet JM, Di Bisceglie AM, Bruix J et al (2008) Panel of experts in HCC-design clinical trials. Design and endpoints of clinical trials in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Natl Cancer Inst 100:698–711

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Furuse J, Ishii H, Nakachi K et al (2008) Phase I study of sorafenib in Japanese patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Sci 99:159–165

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhu AX, Sahani DV, Duda DG et al (2009) Efficacy, safety, and potential biomarkers of sunitinib monotherapy in advanced hepatocellular carcinoma: a phase II study. J Clin Oncol 27:3027–3035

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Thomas MB, Abbruzzese JL (2005) Opportunities for targeted therapies in hepatocellular carcinoma. J Clin Oncol 23:8093–8108

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Pang R, Poon RT (2006) Angiogenesis and antiangiogenic therapy in hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Lett 242:151–167

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Poon RT, Lau C, Pang R et al (2007) High serum vascular endothelial growth factor levels predict poor prognosis after radiofrequency ablation of hepatocellular carcinoma: importance of tumor biomarker in ablative therapies. Ann Surg Oncol 14:1835–1845

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Alexiou D, Karayiannakis AJ, Syrigos KN et al (2001) Serum levels of E-selectin, ICAM-1, and VCAM-1 in colorectal cancer patients: correlations with clinicopathological features, patient survival and tumor surgery. Eur J Cancer 37:2392–2397

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Alexiou D, Karayiannakis AJ, Syrigos KN et al (2003) Clinical significance of serum levels of E-selectin, intracellular adhesion molecule-1, and vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 in gastric cancer patients. Am J Gastroenterol 98:478–485

    CAS  Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. O’Hanlon DM, Fitzsimons H, Lynch J et al (2002) Soluble adhesion molecule (E-selectin, ICAM-1 and VCAM-1) in breast carcinoma. Eur J Cancer 38:2252–2257

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Joanna WH, Ronnie TP, Cindy ST et al (2004) Clinical significance of serum vascular cell adhesion molecule-1 levels in patients with hepatocellular carcinoma. World J Gastroenterol 10:2014–2018

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We thank Tomonori Fujishima, Hideo Yoshida, Miwa Yamashita, Megumi Kawai and Atsuko Tamori for their contributions. We are also grateful to Yutaka Ariyoshi, Nagahiro Saijo and Yuh Sakata for their extramural review. This study was supported by Taiho Pharmaceutical.

Conflict of interest statement

The author(s) have nothing to disclose.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Fumihiko Kanai.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kanai, F., Yoshida, H., Tateishi, R. et al. A phase I/II trial of the oral antiangiogenic agent TSU-68 in patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol 67, 315–324 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-010-1320-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00280-010-1320-2

Keywords

  • Advanced HCC
  • Liver function
  • TSU-68
  • Pharmacokinetics
  • Tolerability
  • Angiogenesis