Skip to main content
Download PDF

A multicenter, dose-finding, phase 1b study of imatinib in combination with alpelisib as third-line treatment in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor

BMC Cancer volume 22, Article number: 511 (2022) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

Acquired resistance to approved tyrosine kinase inhibitors limits their clinical use in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST). This study investigated the safety, tolerability and efficacy of alpelisib, a phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase inhibitor, used in combination with imatinib in patients with advanced GIST who had failed prior therapy with both imatinib and sunitinib.

Methods

This phase 1b, multicenter, open-label study consisted of 2 phases: dose escalation and dose expansion. Dose escalation involved 200 mg once daily (QD) alpelisib, initially, followed by 250 and 350 mg. These were combined with 400 mg QD imatinib until maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of alpelisib in combination with imatinib was determined. This MTD/RP2D dose was tested to evaluate the clinical activity of this combination in dose expansion.

Results

Fifty-six patients were enrolled, 21 and 35 in the dose escalation and expansion phases, respectively. The MTD of alpelisib given with imatinib was determined as 350 mg QD. Combination treatment showed partial response in 1 (2.9%) and stable disease in 15 (42.9%) patients. Median progression-free survival was 2 months (95% CI 1.8–4.6). Overall, 92.9% patients had adverse events (AEs) while 46.4% had grade 3/4 AEs, hyperglycemia being the most common (23.2%).

Conclusions

The MTD of alpelisib was estimated as 350 mg QD when used in combination with imatinib 400 mg QD after oral administration in patients with advanced GIST. The safety and tolerability profile of this combination was acceptable; however, the combination did not demonstrate sufficient clinical activity to justify additional clinical testing.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.govNCT01735968 (date of initial registration 28/11/2012).

Peer Review reports

Background

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors (GISTs) are the most common mesenchymal tumor of the gastrointestinal tract, with a low incidence of 10–15 cases per million people [1, 2]. Activating mutations in either of the 2 receptor tyrosine kinases, KIT (CD117) or the platelet-derived growth factor receptors alpha (PDGFRA), are found in 85% of all GISTs [3, 4]. Gain-of-function KIT gene mutations activate downstream signaling pathways (such as phosphatidylinositol 3-kinases [PI3K]), that stimulate cell survival, growth, and proliferation [4], and contribute to tumor development and drug-resistance [5].

Tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) are the established systemic therapies for KIT-mutated GISTs; imatinib being the first line in patients requiring a systemic therapy [1,2,3,4]. Imatinib has demonstrated a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 1.5 years (median follow-up 4.5 years) and median overall survival (OS) of 4.5 years in patients with advanced GIST [6, 7]. Sunitinib, a multi-targeted TKI showing activity against KIT and PDGFRA, is the standard second-line treatment of imatinib-resistant/intolerant GISTs. Similarly, regorafenib is approved in third-line after failure with imatinib and sunitinib [2]. However, both sunitinib [8] and regorafenib [9] achieve a shorter PFS (5–6.5 months) than with first-line imatinib. Recently, ripretinib has been approved (median PFS 6.3 months) for adult patients with advanced GIST who had received prior treatment with 3 or more TKIs (including imatinib, sunitinib, and regorafenib) based on the INVICTUS trial results [10]. Avapritinib is approved for a rare subtype of GIST with a PDGFRA (D842V) mutation [11], but has failed to demonstrate superiority over regorafenib as third-line in unselected GIST patients [12]. In addition, cabozantinib was shown to be active for TKI-resistant GIST in a phase 2 study [13].

Despite the clinical benefits of approved TKIs, acquired resistance to these agents results in fatal disease progression in the majority of patients with advanced GIST [2]. Preclinical studies demonstrated that the PI3K pathway is a crucial survival pathway in imatinib-resistant GIST [14] and some have suggested that the use of TKIs combined with an agent targeting the PI3K pathway may provide long-term benefits in GIST by delaying TKI resistance [1, 15]. The addition of a PI3K inhibitor to imatinib resulted in a prominent decrease of tumor volume and significant antitumor efficacy in a GIST xenograft [16, 17]. We hypothesized that alpelisib, a PI3K inhibitor, combined with imatinib, a KIT inhibitor, might improve outcomes in patients who failed to respond to approved systemic therapies. Of note, no approved treatment for third-line therapy was available when this study (NCT01735968) was planned and initiated.

The current study was conducted to establish the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and/or a recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of alpelisib in combination with imatinib 400 mg once daily (QD) in patients with metastatic and/or unresectable GIST, who had failed prior therapy with both imatinib and sunitinib. The study was then expanded to confirm safety and estimate efficacy.

Methods

Study design and treatment

The study consisted of 2 phases: a dose escalation to establish the MTD and/or RP2D, followed by a dose expansion at MTD or RP2D. An adaptive Bayesian Logistic Regression Model with the escalation with overdose control was used in the study. During the dose escalation phase, successive cohorts (3) of newly enrolled patients received increasing doses of alpelisib in combination with imatinib 400 mg QD until MTD and/or RP2D of the combination was determined. The primary objective of the study was to determine the MTD and/or a RP2D of alpelisib when administered orally in combination with imatinib 400 mg QD.

The MTD was defined as the highest drug dosage not expected to cause a dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) in more than 35% of the treated patients in the first cycle of treatment. Defining the MTD required ≥6 patients per dose level. After determination of the MTD and/or RP2D, additional patients were enrolled into the dose expansion phase and treated at the MTD/RP2D to evaluate further the safety and antitumor activity of the combination.

Patients

Adult patients with a histologically confirmed diagnosis of unresectable or metastatic GIST who had failed prior therapy with imatinib followed by sunitinib, and had World Health Organization performance status of 0–2, were enrolled. Treatment failure was defined as disease progression during therapy (both imatinib and sunitinib) or intolerance to therapy (sunitinib). To enter the dose expansion phase, patients must have had disease progression on both imatinib and sunitinib as documented by ≥1 measurable lesion or confirmation of disease progression by radiological evaluation (computer tomography/magnetic resonance imaging) based on response evaluation criteria in solid tumors (RECIST; 1.1) during prior therapy with imatinib and sunitinib. The patients could have had additional lines of therapy (dose escalation phase) or up to 3 lines of therapy (dose expansion phase).

Assessments

Adverse events (AEs) were coded using the MedDRA 21.1 while common terminology criteria for AEs (CTCAE; 4.03) was used for grading the severity. Summary of AEs was based on the safety set and focused on the on-treatment period (from day of first dose of study treatment to 30 days after the last dose of study treatment).

The antitumor activity was determined during the dose expansion phase. Tumor response was determined locally by the investigator sites according to Novartis guidelines based on RECIST 1.1. A complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) required confirmation, ≥28 days after first evaluation of response. Efficacy was assessed based on the clinical benefit rate (CBR), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), and PFS. The CBR was defined as proportion of patients with either a best overall response of CR or PR, or a response of stable disease (SD) or better which lasts ≥16 weeks from the start of study treatment (but before progression). The ORR was defined as proportion of patients with the best overall response of CR or PR (confirmed). The DCR was defined as proportion of patients with the best overall response of CR or PR, or a response of SD or better which lasts for ≥6 weeks (but before progression).

Statistical analysis

The full analysis set (FAS) and safety set consisted of all the patients who received ≥1 dose of alpelisib or imatinib. The dose-determining set (DDS) consisted of patients from the safety set enrolled in the dose escalation phase who either met the minimum exposure criterion and had sufficient safety evaluations (as determined by the investigators and Novartis), or had experienced a DLT during the first cycle (up to day 28 following the start of the combination treatment). The CBR, ORR, and DCR were summarized with the 95% CIs using exact Pearson-Clopper limits. PFS was estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method.

Ethical Statement

This study protocol was reviewed and approved by the independent ethics committee or institutional review board (Comitato Etico Indipendente del Policlinico Sant’Orsola-Malpighi Padiglione 3, Via Albertoni, 15, Bologna 40138), and the study was conducted according to the ethical principles described in the Declaration of Helsinki. Informed consent was obtained from each participant prior to study entry. The study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01735968, date of initial registration 28/11/2012).

Results

Patients

Overall, 56 patients with advanced GIST were enrolled in the study (21 in the dose escalation phase and 35 in the dose expansion phase). The baseline characteristics and demographics of patients are described in Table 1. The majority of the enrolled patients had multi-site metastatic disease (Table 1).

Table 1 Baseline characteristics and demographics (FAS)
Full size table

All patients (100%) discontinued study treatment, mainly due to progressive disease (64.3%) or AEs (21.4%).

Maximum tolerated dose

Overall, 19 patients were evaluable for the determination of MTD/RP2D and included in the DDS over 3 cohorts of alpelisib (200 mg, 250 mg, and 350 mg, respectively) in combination with imatinib 400 mg. In cohort 1 (alpelisib 200 mg; n = 4), 1 patient experienced a DLT (aspartate aminotransferase increased and blood bilirubin increased), none in cohort 2 (alpelisib 250 mg; n = 6), and 2 patients had a DLT (hyperglycemia) in cohort 3 (alpelisib 350 mg; n = 9).

Safety

Adverse events were reported in all patients (100%) at some point during the study. The most common AEs were nausea (66.1%), hyperglycemia (57.1%), diarrhea (53.6%), decreased appetite (39.3%), and vomiting (35.7%). Overall, 75% of patients had grade 3/4 AEs, including hyperglycemia (25%), anemia (12.5%), and abdominal pain (10.7%) as the most common AEs. A total of 92.9% of patients had AEs suspected to be study treatment-related including 46.4% with grade 3/4 AEs. Among these, the most common AE was hyperglycemia (57.1%, all grades; 23.2%, grade 3/4) (Table 2).

Table 2 Adverse events suspected to be study treatment-related (overall ≥10%; safety set)
Full size table

Overall, 30 patients (53.6%) had serious adverse events (SAEs) (Table 3). The most common SAEs were anemia, decreased appetite, pyrexia, and renal impairment (5.4%, each). Adverse events led to study treatment discontinuation in 12 patients (21.4%) (Table 3); the most common being decreased appetite, hyperglycemia, and renal impairment (3.6%, each). Out of these 12 patients, AEs were suspected to be study treatment-related in 6 patients. A total of 62.5% of patients had AEs requiring dose interruption and/or change and all the patients required additional supportive therapy for their AEs (Table 3).

Table 3 Patients who had grade 3/4 AEs, SAEs, AEs leading to discontinuation, or other significant AEs (safety set)
Full size table

Adverse events of special interest (AESI) were observed in 53 patients (94.6%). For this purpose, similar AEs (and of specific clinical interest) related to alpelisib were grouped under different categories as gastrointestinal toxicity (82.1%), hyperglycemia (57.1%), hypersensitivity and anaphylactic reaction (26.8%), pancreatitis (10.7%), and rash (28.6%).

Overall, 23 deaths (41.1%) were reported during the study, including 12 (21.4%) on-treatment deaths. The majority of the on-treatment deaths were due to underlying malignancy (10 patients, 83.3%); remaining 2 deaths were due to suicide and acute kidney injury, respectively.

Efficacy

In the dose expansion phase of the study, a PR was observed in 1 patient (2.9%). Fifteen patients (42.9%) had SD as their best overall response. The CBR and DCR were 25.7% (95% CI, 12.5%, 43.3%) and 45.7% (95% CI, 28.8%, 63.4%), respectively (Table 4). For the 5 patients with an unknown response, 3 discontinued due to AEs, 1 due to patient decision and 1 due to progressive disease.

Table 4 Best overall response as per investigator review (FAS − expansion phase)
Full size table

Progression-free survival events were reported in 29 patients (82.9%). Median PFS time was 2 months (95% CI 1.8–4.6) (Table 5).

Table 5 Analysis of progression-free survival as per investigator review using Kaplan−Meier method (FAS − expansion phase)
Full size table

Discussion

The MTD of alpelisib in combination with imatinib 400 mg QD was determined as 350 mg QD. Median PFS was 2.0 months (95% CI 1.8–4.6). Clinical activity was also observed with one patient (2.9%) achieving PR and 15 patients (43%) having SD as best response. The MTD of alpelisib monotherapy in a first-in-human study was reported as 400 mg QD in patients with solid tumors, which reported a manageable safety profile [18]. In our study, the combination of alpelisib and imatinib (400 mg QD) was used for the first time with a starting dose of alpelisib that was 50% of alpelisib monotherapy MTD (i.e., 200 mg QD).

Imatinib, when used as a monotherapy in patients with GIST who had previous clinical resistance, showed a clinical benefit in only 15% of patients [19,20,21]. To date, monotherapy with clinically available TKIs is unable to durably overcome resistance caused by secondary KIT/PDGFRA mutations in patients with advanced GIST for longer than 6 months on average, explaining our inability to obtain long-term disease control in the second-line or later lines of therapy. We hypothesized that combination therapy might improve results compared with TKI monotherapy. Alpelisib, a PI3K inhibitor, has shown antitumor activities in combination with other drugs (such as trastuzumab emtansine, fulvestrant, cetuximab, paclitaxel) across patients with a variety of tumors [22,23,24,25,26]. Thus, our study used a combination of imatinib with alpelisib in patients with advanced GIST.

The combination of alpelisib (350 mg QD) and imatinib (400 mg QD) had an acceptable safety profile. Hyperglycemia was the most common AE (57.1%, all grades; 23.2%, grade 3/4). Hyperglycemia is a previously recognized side effect of alpelisib PI3K inhibition [26, 27] and therefore was categorized as an AESI. The incidence of all AESIs was as expected with PI3K inhibitors and alpelisib and was manageable although 4 patients (2 hyperglycemia, 1 rash, and 1 vomiting) discontinued the study treatment due to these AESIs.

Although there are important limitations in comparing across several phase 1 or 2 studies as their results depend upon the details of the cohort and study design selected that may confound the activity results of the agents, our study should be put in context of others, like the INVICTUS trial investigating ripretinib and revealing alopecia as the most common AE (49% patients in ripretinib group; treatment-related) with 9% patients having treatment-related SAEs, while our study showed hyperglycemia as the most common AE (57.1% patients; suspected to be treatment-related) and 12.5% patients with SAEs (suspected to be treatment-related). Also, AEs leading to dose reductions and drug discontinuations were lower in the INVICTUS trial compared to our study (6% vs 10.7%, dose reduction; 5% vs 44.6%, drug discontinuation) [13]. In the GRID trial, regorafenib showed lower incidence of AEs (all grades and grade 3/4) compared to our study (98.5% vs 100%, all grades; 58.3% vs 75%, grade 3/4) [9].

Our results suggest limited clinical activity with only a single PR observed. In the RIGHT trial, a PFS of 1.8 months (95% CI 1.7–3.6) was observed from rechallenge with imatinib after prior imatinib failure in advanced GIST [28] whereas we report alpelisib in combination with imatinib achieved a median PFS of only 2.0 months (95% CI 1.8–4.6). This does not compare favorably with other approved TKI monotherapies such as median PFS of 24.1 weeks (95% CI 11.1–28.3) for second-line sunitinib [8], 4.8 months (95% CI 0.19–0.39) for third-line regorafenib [9], 3.4 months (95% CI 2.4–5.6) for third-line (or further line) pazopanib [29], and 6.3 months (95% CI 4.6–6.9) for fourth-line (or further line) ripretinib [13]. In addition, CABOGIST trial reported a median PFS of 5.5 months (95% CI 3.6–6.9) for cabozantinib in patients with progression after imatinib and sunitinib but no other lines of TKI therapy [13].

A similar study with imatinib (400 mg) in combination with another PI3K inhibitor, buparlisib, in patients with advanced GIST who had failed prior therapy with imatinib and sunitinib showed a median PFS of 3.5 months (95% CI 1.9–5.4) and overall, 98.3% of patients had suspected treatment-related AEs, including 45% with grade 3/4 AEs [30]. However, this combination was not felt to provide additional benefits compared to other existing TKI monotherapy regimens. Additionally, in our study, the combination of alpelisib and imatinib failed to elicit the expected ORR. We hypothesize that these 2 agents may not be acting as a valid biologic combination therapy as all patients had imatinib-resistant GIST. Therefore, our study results may only indicate the single agent activity of alpelisib in this patient population. In a pretreated patient population, PI3K inhibitors may still be relevant, if combined with more potent KIT inhibitors. However, lack of molecular data collection (i.e., KIT and PDGFRA mutation status) is a limitation of this study. Alternatively, there could still be a role for this combination in front-line treatment, but this would require additional clinical investigation.

Conclusions

The MTD of alpelisib was estimated as 350 mg QD when used in combination with imatinib 400 mg QD after oral administration in patients with advanced GIST. The safety and tolerability profile of this combination was acceptable; however, the combination did not demonstrate sufficient clinical activity to justify additional clinical testing.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets generated and/or analysed during the current study are not publicly available because Phase 1 studies, by their nature, present a high risk of patient re-identification, but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

GIST:

Gastrointestinal stromal tumor

PDGFRA:

Platelet-derived growth factor receptors alpha

PI3K:

Phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase

TKI:

Tyrosine kinase inhibitor

PFS:

Progression-free survival

OS:

Overall survival

MTD:

Maximum tolerated dose

RP2D:

Recommended phase 2 dose

QD:

Once daily

DLT:

Dose-limiting toxicity

RECIST:

Response evaluation criteria in solid tumors

AEs:

Adverse events

CTCAE:

Common terminology criteria for AEs

CR:

Complete response

PR:

Partial response

CBR:

Clinical benefit rate

ORR:

Overall response rate

DCR:

Disease control rate

SD:

Stable disease

FAS:

Full analysis set

DDS:

Dose-determining set

ECOG:

Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group

SAEs:

Serious adverse events

AESI:

Adverse events of special interest

References

  1. Rubin BP, Heinrich MC, Corless CL. Gastrointestinal stromal tumour. Lancet (London, England). 2007;369:1731–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Mazzocca A, Napolitano A, Silletta M, Spalato Ceruso M, Santini D, Tonini G, et al. New frontiers in the medical management of gastrointestinal stromal tumours. Therapeut Adv Med Oncol. 2019;11:1758835919841946.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Corless CL, Heinrich MC. Molecular pathobiology of gastrointestinal stromal sarcomas. Annu Rev Pathol. 2008;3:557–86.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Wu C-E, Tzen C-Y, Wang S-Y, Yeh C-N. Clinical Diagnosis of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor (GIST): From the Molecular Genetic Point of View. Cancers (Basel). 2019;11:679.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Martini M, De Santis MC, Braccini L, Gulluni F, Hirsch E. PI3K/AKT signaling pathway and cancer: an updated review. Ann Med. 2014;46:372–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Blanke CD, Rankin C, Demetri GD, Ryan CW, von Mehren M, Benjamin RS, et al. Phase III randomized, intergroup trial assessing imatinib mesylate at two dose levels in patients with unresectable or metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumors expressing the kit receptor tyrosine kinase: S0033. J Clin Oncol Off J Am Soc Clin Oncol. 2008;26:626–32.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Casali PG, Zalcberg J, Le Cesne A, Reichardt P, Blay J-Y, Lindner LH, et al. Ten-Year Progression-Free and Overall Survival in Patients With Unresectable or Metastatic GI Stromal Tumors: Long-Term Analysis of the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer, Italian Sarcoma Group, and Australasian Gastrointestinal Trials Group Intergroup Phase III Randomized Trial on Imatinib at Two Dose Levels. J Clin Oncol. 2017;35:1713–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Demetri GD, van Oosterom AT, Garrett CR, Blackstein ME, Shah MH, Verweij J, et al. Efficacy and safety of sunitinib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumour after failure of imatinib: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet (London, England). 2006;368:1329–38.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Demetri GD, Reichardt P, Kang YK, Blay JY, Rutkowski P, Gelderblom H, et al. Efficacy and safety of regorafenib for advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours after failure of imatinib and sunitinib (GRID): an international, multicentre, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet (London, England). 2013;381:295–302.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Blay JY, Serrano C, Heinrich MC, Zalcberg J, Bauer S, Gelderblom H, et al. Ripretinib in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours (INVICTUS): a double-blind, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:923–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Heinrich MC, Jones RL, von Mehren M, Schöffski P, Serrano C, Kang YK, et al. Avapritinib in advanced PDGFRA D842V-mutant gastrointestinal stromal tumour (NAVIGATOR): a multicentre, open-label, phase 1 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2020;21:935–46.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Blueprint Medicines Announces Top-line Results from Phase 3 VOYAGER Trial of Avapritinib versus Regorafenib in Patients with Advanced Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor.  https://ir.blueprintmedicines.com/news-releases/news-release-details/blueprint-medicines-announces-top-line-results-phase-3-voyager. Accessed 04 May 2022.

  13. Schöffski P, Mir O, Kasper B, Papai Z, Blay JY, Italiano A, et al. Activity and safety of the multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor cabozantinib in patients with metastatic gastrointestinal stromal tumour after treatment with imatinib and sunitinib: European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer phase II trial 1317 'CaboGIST'. Eur J Cancer (Oxford, England : 1990). 2020;134:62–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Bauer S, Duensing A, Demetri GD, Fletcher JA. KIT oncogenic signaling mechanisms in imatinib-resistant gastrointestinal stromal tumor: PI3-kinase/AKT is a crucial survival pathway. Oncogene. 2007;26:7560–8.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Yang J, Nie J, Ma X, Wei Y, Peng Y, Wei X. Targeting PI3K in cancer: mechanisms and advances in clinical trials. Mol Cancer. 2019;18:26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Van Looy T, Wozniak A, Floris G, Sciot R, Li H, Wellens J, et al. Phosphoinositide 3-Kinase Inhibitors Combined with Imatinib in Patient-Derived Xenograft Models of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors: Rationale and Efficacy. Clin Cancer Res. 2014;20:6071.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Floris G, Wozniak A, Sciot R, Li H, Friedman L, Van Looy T, et al. A Potent Combination of the Novel PI3K Inhibitor, GDC-0941, with Imatinib in Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumor Xenografts: Long-Lasting Responses after Treatment Withdrawal. Clin Cancer Res. 2013;19:620.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Juric D, Rodon J, Tabernero J, Janku F, Burris HA, Schellens JHM, et al. Phosphatidylinositol 3-Kinase α-Selective Inhibition With Alpelisib (BYL719) in PIK3CA-Altered Solid Tumors: Results From the First-in-Human Study. J Clin Oncol. 2018;36:1291–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Heinrich MC, Corless CL, Blanke CD, Demetri GD, Joensuu H, Roberts PJ, et al. Molecular correlates of imatinib resistance in gastrointestinal stromal tumors. J Clin Oncol. 2006;24:4764–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Liegl B, Kepten I, Le C, Zhu M, Demetri GD, Heinrich MC, et al. Heterogeneity of kinase inhibitor resistance mechanisms in GIST. J Pathol. 2008;216:64–74.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Debiec-Rychter M, Cools J, Dumez H, Sciot R, Stul M, Mentens N, et al. Mechanisms of resistance to imatinib mesylate in gastrointestinal stromal tumors and activity of the PKC412 inhibitor against imatinib-resistant mutants. Gastroenterology. 2005;128:270–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Mayer IA, Abramson VG, Formisano L, Balko JM, Estrada MV, Sanders ME, et al. A Phase Ib Study of Alpelisib (BYL719), a PI3Kα-Specific Inhibitor, with Letrozole in ER+/HER2- Metastatic Breast Cancer. Clin Cancer Res. 2017;23:26–34.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Jain S, Shah AN, Santa-Maria CA, Siziopikou K, Rademaker A, Helenowski I, et al. Phase I study of alpelisib (BYL-719) and trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC) after trastuzumab and taxane therapy. Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2018;171:371–81.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Juric D, Janku F, Rodón J, Burris HA, Mayer IA, Schuler M, et al. Alpelisib Plus Fulvestrant in PIK3CA-Altered and PIK3CA-Wild-Type Estrogen Receptor-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer: A Phase 1b Clinical Trial. JAMA Oncol. 2019;5:e184475.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Dunn LA, Riaz N, Fury MG, McBride SM, Michel L, Lee NY, et al. A Phase 1b Study of Cetuximab and BYL719 (Alpelisib) Concurrent with Intensity Modulated Radiation Therapy in Stage III-IVB Head and Neck Squamous Cell Carcinoma. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys. 2020;106:564–70.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Rodon J, Curigliano G, Delord J-P, Harb W, Azaro A, Han Y, et al. A Phase Ib, open-label, dose-finding study of alpelisib in combination with paclitaxel in patients with advanced solid tumors. Oncotarget. 2018;9:31709–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Fritsch C, Huang A, Chatenay-Rivauday C, Schnell C, Reddy A, Liu M, et al. Characterization of the novel and specific PI3Kα inhibitor NVP-BYL719 and development of the patient stratification strategy for clinical trials. Mol Cancer Ther. 2014;13:1117–29.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Kang YK, Ryu MH, Yoo C, Ryoo BY, Kim HJ, Lee JJ, et al. Resumption of imatinib to control metastatic or unresectable gastrointestinal stromal tumours after failure of imatinib and sunitinib (RIGHT): a randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2013;14:1175–82.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Mir O, Cropet C, Toulmonde M, Cesne AL, Molimard M, Bompas E, et al. Pazopanib plus best supportive care versus best supportive care alone in advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumours resistant to imatinib and sunitinib (PAZOGIST): a randomised, multicentre, open-label phase 2 trial. Lancet Oncol. 2016;17:632–41.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Gelderblom H, Jones RL, George S, Valverde Morales C, Benson C, Jean-Yves B, et al. Imatinib in combination with phosphoinositol kinase inhibitor buparlisib in patients with gastrointestinal stromal tumour who failed prior therapy with imatinib and sunitinib: a Phase 1b, multicentre study. Br J Cancer. 2020;122:1158–65.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the patients and their families, investigators and staff from all the participating sites. We thank Amrit Singh, PhD, Novartis Healthcare Pvt. Ltd., for providing medical editorial assistance with this paper.

Funding

The study was funded by the Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division in Medical Oncology, IRCSS Azienda Ospedaliero-Universitaria di Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Maria A. Pantaleo

  2. Portland VA Health Care System and Oregon Health and Science University, Knight Cancer Institute, Portland, Oregon, USA

    Michael C. Heinrich

  3. Institut Bergonie, Bordeaux, France

    Antoine Italiano

  4. Hospital Universitario Vall D Hebron, Medical Oncology, Barcelona, Spain

    Claudia Valverde

  5. Department of General Medical Oncology, University Hospitals Leuven, Leuven Cancer Institute, and Laboratory of Experimental Oncology, KU Leuven, Leuven, Belgium

    Patrick Schöffski

  6. Division of Medical Oncology, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO – IRCCS, St. Provinciale 142, Km 3.95 - 10060, Candiolo, TO, Italy

    Giovanni Grignani

  7. Department of Medical Oncology, University Medical Center Groningen, University of Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands

    Anna K. L. Reyners

  8. Department of Medical Oncology, Sarcoma Center, West German Cancer Center and German Consortium for Translational Cancer Research (DKTK), University Hospital Essen, Essen, Germany

    Sebastian Bauer

  9. Department of Oncology and Palliative Care Helios Klinikum Berlin Buch, Berlin, Germany

    Peter Reichardt

  10. Leeds Institute for Medical Research, St James’s University Hospital, Leeds, UK

    Daniel Stark

  11. Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation, East Hanover, NJ, USA

    Ghimja Berhanu

  12. Novartis Pharma AG, Basel, Switzerland

    Ulrike Brandt & Tommaso Stefanelli

  13. Department of Medical Oncology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands

    Hans Gelderblom

Authors
  1. Maria A. Pantaleo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael C. Heinrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Antoine Italiano
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Claudia Valverde
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Patrick Schöffski
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Giovanni Grignani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Anna K. L. Reyners
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Sebastian Bauer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Peter Reichardt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Daniel Stark
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Ghimja Berhanu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Ulrike Brandt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Tommaso Stefanelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Hans Gelderblom
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

HG contributed to study conceptualization and study design. MAP, MCH, AI, CV, PS, GG, AKLR, SB, PR, DS, and HG contributed to patient recruitment and data acquisition. UB contributed to quality control of data and algorithms, statistical analysis, and data interpretation. TS contributed to data analysis and interpretation. GB contributed to data interpretation. All authors were involved in manuscript development and its critical review. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Maria A. Pantaleo.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This study protocol was reviewed and approved by the independent ethics committee or institutional review board (Comitato Etico Indipendente del Policlinico Sant’Orsola-Malpighi Padiglione 3, Via Albertoni, 15, Bologna 40138). The study was conducted according to the ethical principles described in the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants gave signed informed consent to participate.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

MAP, PS, AKLR, DS, and HG had nothing to disclose. MCH reported personal fees and expert testimony from Novartis; grants and personal fees from Deciphera Pharmaceuticals and Blueprint Medicines; personal fees and equity interest from Molecular MD, outside the submitted work. In addition, MCH also reported a patent ‘Treatment of Gastrointestinal Stromal Tumors’ with royalties paid and partial salary support from a Veterans Affairs Merit Review Grant (I01 BX000338). AI reported grants and personal fees from Bayer; grants from Merck, MSD, Novartis, Chugai, and Astra Zeneca; and personal fees from Springworks, outside the submitted work. CV reported personal fees, advisory board, and travel expenses from Bayer, Pfizer, PharmaMar, and Lilly; and advisory board from Mundipharma and GSK, outside the submitted work. GG reported grants and personal fees from Novartis, Bayer, and PharmaMar; personal fees from Pfizer, Merck, EISAI, and Lilly; and travel support from Tesaro, outside the submitted work. SB reported grant from Incyte, Blueprint Medicines, and Novartis; personal fees from Deciphera, Blueprint Medicines, Lilly, Novartis, Daichii-Sankyo, Plexxikon, Exelixis, and Bayer; and CME from Pfizer, during the conduct of the study. In addition, SB also reported personal fees from PharmaMar, Lilly, Roche, and GSK, outside the submitted work. PR reported personal fees from Bayer, Clinigen, BMS, Roche, MSD, Deciphera, Novartis, Pfizer, PharmaMar, Lilly, and Amgen, outside the submitted work. GB, UB, and TS are Novartis employees. The authors declare no conflict of interest regarding the content discussed in the manuscript.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Pantaleo, M.A., Heinrich, M.C., Italiano, A. et al. A multicenter, dose-finding, phase 1b study of imatinib in combination with alpelisib as third-line treatment in patients with advanced gastrointestinal stromal tumor. BMC Cancer 22, 511 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09610-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12885-022-09610-4

Keywords

BMC Cancer

ISSN: 1471-2407

Contact us