Purpose The primary objective was to determine the recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of checkpoint kinase 1 inhibitor, prexasertib, in combination with the p38 mitogen-activated protein kinase inhibitor, ralimetinib, which may be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer. Methods This Phase 1, nonrandomized, open-label, dose-escalation study of prexasertib+ralimetinib included patients with advanced and/or metastatic cancer, followed by a planned cohort expansion in patients with colorectal or non-small-cell lung cancer with KRAS and/or BRAF mutations. Intravenous prexasertib was administered at 60 mg/m2 (days 1 and 15 of a 28-day cycle), together with oral ralimetinib every 12 h (days 1 to 14 at 100 mg [Cohort 1, n = 3] or 200 mg [Cohort 2, n = 6]). Dose escalations for each agent were planned using a model-based 3 + 3 escalation paradigm. Safety was assessed using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (CTCAE) v4.0X. Tumor response was determined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. Results Nine patients were treated; 3 experienced dose-limiting toxicities, all in Cohort 2, prohibiting further dose escalation. The most common ≥Grade 3 adverse event was neutrophil count decreased; other reported ≥Grade 3 hematological toxicities included febrile neutropenia and anemia. The pharmacokinetics of prexasertib+ralimetinib was comparable to the monotherapy population profile for each agent. One patient achieved a best overall response of stable disease (for 2 cycles); there were no complete/partial responses. Conclusions This study did not achieve its primary objective of establishing an RP2D of combination prexasertib + ralimetinib that could be safely administered to patients with advanced cancer.

Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) inhibition following chemotherapy-elicited DNA damage overrides cell cycle arrest and induces mitotic catastrophe and cell death. GDC-0575 is a highly-selective oral small-molecule Chk1 inhibitor that results in tumor shrinkage and growth delay in xenograft models. We evaluated the safety, tolerability, and pharmacokinetic properties of GDC-0575 alone and in combination with gemcitabine. Antitumor activity and Chk1 pathway modulation were assessed.
In this phase I open-label study, in the dose escalation stage, patients were enrolled in a GDC-0575 monotherapy Arm (1) or GDC-0575 combination with gemcitabine Arm (2) to determine the maximum tolerated dose. Patients in arm 2 received either i.v. gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 (arm 2a) or 500 mg/m2 (arm 2b), followed by GDC-0575 (45 or 80 mg, respectively, as RP2D). Stage II enrolled disease-specific cohorts.
Of 102 patients treated, 70% were female, the median age was 59 years (range 27-85), and 47% were Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group PS 0. The most common tumor type was breast (37%). The most frequent adverse events (all grades) related to GDC-0575 and/or gemcitabine were neutropenia (68%), anemia (48%), nausea (43%), fatigue (42%), and thrombocytopenia (35%). Maximum concentrations of GDC-0575 were achieved within 2 hours of dosing, and half-life was ∼23 hours. No pharmacokinetic drug-drug interaction was observed between GDC-0575 and gemcitabine. Among patients treated with GDC-0575 and gemcitabine, there were four confirmed partial responses, three occurring in patients with tumors harboring TP53 mutation. Pharmacodynamic data were consistent with GDC-0575 inhibition of gemcitabine-induced expression of pCDK1/2.
GDC-0575 can be safely administered as a monotherapy and in combination with gemcitabine; however, overall tolerability with gemcitabine was modest. Hematological toxicities were frequent but manageable. Preliminary antitumor activity was observed but limited to a small number of patients with a variety of refractory solid tumors treated with GDC-0575 and gemcitabine.
NCT01564251.

LC MS/MS methods to measure prexasertib in mouse plasma and Ringer\'s solution containing 0.5% BSA (Ringer\'s/BSA) were developed and validated. Liquid-liquid extraction with tert-butyl methyl ether was used to extract prexasertib from mouse plasma and Ringer\'s/BSA. Reverse phase chromatography with gradient elution was performed to separate prexasertib from the endogenous interference in the matrix, followed by MS detection using positive ion MRM mode. The initial calibration curve for mouse plasma samples ranged from 1 to 500 ng/ml, and after validation of that curve and use in a preliminary study another calibration curve (0.2-200 ng/ml) was created to enable the quantitation of prexasertib at lower concentrations. The method described was precise and accurate with %CV in precision studies of ≤ 6.7% and accuracies within 95.0-110% of nominal target concentration across all concentrations tested for both matrices. This validated method was successfully applied in the analysis of prexasertib in mouse plasma and dialysate samples collected during a cerebral microdialysis study.

Gemcitabine irreversibly inhibits ribonucleotide reductase and induces S phase arrest but whether this occurs in tumors in mice or patients has not been established. Tumor cells in culture were incubated with gemcitabine for 6 h to approximate the administration schedule in a patient. Concentrations that induced persistent S phase arrest thereafter correlated with cell killing. Administration of gemcitabine to mice also demonstrated a persistent S phase arrest in their tumor. The minimum dose that induced almost complete S phase arrest after 24 h (40 mg/kg) was well below the maximum tolerated dose in mice. S phase arrest was also observed in tumors of bladder cancer patients receiving gemcitabine. The Chk1 inhibitor MK-8776 sensitized cells to gemcitabine with the greatest cell killing when added 18 h after gemcitabine. In mice, the administration of MK-8776 18 h after gemcitabine elicited positivity for the DNA damage marker γH2AX; this also occurred at relatively low dose (40 mg/kg) gemcitabine. Hence, in both cell culture and xenografts, MK-8776 can markedly enhance cell killing of cells reversibly arrested in S phase by gemcitabine. Some cell lines are hypersensitive to MK-8776 as monotherapy, but this was not observed in xenograft models. Effective monotherapy requires a higher dose of Chk1 inhibitor, and target inhibition over a longer time period as compared to its use in combination. These results have important implications for combining Chk1 inhibitors with gemcitabine and suggest that Chk1 inhibitors with increased bioavailability may have improved efficacy both in combination and as monotherapy.

Cytosine arabinoside (AraC) remains the backbone of most treatment regimens for acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Incorporation of AraC into DNA activates checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1), leading to cell-cycle arrest and diminished AraC cytotoxicity, which can be reversed by the selective Chk1 inhibitor MK-8776. Building on a Phase I trial, we conducted a phase II trial comparing timed sequential AraC with or without MK-8776.
Patients with relapsed or primary refractory AML were randomized 1:1 to receive either AraC with MK-8776 (Arm A); or AraC alone (Arm B).
32 patients were treated: 14 assigned to Arm A and 18 to Arm B. There were 5 (36%) complete responses (CR/CRi) and 1 (7%) partial response (PR) in Arm A, and 8 (44%) CR/CRis and 1 (6%) PR in Arm B. Median survival did not differ significantly between the two groups (5.9months in Arm A vs. 4.5 months in Arm B). MK-8776 led to a robust increase in DNA damage in circulating leukemic blasts as measured by increased γ-H2AX (16.9%±6.1% prior and 36.4%±6.8% at one hour after MK-8776 infusion, p=0.016).
Response rates and survival were similar between the two groups in spite of evidence that MK-8776 augmented DNA damage in circulating leukemic blasts. Better than expected results in the control arm using timed sequential AraC and truncated patient enrollment may have limited the ability to detect clinical benefit from the combination.

The aim of this study was to determine whether checkpoint kinase 1 inihibitor (CHK1), LY2603618, and gemcitabine prolong overall survival (OS) compared to gemcitabine alone in patients with unresectable pancreatic cancer.
Patients with Stage II-IV locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer were randomized (2:1) to either 230 mg of LY2603618/1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine combined or 1000 mg/m2 gemcitabine alone. OS was assessed using both a Bayesian augment control model and traditional frequentist analysis for inference. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall response rate (ORR), duration of response, pharmacokinetics (PK), and safety (Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events [AEs] v 3.0) were also evaluated.
Ninety-nine patients (n = 65, LY2603618/gemcitabine; n = 34, gemcitabine) were randomized (intent-to-treat population). The median OS (months) was 7.8 (range, 0.3-18.9) with LY2603618/gemcitabine and 8.3 (range, 0.8-19.1+) with gemcitabine. Similarly, in a Bayesian analysis, the study was not positive since the posterior probability that LY2603618/gemcitabine was superior to gemcitabine in improving OS was 0.3, which did not exceed the prespecified threshold of 0.8. No significant improvements in PFS, ORR, or duration of response were observed. Drug-related treatment-emergent AEs in both arms included nausea, thrombocytopenia, fatigue, and neutropenia. The severity of AEs with LY2603618/gemcitabine was comparable to gemcitabine. The LY2603618 exposure targets (AUC(0-∞) ≥21,000 ng∙hr/mL and Cmax ≥2000 ng/mL) predicted for maximum pharmacodynamic response were achieved after 230 mg of LY2603618.
LY2603618/gemcitabine was not superior to gemcitabine for the treatment of patients with pancreatic cancer.
NCT00839332 . Clinicaltrials.gov. Date of registration: 6 February 2009.

Checkpoint kinase 1 (Chk1) is a promising target for the design of novel anticancer agents. In the present work, molecular docking simulations and three-dimensional quantitative structure-activity relationship (3D-QSAR) studies were performed on pyridyl aminothiazole derivatives as Chk1 inhibitors. AutoDock was used to determine the probable binding conformations of all the compounds inside the active site of Chk1. Comparative molecular field analysis (CoMFA) and comparative molecular similarity indices analysis (CoMSIA) models were developed based on the docking conformations and alignments. The CoMFA model produced statistically significant results with a cross-validated correlation coefficient (q2) of 0.608 and a coefficient of determination (r2) of 0.972. The reliable CoMSIA model with q2 of 0.662 and r2 of 0.970 was obtained from the combination of steric, electrostatic and hydrogen bond acceptor fields. The predictive power of the models were assessed using an external test set of 14 compounds and showed reasonable external predictabilities (r(2)pred) of 0.668 and 0.641 for CoMFA and CoMSIA models, respectively. The models were further evaluated by leave-ten-out cross-validation, bootstrapping and progressive scrambling analyses. The study provides valuable information about the key structural elements that are required in the rational design of potential drug candidates of this class of Chk1 inhibitors.

Many anticancer agents damage DNA and activate cell cycle checkpoints that permit time for the cells to repair their DNA and recover. These checkpoints have undergone intense investigation as potential therapeutic targets and Chk1 inhibitors have emerged as promising novel therapeutic agents. Chk1 was initially recognized as a regulator of the G2/M checkpoint, but has since been demonstrated to have additional roles in replication fork stability, replication origin firing and homologous recombination. Inhibition of these pathways can dramatically sensitize cells to some antimetabolites. Current clinical trials with Chk1 inhibitors are primarily focusing on their combination with gemcitabine. Here, we discuss the mechanisms of, and emerging uses for Chk1 inhibitors as single agents and in combination with antimetabolites. We also discuss the pharmacodynamic issues that need to be addressed in attaining maximum efficacy in vivo. Following administration of gemcitabine to mice and humans, tumour cells accumulate in S phase for at least 24 h before recovering. In addition, stalled replication forks evolve over time to become more Chk1 dependent. We emphasize the need to assess cell cycle perturbation and Chk1 dependence of tumours in patients administered gemcitabine. These assessments will define the optimum dose and schedule for administration of these drug combinations.