CAMPTOSAR Solution for injection Ref.[49708] Active ingredients: Irinotecan

Irinotecan serves as a water-soluble precursor of the lipophilic metabolite SN-38. SN-38 is formed from irinotecan by carboxylesterase-mediated cleavage of the carbamate bond between the camptothecin moiety and the dipiperidino side chain. SN-38 is approximately 1000 times as potent as irinotecan as an inhibitor of topoisomerase I purified from human and rodent tumor cell lines. In vitro cytotoxicity assays show that the potency of SN-38 relative to irinotecan varies from 2- to 2000-fold; however, the plasma area under the concentration versus time curve (AUC) values for SN-38 are 2% to 8% of irinotecan and SN-38 is 95% bound to plasma proteins compared to approximately 50% bound to plasma proteins for irinotecan [see Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)]. The precise contribution of SN-38 to the activity of CAMPTOSAR is thus unknown. Both irinotecan and SN-38 exist in an active lactone form and an inactive hydroxy acid anion form. A pH-dependent equilibrium exists between the two forms such that an acid pH promotes the formation of the lactone, while a more basic pH favors the hydroxy acid anion form.

Administration of irinotecan has resulted in antitumor activity in mice bearing cancers of rodent origin and in human carcinoma xenografts of various histological types.

After intravenous infusion of irinotecan in humans, irinotecan plasma concentrations decline in a multiexponential manner, with a mean terminal elimination half-life of about 6 to 12 hours. The mean terminal elimination half-life of the active metabolite SN-38 is about 10 to 20 hours. The half-lives of the lactone (active) forms of irinotecan and SN-38 are similar to those of total irinotecan and SN-38, as the lactone and hydroxy acid forms are in equilibrium.

Over the recommended dose range of 50 to 350 mg/m², the AUC of irinotecan increases linearly with dose; the AUC of SN-38 increases less than proportionally with dose. Maximum concentrations of the active metabolite SN-38 are generally seen within 1 hour following the end of a 90-minute infusion of irinotecan. Pharmacokinetic parameters for irinotecan and SN-38 following a 90-minute infusion of irinotecan at dose levels of 125 and 340 mg/m² determined in two clinical studies in patients with solid tumors are summarized in Table 9:

Table 9. Summary of Mean (±Standard Deviation) Irinotecan and SN-38 Pharmacokinetic Parameters in Patients With Solid Tumors:

C_max - Maximum plasma concentration
AUC_0–24 - Area under the plasma concentration-time curve from time
0 to 24 hours after the end of the 90-minute infusion
t_1/2 - Terminal elimination half-life
V_z - Volume of distribution of terminal elimination phase
CL – Total systemic clearance

^* Plasma specimens collected for 24 hours following the end of the 90-minute infusion.
^† Plasma specimens collected for 48 hours following the end of the 90-minute infusion. Because of the longer collection period, these values provide a more accurate reflection of the terminal elimination half-lives of irinotecan and SN-38.

Distribution

Irinotecan exhibits moderate plasma protein binding (30% to 68% bound). SN-38 is highly bound to human plasma proteins (approximately 95% bound). The plasma protein to which irinotecan and SN-38 predominantly binds is albumin.

Elimination

Metabolism

Irinotecan is subject to extensive metabolic conversion by various enzyme systems,
including esterases that form an active metabolite SN-38, and UGT1A1 which mediates the glucuronidation of SN-38 to form an inactive metabolite. SN-38 glucuronide had 1/50 to 1/100 the activity of SN-38. Patients who are homozygous for either the UGT1A1*28 or *6 alleles, or who are compound heterozygous for these alleles, have higher SN-38 AUC than patients with the wild-type UGT1A1 alleles [see Dosage and Administration (2.3), Warnings and Precautions (5.3), and Clinical Pharmacology (12.5)].

Irinotecan can also undergo CYP3A4-mediated oxidative metabolism to several inactive metabolites, one of which can be hydrolyzed by carboxylesterase to release the active metabolite SN-38.

Excretion

The disposition of irinotecan has not been fully elucidated in humans. The urinary excretion of irinotecan is 11% to 20%; SN-38, <1%; and SN-38 glucuronide, 3%. The cumulative biliary and urinary excretion of irinotecan and its metabolites (SN-38 and SN38 glucuronide) over a period of 48 hours following administration of irinotecan in two patients ranged from approximately 25% (100 mg/m²) to 50% (300 mg/m²).

Specific Populations

Geriatric Patients

The pharmacokinetics of irinotecan administered using the weekly schedule was evaluated in a study of 183 patients that was prospectively designed to investigate the effect of age on irinotecan toxicity. Results from this trial indicate that there are no differences in the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan, SN-38, and SN-38 glucuronide in patients <65 years of age compared with patients ≥65 years of age. In a study of 162 patients that was not prospectively designed to investigate the effect of age, small (less than 18%) but statistically significant differences in dose-normalized irinotecan pharmacokinetic parameters in patients <65 years of age compared to patients ≥65 years of age were observed. Although dose-normalized AUC for SN-38 in patients ≥65 years of age was 11% higher than in patients <65 years of age, this difference was not statistically significant. No change in the starting dose is recommended for geriatric patients receiving the weekly dosage schedule of irinotecan [see Dosage and Administration (2)].

Male and Female Patients

The pharmacokinetics of irinotecan do not appear to be influenced by gender.

Racial and Ethnic Groups

The influence of race on the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan has not been evaluated.

Patients with Renal Impairment

The influence of renal impairment on the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan has not been evaluated.

Patients with Hepatic Impairment

Irinotecan clearance is diminished in patients with hepatic impairment while exposure to the active metabolite SN-38 is increased relative to that in patients with normal hepatic function. The magnitude of these effects is proportional to the degree of liver impairment as measured by elevations in total bilirubin and transaminase concentrations. However, the tolerability of irinotecan in patients with hepatic dysfunction (bilirubin greater than 2 mg/dl) has not been assessed sufficiently.

Drug Interaction Studies

Clinical Studies and Model-Informed Approaches

Dexamethasone, a moderate CYP3A4 inducer, does not appear to alter the pharmacokinetics of irinotecan.

In Vitro Studies

Irinotecan and the metabolites SN-38 and aminopentane carboxylic acid (APC) do not inhibit cytochrome P-450 isozymes.

The active metabolite SN-38 is further metabolized via UGT1A1. Genetic variants of the UGT1A1 gene such as the UGT1A1*28 [(TA)7] and *6 alleles lead to reduced UGT1A1 enzyme expression or activity and decreased function to a similar extent.

Individuals who are homozygous or compound (double) heterozygous for these alleles (e.g., *28/*28, *6/*6, *6/*28) are UGT1A1 poor metabolizers and are at increased risk for severe or life-threatening neutropenia from CAMPTOSAR due to elevated systemic exposure to SN-38. The UGT1A1*6/*6 genotype should not be confused with 6/6 genotype, which is sometimes used to represent the genotype of individuals who are wild type for UGT1A1*28. Individuals who are heterozygous for either the UGT1A1*28 or *6 alleles (*1/*6, *1/*28) are UGT1A1 intermediate metabolizers and may also have an increased risk of severe or life-threatening neutropenia [see Dosage and Administration (2.3), Warnings and Precautions (5.3), and Clinical Pharmacology (12.3)].

Published studies have shown that individuals with UGT1A1*28 and *6 alleles may be at an increased risk of severe diarrhea. The risk evidence appears greater in UGT1A1*28 and *6 homozygous patients and in those taking irinotecan doses > 125 mg/m ² [see Warnings and Precautions (5.1)].

UGT1A1*28 and *6 alleles occur at various frequencies in different populations. Approximately 20% of Black or African American, 10% of White, and 2% of East Asian individuals are homozygous for the UGT1A1*28 allele. Approximately 2-6 % of East Asian individuals are homozygous for the UGT1A1*6 allele. The UGT1A1*6 allele is uncommon in Black or African American or in White individuals. Decreased function alleles other than UGT1A1*28 and *6 may be present in certain populations.

Long-term carcinogenicity studies with irinotecan were not conducted. Rats were, however, administered intravenous doses of 2 mg/kg or 25 mg/kg irinotecan once per week for 13 weeks (in separate studies, the 25 mg/kg dose produced an irinotecan C_max and AUC that were about 7.0 times and 1.3 times the respective values in patients administered 125 mg/m² weekly) and were then allowed to recover for 91 weeks. Under these conditions, there was a significant linear trend with dose for the incidence of combined uterine horn endometrial stromal polyps and endometrial stromal sarcomas. Irinotecan was clastogenic both in vitro (chromosome aberrations in Chinese hamster ovary cells) and in vivo (micronucleus test in mice). Neither irinotecan nor its active metabolite SN-38 was mutagenic in the in vitro Ames assay.

No significant adverse effects on fertility and general reproductive performance were observed after intravenous administration of irinotecan in doses of up to 6 mg/kg/day to rats and rabbits; however, atrophy of male reproductive organs was observed after multiple daily irinotecan doses both in rodents at 20 mg/kg and in dogs at 0.4 mg/kg. In separate studies in rodents, this dose produced an irinotecan C_max and AUC about 5 and 1 times, respectively, of the corresponding values in patients administered 125 mg/m² weekly. In dogs this dose produced an irinotecan C_max and AUC about one-half and 1/15th, respectively, of the corresponding values in patients administered 125 mg/m² weekly.

Irinotecan has been studied in clinical trials in combination with 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) and leucovorin (LV) and as a single agent [see Dosage and Administration (2)]. When given as a component of combination-agent treatment, irinotecan was either given with a weekly schedule of bolus 5-FU/LV or with an every-2-week schedule of infusional 5-FU/LV. Weekly and once-every-3-week dosage schedules were used for the single-agent irinotecan studies. Clinical studies of combination and single-agent use are described below.

14.1 Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

First-Line Therapy in Combination with 5-FU/LV: Studies 1 and 2

Two phase 3, randomized, controlled, multinational clinical trials support the use of CAMPTOSAR Injection as first-line treatment of patients with metastatic carcinoma of the colon or rectum. In each study, combinations of irinotecan with 5-FU and LV were compared with 5-FU and LV alone. Study 1 compared combination irinotecan/bolus 5-FU/LV therapy given weekly with a standard bolus regimen of 5-FU/LV alone given daily for 5 days every 4 weeks; an irinotecan-alone treatment arm given on a weekly schedule was also included. Study 2 evaluated two different methods of administering infusional 5-FU/LV, with or without irinotecan. In both studies, concomitant medications such as antiemetics, atropine, and loperamide were given to patients for prophylaxis and/or management of symptoms from treatment. In Study 2, a 7-day course of fluoroquinolone antibiotic prophylaxis was given in patients whose diarrhea persisted for greater than 24 hours despite loperamide or if they developed a fever in addition to diarrhea. Treatment with oral fluoroquinolone was also initiated in patients who developed an absolute neutrophil count (ANC) <500/mm³, even in the absence of fever or diarrhea. Patients in both studies also received treatment with intravenous antibiotics if they had persistent diarrhea or fever or if ileus developed.

In both studies, the combination of irinotecan/5-FU/LV therapy resulted in significant improvements in objective tumor response rates, time to tumor progression, and survival when compared with 5-FU/LV alone. These differences in survival were observed in spite of second-line therapy in a majority of patients on both arms, including crossover to irinotecan-containing regimens in the control arm. Patient characteristics and major efficacy results are shown in Table 10.

Table 10. Combination Dosage Schedule: Study Results:

^* Study 1: N=225 (irinotecan/5-FU/LV),N=219 (5-FU/LV),N=223 (irinotecan), Study 2: N=199 (irinotecan/5-FU/LV),N=186 (5-FU/LV)
^† Confirmed ≥ 4 to 6 weeks after first evidence of objective response
^‡ Chi-square test
^§ Log-rank test

Improvement was noted with irinotecan-based combination therapy relative to 5-FU/LV when response rates and time to tumor progression were examined across the following demographic and disease-related subgroups (age, gender, ethnic origin, performance status, extent of organ involvement with cancer, time from diagnosis of cancer, prior adjuvant therapy, and baseline laboratory abnormalities). Figures 1 and 2 illustrate the Kaplan-Meier survival curves for the comparison of irinotecan/5-FU/LV versus 5-FU/LV in Studies 1 and 2, respectively.

Second-Line Therapy After 5-FU-Based Treatment

4 Weekly Doses on a 6-Week Cycle: Studies 3, 4, and 5

Data from three open-label, single-agent, clinical studies, involving a total of 304 patients in 59 centers, support the use of CAMPTOSAR in the treatment of patients with metastatic cancer of the colon or rectum that has recurred or progressed following treatment with 5-FU-based therapy. These studies were designed to evaluate tumor response rate and do not provide information on effects on survival and disease-related symptoms. In each study, CAMPTOSAR was administered in repeated 6-week cycles consisting of a 90-minute intravenous infusion once weekly for 4 weeks, followed by a 2-week rest period. Starting doses of CAMPTOSAR in these trials were 100, 125, or 150 mg/m², but the 150-mg/m² dose was poorly tolerated (due to high rates of grade 4 late diarrhea and febrile neutropenia). Study 3 enrolled 48 patients and was conducted by a single investigator at several regional hospitals. Study 4 was a multicenter study conducted by the North Central Cancer Treatment Group. All 90 patients enrolled in Study 4 received a starting dose of 125 mg/m². Study 5 was a multicenter study that enrolled 166 patients from 30 institutions. The initial dose in Study 5 was 125 mg/m² but was reduced to 100 mg/m² because the toxicity seen at the 125-mg/m² dose was perceived to be greater than that seen in previous studies. All patients in these studies had metastatic colorectal cancer, and the majority had disease that recurred or progressed following a 5-FU-based regimen administered for metastatic disease. The results of the individual studies are shown in Table 11.

Table 11. Weekly Dosage Schedule: Study Results:

In the intent-to-treat analysis of the pooled data across all three studies, 193 of the 304 patients began therapy at the recommended starting dose of 125 mg/m². Among these 193 patients, 2 complete and 27 partial responses were observed, for an overall response rate of 15.0% (95% Confidence Interval [CI], 10.0% to 20.1%) at this starting dose. A considerably lower response rate was seen with a starting dose of 100 mg/m². The majority of responses were observed within the first two cycles of therapy, but responses did occur in later cycles of treatment (one response was observed after the eighth cycle). The median response duration for patients beginning therapy at 125 mg/m² was 5.8 months (range, 2.6 to 15.1 months). Of the 304 patients treated in the three studies, response rates to CAMPTOSAR were similar in males and females and among patients older and younger than 65 years. Rates were also similar in patients with cancer of the colon or cancer of the rectum and in patients with single and multiple metastatic sites. The response rate was 18.5% in patients with a performance status of 0 and 8.2% in patients with a performance status of 1 or 2. Patients with a performance status of 3 or 4 have not been studied. Over half of the patients responding to CAMPTOSAR had not responded to prior 5-FU. Patients who had received previous irradiation to the pelvis responded to CAMPTOSAR at approximately the same rate as those who had not previously received irradiation.

Once-Every-3-Week Dosage Schedule

Single Arm Study: Study 6

Data from an open-label, single-agent, single-arm, multicenter, clinical study involving a total of 132 patients support a once every-3-week dosage schedule of irinotecan in the treatment of patients with metastatic cancer of the colon or rectum that recurred or progressed following treatment with 5-FU. Patients received a starting dose of 350 mg/m² given by 30-minute intravenous infusion once every 3 weeks. Among the 132 previously treated patients in this trial, the intent-to-treat response rate was 12.1% (95% CI, 7.0% to 18.1%).

Randomized Studies: Studies 7 and 8

Two multicenter, randomized, clinical studies further support the use of irinotecan given by the once-every-3-week dosage schedule in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer whose disease has recurred or progressed following prior 5-FU therapy. In Study 7, second-line irinotecan therapy plus best supportive care was compared with best supportive care alone. In Study 8, second-line irinotecan therapy was compared with infusional 5-FU-based therapy. In both studies, irinotecan was administered intravenously at a starting dose of 350 mg/m² over 90 minutes once every 3 weeks. The starting dose was 300 mg/m² for patients who were 70 years and older or who had a performance status of 2. The highest total dose permitted was 700 mg. Dose reductions and/or administration delays were permitted in the event of severe hematologic and/or nonhematologic toxicities while on treatment. Best supportive care was provided to patients in both arms of Study 7 and included antibiotics, analgesics, corticosteroids, transfusions, psychotherapy, or any other symptomatic therapy as clinically indicated. In both studies, concomitant medications such as antiemetics, atropine, and loperamide were given to patients for prophylaxis and/or management of symptoms from treatment. If late diarrhea persisted for greater than 24 hours despite loperamide, a 7-day course of fluoroquinolone antibiotic prophylaxis was given. Patients in the control arm of the Study 8 received one of the following 5-FU regimens: (1) LV, 200 mg/m² IV over 2 hours; followed by 5-FU, 400 mg/m² IV bolus; followed by 5-FU, 600 mg/m² continuous IV infusion over 22 hours on days 1 and 2 every 2 weeks; (2) 5-FU, 250 to 300 mg/m²/day protracted continuous IV infusion until toxicity; (3) 5-FU, 2.6 to 3 g/m² IV over 24 hours every week for 6 weeks with or without LV, 20 to 500 mg/m²/day every week IV for 6 weeks with 2-week rest between cycles. Patients were to be followed every 3 to 6 weeks for 1 year.

A total of 535 patients were randomized in the two studies at 94 centers. The primary endpoint in both studies was survival. The studies demonstrated a significant overall survival advantage for irinotecan compared with best supportive care (p=0.0001) and infusional 5-FU-based therapy (p=0.035) as shown in Figures 3 and 4. In Study 7, median survival for patients treated with irinotecan was 9.2 months compared with 6.5 months for patients receiving best supportive care. In Study 8, median survival for patients treated with irinotecan was 10.8 months compared with 8.5 months for patients receiving infusional 5-FU-based therapy. Multiple regression analyses determined that patients' baseline characteristics also had a significant effect on survival. When adjusted for performance status and other baseline prognostic factors, survival among patients treated with irinotecan remained significantly longer than in the control populations (p=0.001 for Study 7 and p=0.017 for Study 8). Measurements of pain, performance status, and weight loss were collected prospectively in the two studies; however, the plan for the analysis of these data was defined retrospectively. When comparing irinotecan with best supportive care in Study 7, this analysis showed a statistically significant advantage for irinotecan, with longer time to development of pain (6.9 months versus 2.0 months), time to performance status deterioration (5.7 months versus 3.3 months), and time to > 5% weight loss (6.4 months versus 4.2 months). Additionally, 33.3% (33/99) of patients with a baseline performance status of 1 or 2 showed an improvement in performance status when treated with irinotecan versus 11.3% (7/62) of patients receiving best supportive care (p=0.002). Because of the inclusion of patients with non-measurable disease, intent-to-treat response rates could not be assessed.

Figure 3. Survival Second-Line Irinotecan vs Best Supportive Care (BSC) - Study 7:

Figure 4. Survival Second-Line Irinotecan vs Infusion 5-FU – Study 8:

Table 12. Once-Every-3-Week Dosage Schedule: Study Results:

^* BSC = best supportive care
^† Relative dose intensity for irinotecan based on planned dose intensity of 116.7 and 100 mg/m /wk corresponding with 350 and 300 mg/m² starting doses, respectively.

In the two randomized studies, the EORTC QLQ-C30 instrument was utilized. At the start of each cycle of therapy, patients completed a questionnaire consisting of 30 questions, such as “Did pain interfere with daily activities?” (1 = Not at All, to 4 = Very Much) and “Do you have any trouble taking a long walk?” (Yes or No). The answers from the 30 questions were converted into 15 subscales, that were scored from 0 to 100, and the global health status subscale that was derived from two questions about the patient’s sense of general well being in the past week. The results as summarized in Table 13 are based on patients' worst post-baseline scores. In Study 7, a multivariate analysis and univariate analyses of the individual subscales were performed and corrected for multivariate testing. Patients receiving irinotecan reported significantly better results for the global health status, on two of five functional subscales, and on four of nine symptom subscales. As expected, patients receiving irinotecan noted significantly more diarrhea than those receiving best supportive care. In Study 8, the multivariate analysis on all 15 subscales did not indicate a statistically significant difference between irinotecan and infusional 5-FU.

Table 13. EORTC QLQ-C30: Mean Worst Post-Baseline Score*:

^* For the five functional subscales and global health status subscale, higher scores imply better functioning, whereas, on the nine symptom subscales, higher scores imply more severe symptoms. The subscale scores of each patient were collected at each visit until the patient dropped out of the study.