A Study of TAS-120 in Patients With Advanced Solid Tumors

MTD:Highest dose level at which <33% of participants experience dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) during Cycle1. DLT: >=Grade(G)3: - nonhematologic toxicity, - nausea/vomiting lasting >48hrs(uncontrolled by aggressive antiemetic), - diarrhea lasting >48hrs (unresponsive to antidiarrheal drug); G4 neutropenia lasting >7days; Febrile neutropenia (ANC<1000/mm^3 with body temperature=>38.3°C/sustained temperature >=38°C for >1hr; Thrombocytopenia G4/G3 with bleeding, required blood transfusion; Corneal disorder worsened by 1 grade or more; Increased phosphorus: >=9mg/dL or >=7mg/dL lasting for >=7days or phosphate lowering therapy[PLT] for 7days); Creatinine increase (>1.5×upper limit of normal [ULN]) lasting for >=7 days associated with serum phosphorus >5.5 mg/dL(PLT=7days)/calcium×phosphorus >55 mg/dL(PLT=7days); Hypercalcemia G2 for >7days or G3; Ectopic de novo calcification in soft tissues; >G2 DLT: prevented Cycle 1 completion, inability to start Cycle 2 within 2 weeks of schedule.

RP2D was MTD or less. MTD: Highest dose level at which <33% of participants experience DLT) during Cycle1. DLT: >=Grade(G)3: - nonhematologic toxicity, - nausea/vomiting lasting >48hrs(uncontrolled by aggressive antiemetic), - diarrhea lasting >48hrs (unresponsive to antidiarrheal drug); G4 neutropenia lasting >7days; Febrile neutropenia (ANC<1000/mm^3 with body temperature=>38.3°C/sustained temperature >=38°C for >1hr; Thrombocytopenia G4/G3 with bleeding, required blood transfusion; Corneal disorder worsened by 1 grade or more; Increased phosphorus: >=9mg/dL or >=7mg/dL lasting for >=7days or phosphate lowering therapy[PLT] for 7days); Creatinine increase (>1.5×upper limit of normal [ULN]) lasting for >=7 days associated with serum phosphorus >5.5 mg/dL(PLT=7days)/calcium×phosphorus >55 mg/dL(PLT=7days); Hypercalcemia G2 for >7days or G3; Ectopic de novo calcification in soft tissues; >G2 DLT: prevented Cycle 1 completion, inability to start Cycle 2 within 2 weeks of schedule.

Objective response was defined as proportion of participants who had achieved best overall response of partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (RECIST) v1.1. The CR was defined as a disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (target or non-target) must had reduction in short axis to <10 millimeters (mm) and PR was defined as at least a 30 percent (%) decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions. For Cohorts 1 to 6: Objective response was based on Independent Review Committee (IRC) and for pooled Sub-cohort: Objective response was based on investigator review.

Objective response was defined as proportion of participants who had achieved best overall response of PR or CR per RECIST v1.1. CR was defined as a disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes (target or non-target) must had reduction in short axis to <10 mm and PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of target lesions. The Phase 2 evaluation of objective response was based on central independent CT/MRI image assessment.

A DOR was defined as the time (in months) from the first documentation of response (CR or PR) to the first documentation of objective progressive disease (PD) or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Participants who started subsequent anticancer therapy without a prior reported progression were censored at the last tumor assessments prior to initiation of the subsequent anticancer therapy. For Cohorts 1 to 6: DOR was based on IRC and for Group 3, 4, 5, 6 and for pooled Sub-cohort: DOR was based on investigator review.

A DOR was defined as the time (in months) from the first documentation of response (CR or PR) to the first documentation of objective tumor progression or death due to any cause, whichever occurred first. Participants who started subsequent anticancer therapy without a prior reported progression were censored at the last tumor assessments prior to initiation of the subsequent anticancer therapy. Kaplan-Meier method was used for the analysis.

A DCR was defined as the proportion of participants with objective evidence of CR, PR, or stable disease (SD), except that there was no requirement for a confirmation of an SD, if it is maintained for at least 6 weeks post treatment initiation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes might had reduction in short axis to <10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of the target lesions, taking as a reference the Baseline sum diameters. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taken as a reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. For Cohorts 1 to 6: DCR was based on IRC and for pooled Sub-cohort: DCR was based on investigator review.

A DCR was defined as the proportion of participants with objective evidence of CR, PR, or SD, except that there was no requirement for a confirmation of an SD response, if it is maintained for at least 6 weeks post treatment initiation. CR was defined as the disappearance of all target lesions. Any pathological lymph nodes might had reduction in short axis to <10 mm. PR was defined as at least a 30% decrease in the sum of diameters of the target lesions, taking as a reference the Baseline sum diameters. SD was defined as neither sufficient shrinkage to qualify for PR nor sufficient increase to qualify for PD, taken as a reference the smallest sum diameters while on study. DCR was based on IRC.

A PFS was defined as the time (in months) from the day of the first dose to the date of first documented disease progression or death (due to any cause), whichever occurred first. Participants who died without a reported disease progression were considered to have progressed on the date of their death, participants who did not progress or die were censored on the date of their last tumor assessment, participants who had no on-study assessments and did not die were censored on the first dosing date, and participants who started any subsequent anti-cancer therapy without a prior reported progression were censored at the last tumor assessment prior to initiation of the subsequent anti-cancer therapy. PFS assessment per protocol was by IRC assessment for Cohorts 1 to 6 and for pooled Sub-cohort: PFS was based on investigator review.

A PFS was defined as the time (in months) from the day of the first dose to the date of first objectively documented disease progression or death (any cause), whichever occurred first. Participants who had died without a reported disease progression were considered to have progressed on the date of their death, participants who did not progress or die were censored on the date of their last tumor assessment, participants who had no on-study assessments and did not die were censored on the first dosing date, and participants who started any subsequent anti-cancer therapy without a prior reported progression were censored at the last tumor assessment prior to initiation of the subsequent anti-cancer therapy. PFS was analyzed as using Kaplan-Meier estimate.

An OS was defined as the time (in months) from the date of the first dose to the death date. In the absence of death confirmation or for participants alive as of the OS cut-off date, survival time was censored at the date of last study follow-up, or the cut-off date, whichever was earlier.

An OS was defined as the time (in months) from the date of the first dose to the death date. In the absence of death confirmation or for participants alive as of the OS cut-off date, survival time was censored at the date of last study follow-up, or the cut-off date, whichever was earlier.

EQ-5D-3L was a self-administered standardized questionnaire to assess health outcome. It comprised 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension was rated on 3 levels of function: no problem, some problem and extreme problem. In this outcome measure, data were reported categorically as the number of participants who chose each category.

EQ-5D-3L was a self-administered standardized questionnaire to assess health outcome. It comprised 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension was rated on 3 levels of function: no problem, some problem and extreme problem. In this outcome measure, data were reported categorically as the number of participants who chose each category.

EQ-5D-3L was a self-administered standardized questionnaire to assess health outcome. It comprised 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension was rated on 3 levels of function: no problem, some problem and extreme problem. In this outcome measure, data were reported categorically as the number of participants who chose each category.

EQ-5D-3L was a self-administered standardized questionnaire to assess health outcome. It comprised 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension was rated on 3 levels of function: no problem, some problem and extreme problem. In this outcome measure, data were reported categorically as the number of participants who chose each category.

EQ-5D-3L was a self-administered standardized questionnaire to assess health outcome. It comprised 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. Each dimension was rated on 3 levels of function: no problem, some problem and extreme problem. In this outcome measure, data were reported categorically as the number of participants who chose each category.

EQ-5D-3L was a self-administered standardized questionnaire to assess health outcome. It comprised 5 dimensions: mobility, self-care, usual activities, pain/discomfort and anxiety/depression. A vertical VAS allows the participants to indicate their health state that day, and ranged from 0 (worst imaginable) to 100 (best imaginable), with higher scores indicating better health state.

EORTC QLQ-C30 is a cancer-specific instrument that contains 30 questions for evaluation of new chemotherapy & assessment of participant reported outcome. EORTC QLQ-C30 included global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL), functional scales (physical, role, cognitive, emotional, social), symptom scales (fatigue, pain, nausea/vomiting), and 6 single items (dyspnea, appetite loss, insomnia, constipation, diarrhea, financial difficulties). Most questions from QLQ-C30 are 4-point scale (1/Not at All to 4/Very Much), except Items 29-30, which comprise GHS scale & are 7-point scale (1/Very Poor to 7/Excellent). GHS total score is calculated as ([{Q29+Q30}/2]-1)/6*100. Answers are converted into grading scale, with values between 0 (worse outcome) to100 (best outcome). High score represents a favorable outcome with best quality of life for participant.

An AE was defined as any untoward medical condition that occurred in a participant from the time the informed consent form (ICF) was signed and does not necessarily had a causal relationship with the use of the product. An SAE was an AE that falls into one or more of the following categories: a. resulted in death, b. was life threatening, c. required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, d. resulted in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, e. was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, f. other important medical event.

An AE was defined as any untoward medical condition that occurs in a participant from the time the informed consent form (ICF) was signed and does not necessarily had a causal relationship with the use of the product. An SAE was an AE that falls into one or more of the following categories: a. resulted in death, b. was life threatening, c. required inpatient hospitalization or prolongation of existing hospitalization, d. resulted in persistent or significant disability or incapacity, e. was a congenital anomaly/birth defect, f. other important medical event.