In GIST, what different oral TKIs are available, and what are their practical advantages vs limitations when it comes to dose individualization, toxicity management, and therapeutic exposure?
Patients with GIST are managed with TKIs. The agents that are FDA approved in the United States include imatinib, sunitinib [Sutent], regorafenib [Stivarga], and ripretinib [Qinlock]. There are 3 or 4 other TKIs being studied in various phases of clinical trials that may also be heading toward approval, so the future is bright with these oral agents.
At the same time, these are patients with GI cancers, so they may have had portions of their stomach or small intestine resected, or they may have tumors compressing the stomach or small intestine. Oral agents can therefore be challenging to deliver at times. Sometimes, even when the label doesn't address it, we crush tablets and administer them as a solution, a slurry, or mixed into something like applesauce. We have even administered them through feeding tubes, which I consider off-label use.
Some patients may need to alter how they take their medication to manage toxicities or fit treatment into their schedules. How can these modifications affect drug exposure, and what questions should clinicians routinely ask patients to identify these issues?
Oral agents are increasingly common in our practice. When I first started treating patients with sarcoma, we only had intravenous medicines. It has been a real learning curve for many of us in oncology as we increasingly use oral agents, which have a lot of advantages. They have longer stability, they are typically dosed daily, and you can make adjustments and fine-tune dosing for toxicity.
In my practice, the standard dose for imatinib in a patient with a KIT exon 11 mutation in either the metastatic or adjuvant setting is 400 mg per day, which is the recommended FDA-approved dose. For patients with exon 9 mutations, there is some rationale to use a higher dose of 800 mg per day, which comes with more imatinib-related AEs. Therapeutic drug monitoring by looking at imatinib plasma levels did not really pan out as a dosing panacea the way we might dose chemotherapy by body surface area. We start everyone at 400 mg, and rather than dosing based on weight, we dose based on tolerability, treating patients as close to the target dose as possible without causing unacceptable toxicity.
In my practice, I often use a crescendo approach. I might start a patient at 200 mg per day of imatinib—and the same principle applies to sunitinib, regorafenib, and ripretinib—see how they do for 2 weeks, have a clinic visit, discuss AEs, check labs for liver toxicity and anemia, and if they're doing well at 200 mg, increase to 400 mg. For sunitinib, we might start at 12.5 mg; for regorafenib, we might start at 200 or 400 mg per day, varying the approach based on how we anticipate the patient will tolerate the medicine.
It gets a little tricky when a patient is at 200 mg per day of imatinib and we think they may not be ready for 400 mg but are doing reasonably well. We might give it another week or 2, reassess, and then dose-escalate or try 300 mg for a couple of weeks. But 300 mg per day is difficult to achieve practically, because a 400 mg tablet can be split in half with a pill cutter to give 200 mg, but you can't realistically divide a tablet into precise 100 mg pieces. You could write a new prescription for 100 mg tablets, but that generates a great deal of additional work.
Still, slowly escalating the dose until reaching the target is very effective. I've had several patients who were started at 400 mg and had too much toxicity and were referred to me for imatinib intolerance. We started them at 200 mg every other day, and they did great. After two weeks, we increased to 200 mg per day, then to alternating 400 mg and 200 mg every other day, and ultimately reached the target of 400 mg over about 6 weeks with excellent tolerability.
Are there specific patient populations who you think would derive particular benefit from a liquid formulation as opposed to traditional oral tablets?
Definitely. A liquid formulation of a TKI gives us the flexibility to dose at 100 mg, 200 mg, 300 mg, 400 mg, or anywhere in between for imatinib. It would provide even more flexibility for an agent like sunitinib, which is a capsule that cannot be divided with a pill cutter, making dose adjustments very difficult to make on the fly. For all of the TKIs, a liquid formulation could also significantly help with adherence, given that many of these patients have some baseline degree of GI upset—they may have had portions of their stomach or small intestine removed—and in my experience, a pill is often more difficult to manage than a liquid in terms of GI symptoms.
Liquid dosing allows for more flexible dose amounts for a patient who appears to have a dose-response relationship with their therapy. Liquid dosing would also be ideal for patients who have undergone gastric surgery and may not be able to tolerate oral intake, but who have a G-tube, J-tube, or another type of feeding tube through which a liquid formulation could be administered. This could allow patients to receive their much-needed therapy rather than waiting months after a major GI surgery for sufficient healing to permit oral intake.
References
- Shorla Oncology announces FDA approval of Imkeldi (imatinib) oral solution, an oral liquid for the treatment of certain forms of leukemia and other cancers. News release. Shorla Oncology. November 25, 2024. Accessed June 16, 2026. https://www.businesswire.com/news/home/20241125044117/en
- Gleevec (imatinib mesylate) tablets, for oral use. Prescribing information. FDA; 2026. Accessed June 19, 2026. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/2026/021588s065lbl.pdf