Impact of dose reductions on adjuvant abemaciclib efficacy for patients with high-risk early breast cancer: analyses from the monarchE study

In monarchE, adjuvant abemaciclib significantly improved invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS), with sustained benefit beyond the 2-year treatment period. Abemaciclib dose reductions were allowed to proactively manage adverse events. Exploratory analyses to investigate the impact of dose reductions on efficacy were conducted. Across the three patient subgroups as defined by relative dose intensity (≤66%, 66-93%, ≥93%), the estimated 4-year IDFS rates were generally consistent (87.1%, 86.4%, and 83.7%, respectively). In the time-dependent Cox proportional hazard model, the effect of abemaciclib was consistent at the full dose compared to being reduced to a lower dose (IDFS hazard ratio: 0.905; 95% confidence interval: 0.727, 1.125; DRFS hazard ratio: 0.942; 95% confidence interval: 0.742, 1.195). These analyses showed that the efficacy of adjuvant abemaciclib was not compromised by protocol mandated dose reductions for patients with node positive, hormone receptor positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high-risk early breast cancer.

Adjuvant Abemaciclib Plus Endocrine Therapy for Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative, High-Risk Early Breast Cancer: Results From a Preplanned monarchE Overall Survival Interim Analysis, Including 5-Year Efficacy Outcomes

Clinical trials frequently include multiple end points that mature at different times. The initial report, typically based on the primary end point, may be published when key planned co-primary or secondary analyses are not yet available. Clinical trial updates provide an opportunity to disseminate additional results from studies, published in JCO or elsewhere, for which the primary end point has already been reported.Two years of adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) resulted in a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) that persisted beyond the 2-year treatment period in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (EBC). Here, we report 5-year efficacy results from a prespecified overall survival (OS) interim analysis. In the intent-to-treat population, with a median follow-up of 54 months, the benefit of abemaciclib was sustained with hazard ratios of 0.680 (95% CI, 0.599 to 0.772) for IDFS and 0.675 (95% CI, 0.588 to 0.774) for DRFS. This persistence of abemaciclib benefit translated to continuous separation of the curves with a deepening in 5-year absolute improvement in IDFS and DRFS rates of 7.6% and 6.7%, respectively, compared with rates of 6% and 5.3% at 4 years and 4.8% and 4.1% at 3 years. With fewer deaths in the abemaciclib plus ET arm compared with the ET-alone arm (208 v 234), statistical significance was not reached for OS. No new safety signals were observed. In conclusion, abemaciclib plus ET continued to reduce the risk of developing invasive and distant disease recurrence beyond the completion of treatment. The increasing absolute improvement at 5 years is consistent with a carryover effect and further supports the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk EBC.

Abstract PD13-11: PD13-11 Final Overall Survival Analysis of Monarch 2 : A Phase 3 trial of Abemaciclib Plus Fulvestrant in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer

Background Abemaciclib is approved for patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), HER2-negative (HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) with progression on prior endocrine therapy (ET). The MONARCH 2 trial showed a statistically significantly benefit in progression-free survival (PFS) (hazard ratio [HR]: 0.553; 95% CI: 0.449-0.681; p < 0.001), overall survival (OS) (HR: 0.757; 95% CI: 0.606-0.945; p = 0.01) and a manageable safety profile for abemaciclib plus fulvestrant compared with fulvestrant alone. Here we report the pre-specified final overall survival (OS) analysis from the MONARCH 2 trial (NCT02107703). Methods MONARCH 2 was a global, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind phase 3 trial of abemaciclib or placebo, plus fulvestrant for treatment of pre-, peri- or postmenopausal women with CDK 4 & 6 inhibitor naïve HR+, HER2- ABC that progressed during ET. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive abemaciclib or placebo, 150 mg twice daily, plus fulvestrant. Randomization was stratified based on site of metastasis (visceral, bone only, or other) and resistance to prior ET (primary versus secondary). OS and safety were key secondary endpoints, and chemotherapy-free survival was an exploratory endpoint defined as the time from randomization to initiation of chemotherapy or death, whichever occurs the earliest. Kaplan-Meier (KM) method was used to analyze time-to-event variables. A stratified Cox proportional hazards model was used to estimate treatment effect hazard ratio (HR). The prespecified final analysis was planned to occur based on approximately 441 OS events. Data cutoff was March 18, 2022. Results 669 women were randomized 2:1 to receive abemaciclib (n = 446) or placebo (n = 223), plus fulvestrant. Baseline characteristics have been previously reported (Sledge et. al., Jama Oncol 2020). The median follow-up time was approximately 80 months and at the time of the data cutoff, 11% of pts were still receiving study drug in the abemaciclib arm versus 2% in the placebo arm. 440 OS events were observed in the ITT population (abemaciclib arm: 283 events; placebo arm: 157 events). The median OS was 45.8 months in the abemaciclib arm and 37.2 months in the placebo arm (HR: 0.784; 95% CI: 0.644-0.955). The maintained separation of the KM curves beyond the medians is illustrated by the differences in the estimated 5- and 6-year OS rates between arms (5-year: 41.2% versus 29.2%; 6-year: 34.7% versus 23.7%; abemaciclib versus placebo respectively). While OS benefit was generally consistent across subgroups, a more pronounced benefit is noted in subgroups associated with a poorer prognosis such as visceral disease (HR: 0.643; 95% CI: 0.499-0.829), primary resistance to ET (HR: 0.634; 95% CI: 0.436-0.922) or negative progesterone receptor status (HR: 0.623; 95% CI: 0.405-0.959). Moreover, the addition of abemaciclib to fulvestrant deferred the initiation of chemotherapy (HR: 0.674; 95% CI: 0.562-0.809), with substantial difference in yearly chemotherapy-free survival rates (3 year: 42% vs 29.3%; 4 year: 37% vs 18.6%; 5 year: 32.4% vs 14.7%). Notably with longer exposure to abemaciclib, no new additional safety risks or cumulative toxicities were identified. Conclusions At the prespecified final OS analysis of the MONARCH 2 trial, with a median follow-up of 6.5 years, the statistically significant benefit previously demonstrated was confirmed and maintained. OS benefit was generally consistent across subgroups, with numerically greater effect size observed among patients with poorer prognosis. Importantly, the survival benefit came with a substantial extension of the chemotherapy-free survival time, which is an important consideration for pts with ABC. The results also provide assurance of the safety of abemaciclib with longer-term use.

Citation Format: Antonio Llombart-Cussac, George Sledge, Masakazu Toi, Patrick Neven, Joo Hyuk Sohn, Kenichi Inoue, Xavier Pivot, Meena Okera, Norikazu Masuda, Peter A. Kaufman, Han Koh, Eva-Maria Grischke, PierFranco Conte, Valerie Andre, Yuanyuan Bian, Ashwin Shahir, Gertjan van Hal. PD13-11 Final Overall Survival Analysis of Monarch 2 : A Phase 3 trial of Abemaciclib Plus Fulvestrant in Patients with Hormone Receptor-Positive, HER2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr PD13-11.

Abstract GS1-09: Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer: results from a pre-planned monarchE overall survival interim analysis, including 4-year efficacy outcomes

Background Adjuvant abemaciclib (a CDK4 and 6 inhibitor) combined with ET resulted in significant and clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in patients (pts) with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high risk EBC in the monarchE trial, and is an approved adjuvant therapy for these patients. Here we present efficacy results from a pre-specified overall survival interim analysis (OS IA2) which was planned to occur 2 years (yrs) after the primary outcome analysis. Methods Pts were randomized (1:1) to receive ET for up to 10 yrs +/- abemaciclib for 2 yrs (study treatment period). High-risk EBC was defined as either ≥4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALN), or 1-3 ALN with either Grade 3 disease and/or tumor ≥5 cm (Cohort 1). While the proliferation biomarker Ki-67 was centrally assessed in all pts with available tissue sample, an additional smaller group of pts with 1-3+ ALN and central Ki-67 ≥20% as the only high-risk feature were included (Cohort 2). The intent-to-treat (ITT) population consisted of both Cohort 1 (5120 pts) and Cohort 2 (517 pts). Hazard ratios (HR) were estimated using Cox proportional hazard model. Results At a median follow-up of 42 months, all pts were off abemaciclib. IDFS and DRFS data illustrate a sustained benefit beyond the treatment period. In the ITT population, the HR for IDFS was 0.664 (95% CI: 0.578, 0.762) and DRFS was 0.659 (95% CI: 0.567, 0.767). At 4 yrs, this reflected an improvement in IDFS rates from 79.4% to 85.8% (absolute difference 6.4%), and in DRFS rates from 82.5% to 88.4% (absolute difference 5.9%). The continued separation of the curves was associated with an increase in absolute benefit in IDFS 4-year rates compared to 2-and 3-year IDFS rates (absolute difference 2.8% and 4.8% respectively). While OS remained immature, there was a lower number of deaths observed in the abemaciclib plus ET arm compared to the ET alone arm (157 [5.6%] vs 173 [6.1%], HR 0.929 [95% CI: 0.748, 1.153], p = 0.503), suggesting that the robust benefit in IDFS and DRFS began to translate into a numerically favorable OS HR. As previously described, within Cohort 1, a Ki-67 index of ≥20% was associated with a worse prognosis, but similar abemaciclib treatment effects were observed regardless of Ki-67 index. No new safety signals were observed. Conclusion The clinically meaningful benefit of adjuvant abemaciclib added to ET in HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk EBC persists beyond completion of abemaciclib therapy, yielding an increase in absolute IDFS and DRFS benefit at 4 yrs. While OS remains immature at this time, the lower number of deaths in the abemaciclib arm compared to the ET arm suggest that a survival signal favoring abemaciclib is emerging.

Citation Format: Stephen Johnston, Masakazu Toi, Joyce O’Shaughnessy, Priya Rastogi, Mario Campone, Patrick Neven, Chiun Sheng Huang, Jens Huober, Georgina Garnica Jaliffe, Irfan Cicin, Sara Tolaney, Matthew P. Goetz, Hope Rugo, Elżbieta Senkus, Laura Testa, Lucia Del Mastro, Chikako Shimizu, Ran Wei, Ashwin Shahir, Maria Munoz, Belen San Antonio, Valerie Andre, Nadia Harbeck, Miguel Martín. Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer: results from a pre-planned monarchE overall survival interim analysis, including 4-year efficacy outcomes [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2022 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2022 Dec 6-10; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(5 Suppl):Abstract nr GS1-09.

Efficacy and safety results by menopausal status in monarchE: adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy in patients with HR+, HER2-, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer

Background

Abemaciclib is the first and only cyclin-dependent kinases 4 and 6 inhibitor approved for adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-), node-positive, and high-risk early breast cancer (EBC), with indications varying by geography. Premenopausal patients with HR+, HER2- tumors may have different tumor biology and treatment response compared to postmenopausal patients.

Objectives

We describe the efficacy and safety of abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) for the large subgroup of premenopausal patients with HR+, HER2- EBC in monarchE.

Design

Randomized patients (1:1) received adjuvant ET with or without abemaciclib for 2 years plus at least 3 additional years of ET as clinically indicated.

Methods

Patients were stratified by menopausal status (premenopausal versus postmenopausal) at diagnosis. Standard ET (tamoxifen or aromatase inhibitor) with or without gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist was determined by physician's choice. Invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) by menopausal status were assessed at data cutoff on 1 April 2021 (median follow-up of 27 months).

Results

Among randomized patients, 2451 (43.5%) were premenopausal and 3181 (56.4%) were postmenopausal. The choice of ET for premenopausal patients varied considerably between countries. Treatment benefit was consistent across menopausal status, with a numerically greater effect size in premenopausal patients. For premenopausal patients, abemaciclib with ET resulted in a 42.2% and 40.3% reduction in the risk of developing IDFS and DRFS events, respectively. Absolute improvement at 3 years was 5.7% for IDFS and 4.4% for DRFS rates. Safety profile for premenopausal patients was consistent with the overall safety population.

Conclusion

Abemaciclib with ET demonstrated clinically meaningful treatment benefit for IDFS and DRFS versus ET alone regardless of menopausal status and first ET, with a numerically greater benefit in the premenopausal compared to the postmenopausal population. Safety data in premenopausal patients are consistent with the overall safety profile of abemaciclib.

Abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy for hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer (monarchE): results from a preplanned interim analysis of a randomised, open-label, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy previously showed a significant improvement in invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2; also known as ERBB2)-negative, node-positive, high-risk, early breast cancer. Here, we report updated results from an interim analysis to assess overall survival as well as invasive disease-free survival and distant relapse-free survival with additional follow-up.

METHODS

In monarchE, an open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial, adult patients (aged ≥18 years) who had hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative, node-positive, early breast cancer at a high risk of recurrence with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were recruited from 603 sites including hospitals and academic and community centres in 38 countries. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) by means of an interactive web-based response system (block size of 4), stratified by previous chemotherapy, menopausal status, and region, to receive standard-of-care endocrine therapy of physician's choice for up to 10 years with or without abemaciclib 150 mg orally twice a day for 2 years (treatment period). All therapies were administered in an open-label manner without masking. High-risk disease was defined as either four or more positive axillary lymph nodes, or between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and either grade 3 disease or tumour size of 5 cm or larger (cohort 1). A smaller group of patients were enrolled with between one and three positive axillary lymph nodes and Ki-67 of at least 20% as an additional risk feature (cohort 2). This was a prespecified overall survival interim analysis planned to occur 2 years after the primary outcome analysis for invasive disease-free survival. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population. Safety was assessed in all treated patients. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03155997, and is ongoing.

FINDINGS

Between July 17, 2017, and Aug 12, 2019, 5637 patients were randomly assigned (5601 [99·4%] were women and 36 [0·6%] were men). 2808 were assigned to receive abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy and 2829 were assigned to receive endocrine therapy alone. At a median follow-up of 42 months (IQR 37-47), median invasive disease-free survival was not reached in either group and the invasive disease-free survival benefit previously reported was sustained: HR 0·664 (95% CI 0·578-0·762, nominal p<0·0001). At 4 years, the absolute difference in invasive disease-free survival between the groups was 6·4% (85·8% [95% CI 84·2-87·3] in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group vs 79·4% [77·5-81·1] in the endocrine therapy alone group). 157 (5·6%) of 2808 patients in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group died compared with 173 (6·1%) of 2829 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group (HR 0·929, 95% CI 0·748-1·153; p=0·50). The most common grade 3-4 adverse events were neutropenia (in 548 [19·6%] of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy vs 24 [0·9%] of 2800 patients in the endocrine therapy alone group), leukopenia (318 [11·4%] vs 11 [0·4%]), and diarrhoea (218 [7·8%] vs six [0·2%]). Serious adverse events occurred in 433 (15·5%) of 2791 patients receiving abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy versus 256 (9·1%) of 2800 receiving endocrine therapy. There were two treatment-related deaths in the abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy group (diarrhoea and pneumonitis) and none in the endocrine therapy alone group.

INTERPRETATION

Adjuvant abemaciclib reduces the risk of recurrence. The benefit is sustained beyond the completion of treatment with an absolute increase at 4 years, further supporting the use of abemaciclib in patients with high-risk hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative early breast cancer. Further follow-up is needed to establish whether overall survival can be improved with abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy in these patients.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly.

Adjuvant abemaciclib for high-risk early breast cancer (EBC): Factors increasing the rate of treatment discontinuations in monarchE

527

Background: Adjuvant abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in reducing the risk of recurrence in patients (pts) with HR+, HER2– high risk EBC. In monarchE, 25.6% pts discontinued abemaciclib before completing the 2-year treatment period due to reasons other than recurrence. This exploratory analysis evaluates the impact of baseline factors on time to discontinuation for abemaciclib-treated patients with an aim to identify pts at higher risk of discontinuation. Methods: Time to discontinuation(TTD) was defined as time from first dose to the discontinuation of abemaciclib or all treatment due to reasons other than recurrence. These exploratory analyses evaluated the association between TTD and baseline demographics, disease characteristics, and the extent of pre-existing medical comorbidities. Factors with p-value <0.05 in the univariate Cox model were considered as potentially associated with TTD and then fitted into a multivariate Cox model with stepwise variable selection, with entry and retaining p-value threshold of 0.05. Discontinuation rates at selected timepoints (6-month, 12-month, 18-month, 24-month) within each subgroup were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. Results: The following variables were significantly associated with higher risk of discontinuation in the multivariate model: Age ≥65 yr, enrolled in North America or EU, ECOG PS=1, post-menopausal, 1-3 positive nodes, or 4 or more pre-existing comorbidities. The majority of discontinuations occurred within the first 6 months of the treatment period; thus, this timepoint was selected to estimate discontinuation rates for factors independently associated with TTD (Table). Complete results on discontinuation rates at other timepoints will be reported in the presentation. Conclusions: This exploratory analysis identified several factors associated with a greater risk of discontinuation. These results illustrate the importance of close monitoring and dose adjustments early on, particularly for patients with an increased risk of discontinuation prior to completing the 2-yr treatment period of abemaciclib. Clinical trial information: NCT03155997. [Table: see text]

Adjuvant Abemaciclib Combined with Endocrine Therapy for High Risk Early Breast Cancer: Safety and Patient-Reported Outcomes From the monarchE Study

BACKGROUND

In monarchE, abemaciclib plus endocrine therapy (ET) as adjuvant treatment of hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor 2-negative, high risk, early breast cancer demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival versus ET alone. Detailed safety analyses conducted at a median follow-up of 27 months and key patient-reported outcomes (PRO) are presented.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The safety population included all patients who received at least one dose of study treatment (n=5591). Safety analyses included incidence, management, and outcomes of common and clinically relevant adverse events (AEs). Patient-reported health-related quality-of-life, ET symptoms, fatigue, and side effect burden were assessed.

RESULTS

The addition of abemaciclib to ET resulted in higher incidence of Grade≥3 AEs (49.7% vs 16.3% with ET alone), predominantly laboratory cytopenias (e.g., neutropenia [19.6%]) without clinical complications. Abemaciclib-treated patients experienced more serious adverse events (SAEs; 13.3% vs 7.8%). Discontinuation of abemaciclib and/or ET due to AEs occurred in 18.5% of patients, mainly due to Grade1/2 AEs (66.8%). AEs were managed with comedications (e.g., antidiarrheals), abemaciclib dose holds (61.7%), and/or dose reductions (43.4%). Diarrhea was generally low grade (Grade1/2: 77%); Grade2/3 events were highest in the first month (20.5%), most short-lived (≤7 days) and did not recur. Venous thromboembolic events (VTE) were higher with abemaciclib+ET (2.5%) vs ET (0.6%); in the abemaciclib arm, increased VTE risk was observed with tamoxifen vs AIs (4.3% vs 1.8%). PROs were similar between arms, including being 'bothered by side effects of treatment', except for diarrhea. At ≥3 months, most patients reporting diarrhea reported "a little bit" or "somewhat".

CONCLUSION

In patients with high risk EBC, adjuvant abemaciclib+ET has an acceptable safety profile and tolerability is supported by PRO findings. Most AEs were reversible and manageable with comedications and/or dose modifications, consistent with the known abemaciclib toxicity profile.

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy for high-risk early breast cancer: updated efficacy and Ki-67 analysis from the monarchE study

BACKGROUND

Adjuvant abemaciclib combined with endocrine therapy (ET) previously demonstrated clinically meaningful improvement in invasive disease-free survival (IDFS) and distant relapse-free survival (DRFS) in hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer at the second interim analysis, however follow-up was limited. Here, we present results of the prespecified primary outcome analysis and an additional follow-up analysis.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This global, phase III, open-label trial randomized (1 : 1) 5637 patients to adjuvant ET for ≥5 years ± abemaciclib for 2 years. Cohort 1 enrolled patients with ≥4 positive axillary lymph nodes (ALNs), or 1-3 positive ALNs and either grade 3 disease or tumor ≥5 cm. Cohort 2 enrolled patients with 1-3 positive ALNs and centrally determined high Ki-67 index (≥20%). The primary endpoint was IDFS in the intent-to-treat population (cohorts 1 and 2). Secondary endpoints were IDFS in patients with high Ki-67, DRFS, overall survival, and safety.

RESULTS

At the primary outcome analysis, with 19 months median follow-up time, abemaciclib + ET resulted in a 29% reduction in the risk of developing an IDFS event [hazard ratio (HR) = 0.71, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58-0.87; nominal P = 0.0009]. At the additional follow-up analysis, with 27 months median follow-up and 90% of patients off treatment, IDFS (HR = 0.70, 95% CI 0.59-0.82; nominal P < 0.0001) and DRFS (HR = 0.69, 95% CI 0.57-0.83; nominal P < 0.0001) benefit was maintained. The absolute improvements in 3-year IDFS and DRFS rates were 5.4% and 4.2%, respectively. Whereas Ki-67 index was prognostic, abemaciclib benefit was consistent regardless of Ki-67 index. Safety data were consistent with the known abemaciclib risk profile.

CONCLUSION

Abemaciclib + ET significantly improved IDFS in patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative, node-positive, high-risk early breast cancer, with an acceptable safety profile. Ki-67 index was prognostic, but abemaciclib benefit was observed regardless of Ki-67 index. Overall, the robust treatment benefit of abemaciclib extended beyond the 2-year treatment period.

Prospective Evaluation of Doxorubicin Cardiotoxicity in Patients with Advanced Soft-tissue Sarcoma Treated in the ANNOUNCE Phase III Randomized Trial

PURPOSE

Few prospective studies have assessed anthracycline-associated cardiotoxicity in patients with sarcoma. We evaluated cardiotoxicity in patients with soft-tissue sarcomas administered doxorubicin in the phase III ANNOUNCE trial (NCT02451943).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were anthracycline-naïve adults with locally advanced or metastatic disease and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) ≥50%. Patients could receive eight cycles of doxorubicin at 75 mg/m². The cardioprotectant, dexrazoxane, was allowed at investigator discretion. Symptomatic cardiac adverse events (AEs) were recorded using Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities and graded using Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events 4.0. LVEF deterioration was measured by echocardiogram or multigated acquisition scan, defined as a decrease to <50%, or decrease from baseline value >10%.

RESULTS

A total of 504 patients received ≥1 cycles of doxorubicin [median cumulative dose, 450.3 mg/m² (range, 72.3-634.0)]. Median follow-up of cardiac AEs was 28 weeks. Dexrazoxane was coadministered more frequently to patients receiving higher cumulative doxorubicin doses (38.6% receiving <450 mg/m², 88.5% receiving 450-<600 mg/m², and 90% receiving ≥600 mg/m²) and did not affect treatment efficacy. LVEF deterioration was seen in 62 of 153 (40.5%) patients who received a cumulative dose <450 mg/m², 82 of 159 patients (51.6%) who received 450-<600 mg/m², and 50 of 89 patients (56.2%) who received ≥600 mg/m². Grade ≥3 cardiac dysfunction occurred in 2% of patients at <450 mg/m², 3% at 450-<600 mg/m², and 1.1% at ≥600 mg/m². Incidence of treatment-related cardiac AEs was low across all dose ranges.

CONCLUSIONS

Although follow-up was short, these results suggest doxorubicin can be administered at high cumulative doses (>450 mg/m²), with a low rate of cardiotoxicities, in the context of dexrazoxane coadministration.See related commentary by Benjamin and Minotti, p. 3809.

Phase 1 trial of olaratumab monotherapy and in combination with chemotherapy in pediatric patients with relapsed/refractory solid and central nervous system tumors

Olaratumab is a monoclonal antibody that specifically binds to platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha (PDGFRα) and blocks receptor activation. We conducted a phase 1 trial to evaluate the safety of olaratumab and determine a recommended dose in combination with three different chemotherapy regimens in children. Patients <18 years with relapsed/refractory solid or central nervous system tumors were enrolled to two dose levels of olaratumab. Patients received olaratumab monotherapy at 15 mg/kg (Part A) or 20 mg/kg (Part B) on Days 1 and 8 of the first 21-day cycle, followed by olaratumab combined with standard fixed doses of chemotherapy with doxorubicin, vincristine/irinotecan, or high-dose ifosfamide by investigator choice for subsequent 21-day cycles. In Part C, patients received olaratumab 20 mg/kg plus assigned chemotherapy for all cycles. Parts A-C enrolled 68 patients across three chemotherapy treatment arms; olaratumab in combination with doxorubicin (N = 16), vincristine/irinotecan (N = 26), or ifosfamide (N = 26). Three dose-limiting toxicities (DLTs) occurred during olaratumab monotherapy (at 15 mg/kg, grade [G] 4 alanine aminotransferase [ALT]; at 20 mg/kg, G3 lung infection and G3 gamma-glutamyl transferase). One DLT occurred during vincristine/irinotecan with olaratumab 20 mg/kg therapy (G3 ALT). Treatment-emergent adverse events ≥G3 in >25% of patients included neutropenia, anemia, leukopenia, lymphopenia, and thrombocytopenia. Pharmacokinetic profiles of olaratumab with chemotherapy were within the projected range based on adult data. There was one complete response (rhabdomyosarcoma [Part B vincristine/irinotecan arm]) and three partial responses (two rhabdomyosarcoma [Part A doxorubicin arm and Part C doxorubicin arm]; one pineoblastoma [Part B vincristine/irinotecan arm]). Olaratumab was tolerable and safely administered in combination with chemotherapy regimens commonly used in children and adolescents.

Effect of Doxorubicin Plus Olaratumab vs Doxorubicin Plus Placebo on Survival in Patients With Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcomas: The ANNOUNCE Randomized Clinical Trial

IMPORTANCE

Patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS) have a median overall survival of less than 2 years. In a phase 2 study, an overall survival benefit in this population was observed with the addition of olaratumab to doxorubicin over doxorubicin alone.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the efficacy of doxorubicin plus olaratumab in patients with advanced/metastatic STS.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

ANNOUNCE was a confirmatory, phase 3, double-blind, randomized trial conducted at 110 sites in 25 countries from September 2015 to December 2018; the final date of follow-up was December 5, 2018. Eligible patients were anthracycline-naive adults with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic STS, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 to 1, and cardiac ejection fraction of 50% or greater.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive doxorubicin, 75 mg/m2 (day 1), combined with olaratumab (n = 258), 20 mg/kg in cycle 1 and 15 mg/kg in subsequent cycles, or placebo (n = 251) on days 1 and 8 for up to 8 21-day cycles, followed by olaratumab/placebo monotherapy.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Dual primary end points were overall survival with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo in total STS and leiomyosarcoma (LMS) populations.

RESULTS

Among the 509 patients randomized (mean age, 56.9 years; 58.2% women; 46.0% with LMS), all were included in the primary analysis and had a median length of follow-up of 31 months. No statistically significant difference in overall survival was observed between the doxorubicin plus olaratumab group vs the doxorubicin plus placebo group in either population (total STS: hazard ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.84-1.30], P = .69, median overall survival, 20.4 months vs 19.7 months; LMS: hazard ratio, 0.95 [95% CI, 0.69-1.31], P = .76, median overall survival, 21.6 months vs 21.9 months). Adverse events of grade 3 or greater reported in 15% or more of total patients with STS were neutropenia (46.3% vs 49.0%), leukopenia (23.3% vs 23.7%), and febrile neutropenia (17.5% vs 16.5%).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this phase 3 clinical trial of patients with advanced STS, treatment with doxorubicin plus olaratumab vs doxorubicin plus placebo resulted in no significant difference in overall survival. The findings did not confirm the overall survival benefit observed in the phase 2 trial.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02451943.

Pharmacokinetics of doxorubicin following concomitant intravenous administration of olaratumab (IMC-3G3) to patients with advanced soft tissue sarcoma

BACKGROUND

Olaratumab, a fully human monoclonal antibody, selectively binds to human platelet-derived growth factor receptor alpha and blocks ligand binding. This study assessed the effect of olaratumab on the pharmacokinetics (PK) of doxorubicin and the safety of olaratumab alone and in combination with doxorubicin.

METHODS

This open-label randomized phase 1 trial enrolled 49 patients ages 27 to 83 with metastatic or locally advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS). Patients participated in 21-day treatment cycles (up to 8) until they met discontinuation criteria. In cycles 1 and 2, patients received olaratumab (15 mg/kg in Part A, 20 mg/kg in Part B) and doxorubicin (75 mg/m² ). In cycles 3 through 8, patients continued combination treatment (15 mg/kg olaratumab + doxorubicin). Effect of olaratumab on PK of doxorubicin was determined in patients who received all doses in cycles 1 and 2.

RESULTS

PK properties of doxorubicin administered alone or in combination with olaratumab (15 or 20 mg/kg) were similar for AUC(0-t_last ), AUC(0-∞), and C_max . PK properties of olaratumab (15 or 20 mg/kg) were also similar when administered alone or in combination with doxorubicin. Three patients died (2 of disease progression and 1 of neutropenic enterocolitis). Fatigue and nausea (>75% of patients) were the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). Other common TEAEs included musculoskeletal pain, mucositis, constipation, and diarrhea.

CONCLUSIONS

Olaratumab at 15 or 20 mg/kg before doxorubicin infusion had no clinically relevant effect on systemic exposure to doxorubicin compared with doxorubicin alone in patients with metastatic or locally advanced STS.

Incidence and Management of Olaratumab Infusion-Related Reactions

PURPOSE:

Olaratumab is a human monoclonal immunoglobulin G1 antibody against platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α. We report the nature and frequency of infusion-related reactions (IRRs) with olaratumab in clinical trials and postmarketing reports.

METHODS:

Data from patients exposed to olaratumab across nine clinical trials were reviewed for IRRs. Blood samples were also analyzed for pre-existing immunoglobulin E anti–galactose-α-1,3-galactose (anti–α-Gal) antibodies.

RESULTS:

In the clinical trials, IRRs were identified in 70 of 485 patients (14.4%). The most frequent symptoms included flushing, fever or chills, and dyspnea. For 68 of 70 patients (97.1%), the first IRR occurred during the first two cycles of treatment. Grade 3 or worse IRRs were reported in 11 patients (2.3%), all during the first infusion and usually within 15 minutes of the start of the infusion. One IRR-related fatality (0.2%) occurred in a nonpremedicated patient with grade 3 or worse cardiac comorbidities. There was an association between grade 3 or worse IRRs and pre-existing anti–α-Gal antibodies, with a trend toward higher IRR rates in US geographies known to have a higher prevalence of anti–α-Gal antibodies. IRRs in postmarketing reports were consistent in nature and severity with those in the clinical trials.

CONCLUSION:

Premedication with corticosteroids and antihistamines should occur in all patients before olaratumab infusion, as indicated in labels in the United States and the European Union. Patients receiving olaratumab should be monitored for IRRs in a setting where resuscitation equipment is available for the treatment of IRRs.

ANNOUNCE: A randomized, placebo (PBO)-controlled, double-blind, phase (Ph) III trial of doxorubicin (dox) + olaratumab versus dox + PBO in patients (pts) with advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STS)

LBA3

Background: Dox is standard therapy in STS. In a Ph 2 trial, olaratumab (a human IgG1 antibody targeting PDGFRα) + dox improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) vs dox. ANNOUNCE aimed to confirm the OS benefit in advanced STS. Methods: Adult pts with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic STS, anthracycline-naïve, and ECOG PS 0-1 were eligible. Pts were randomized 1:1 to olaratumab (20mg/kg Cycle 1, 15mg/kg subsequent cycles) or PBO on Days 1 and 8 of each 21-day cycle combined with dox (75mg/m2) on Day 1 for up to 8 cycles. After 8 cycles, pts with disease control continued olaratumab or PBO until progression or toxicity. Randomization was stratified by histology, prior systemic therapy, ECOG PS, and geographic region. Dexrazoxane use was allowed to mitigate dox-related cardiotoxicity. Primary endpoints were OS in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and/or leiomyosarcoma (LMS) subset of the ITT population; the study was designed to be positive if either primary endpoint was met. Secondary endpoints included PFS, response/disease control rates, safety, and pharmacokinetics. Results: 509 pts were randomized: 258 in the investigational and 251 in the control arm. Baseline pt characteristics were well balanced. Dexrazoxane was received by 63.0% vs 65.1% of pts (investigational vs control arm, respectively, for all data). In the ITT population, median OS was 20.4 vs 19.8 months (m) (HR=1.05, 95% CI: 0.84-1.30; p = 0.69) and was 21.6 vs 21.9 m in LMS pts (HR=0.95, 95% CI: 0.69-1.31; p = 0.76). Median PFS was lower in the investigational arm in the ITT population (5.4 vs 6.8 m; HR=1.23, 95% CI: 1.01-1.50; p = 0.04) and in LMS pts (4.3 vs 6.9 m, HR=1.22, 95% CI: 0.92-1.63; p = 0.17). Median dox exposure was 6 vs 7 cycles. Safety was similar between arms. Olaratumab serum concentrations reached levels expected from prior trials. Additional subgroup/biomarker results will be presented. Conclusions: ANNOUNCE did not confirm that olaratumab + dox, followed by olaratumab monotherapy, improves OS over dox in pts with advanced STS. Further analyses are warranted to explore the inconsistent outcomes between the Ph 3 and Ph 2 studies. Clinical trial information: NCT02451943.

Randomized phase II study of the PDGFRα antibody olaratumab plus liposomal doxorubicin versus liposomal doxorubicin alone in patients with platinum-refractory or platinum-resistant advanced ovarian cancer

BACKGROUND

Olaratumab is a platelet-derived growth factor receptor-α (PDGFRα)-targeting monoclonal antibody blocking PDGFRα signaling. PDGFRα expression is associated with a more aggressive phenotype and poor ovarian cancer outcomes. This randomized, open label phase II study evaluated olaratumab plus liposomal doxorubicin compared with liposomal doxorubicin alone in advanced ovarian cancer patients.

METHODS

Patients with platinum-refractory or platinum-resistant advanced ovarian cancer were randomized 1:1 to receive liposomal doxorubicin (40 mg/m², intravenous infusion) administered every 4 weeks with or without olaratumab (20 mg/kg, IV infusion) every 2 weeks. Patients were stratified based on prior response to platinum therapy (refractory vs resistant). The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, duration of response, and safety.

RESULTS

A total of 123 patients were treated (62 olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin; 61 liposomal doxorubicin). Median PFS was 4.2 months for olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin and 4.0 months for liposomal doxorubicin (stratified hazard ratio [HR] = 1.043; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.698-1.558; p = 0.837). Median OS was 16.6 months and 16.2 months in the olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin and liposomal doxorubicin arms, respectively (HR = 1.098; 95% CI 0.71-1.71). In the platinum-refractory subgroup, median PFS was 5.5 months (95% CI 1.6-9.2) and 3.7 months (95% CI 1.9-9.2) in the olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin (n = 15) and liposomal doxorubicin arms (n = 16), respectively (HR = 0.85; 95% CI 0.38-1.91). Overall, 59.7% (olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin) and 65.6% (liposomal doxorubicin) of patients reported grade ≥ 3 adverse events regardless of causality. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (all grades) regardless of causality were fatigue related (61%), nausea (57%), and constipation (52%) with olaratumab+liposomal doxorubicin and nausea (64%), fatigue related (62%), and mucositis (46%) with liposomal doxorubicin.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of olaratumab to liposomal doxorubicin did not result in significant prolongation of PFS or OS in platinum-resistant or platinum-refractory ovarian cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00913835 ; registered June 2, 2009.

Phase II study of olaratumab with paclitaxel/carboplatin (P/C) or P/C alone in previously untreated advanced NSCLC

BACKGROUND

In non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), platelet-derived growth factor receptor (PDGFR) mediates angiogenesis, tissue invasion, and tumor interstitial pressure. Olaratumab (IMC-3G3) is a fully human anti-PDGFRα monoclonal antibody. This Phase II study assessed safety and efficacy of olaratumab+paclitaxel/carboplatin (P/C) versus P/C alone for previously untreated advanced NSCLC.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients received up to six 21-day cycles of P 200mg/m² and C AUC 6 (day 1)±olaratumab 15mg/kg (days 1 and 8). Primary endpoint was PFS. Olaratumab was continued in the olaratumab+P/C arm until disease progression.

RESULTS

131 patients were: 67 with olaratumab+P/C and 64 with P/C; 74% had nonsquamous NSCLC. Median PFS was similar between olaratumab+P/C and P/C (4.4 months each) (HR 1.29; 95% CI [0.86-1.93]; p=0.21). Median OS was similar between olaratumab+P/C (11.8 months) and P/C (11.5 months) (HR 1.04; 95% CI [0.68-1.57]; p=0.87). Both arms had similar toxicity profiles. All evaluable cases were PDGFR-negative by immunohistochemistry. Tumor stroma PDGFR expression was evaluable in 23/131 patients, of which 78% were positive.

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of olaratumab to P/C did not result in significant prolongation of PFS or OS in advanced NSCLC. Olaratumab studies in other patient populations, including soft tissue sarcoma (NCT02783599), pancreatic cancer (NCT03086369), and pediatric malignancies (NCT02677116) are underway.

Olaratumab and doxorubicin versus doxorubicin alone for treatment of soft-tissue sarcoma: an open-label phase 1b and randomised phase 2 trial

BACKGROUND

Treatment with doxorubicin is a present standard of care for patients with metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma and median overall survival for those treated is 12-16 months, but few, if any, novel treatments or chemotherapy combinations have been able to improve these poor outcomes. Olaratumab is a human antiplatelet-derived growth factor receptor α monoclonal antibody that has antitumour activity in human sarcoma xenografts. We aimed to assess the efficacy of olaratumab plus doxorubicin in patients with advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma.

METHODS

We did an open-label phase 1b and randomised phase 2 study of doxorubicin plus olaratumab treatment in patients with unresectable or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma at 16 clinical sites in the USA. For both the phase 1b and phase 2 parts of the study, eligible patients were aged 18 years or older and had a histologically confirmed diagnosis of locally advanced or metastatic soft-tissue sarcoma not previously treated with an anthracycline, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status of 0-2, and available tumour tissue to determine PDGFRα expression by immunohistochemistry. In the phase 2 part of the study, patients were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive either olaratumab (15 mg/kg) intravenously on day 1 and day 8 plus doxorubicin (75 mg/m(2)) or doxorubicin alone (75 mg/m(2)) on day 1 of each 21-day cycle for up to eight cycles. Randomisation was dynamic and used the minimisation randomisation technique. The phase 1b primary endpoint was safety and the phase 2 primary endpoint was progression-free survival using a two-sided α level of 0.2 and statistical power of 0.8. This study was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01185964.

FINDINGS

15 patients were enrolled and treated with olaratumab plus doxorubicin in the phase 1b study, and 133 patients were randomised (66 to olaratumab plus doxorubicin; 67 to doxorubicin alone) in the phase 2 trial, 129 (97%) of whom received at least one dose of study treatment (64 received olaratumab plus doxorubicin, 65 received doxorubicin). Median progression-free survival in phase 2 was 6.6 months (95% CI 4.1-8.3) with olaratumab plus doxorubicin and 4.1 months (2.8-5.4) with doxorubicin (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0.67; 0.44-1.02, p=0.0615). Median overall survival was 26.5 months (20.9-31.7) with olaratumab plus doxorubicin and 14.7 months (9.2-17.1) with doxorubicin (stratified HR 0.46, 0.30-0.71, p=0.0003). The objective response rate was 18.2% (9.8-29.6) with olaratumab plus doxorubicin and 11.9% (5.3-22.2) with doxorubicin (p=0.3421). Steady state olaratumab serum concentrations were reached during cycle 3 with mean maximum and trough concentrations ranging from 419 μg/mL (geometric coefficient of variation in percentage [CV%] 26.2) to 487 μg/mL (CV% 33.0) and from 123 μg/mL (CV% 31.2) to 156 μg/mL (CV% 38.0), respectively. Adverse events that were more frequent with olaratumab plus doxorubicin versus doxorubicin alone included neutropenia (37 [58%] vs 23 [35%]), mucositis (34 [53%] vs 23 [35%]), nausea (47 [73%] vs 34 [52%]), vomiting (29 [45%] vs 12 [18%]), and diarrhoea (22 [34%] vs 15 [23%]). Febrile neutropenia of grade 3 or higher was similar in both groups (olaratumab plus doxorubicin: eight [13%] of 64 patients vs doxorubicin: nine [14%] of 65 patients).

INTERPRETATION

This study of olaratumab with doxorubicin in patients with advanced soft-tissue sarcoma met its predefined primary endpoint for progression-free survival and achieved a highly significant improvement of 11.8 months in median overall survival, suggesting a potential shift in the treatment of soft-tissue sarcoma.

FUNDING

Eli Lilly and Company.

The impact of off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery on postoperative renal function

OBJECTIVES

A number of risk factors have been recognised for postoperative renal dysfunction following on-pump coronary artery bypass surgery (CABG). There are, however, few studies that have evaluated the potential reno-protective effects of off-pump CABG in the presence of other confounding risk factors. The aim of this study was to determine if off-pump CABG reduces the risk of renal injury.

METHODS

Serum creatinine values (preoperatively and day 1, 2 and 4 postoperatively) and other clinical data were prospectively collected on 1580 consecutive patients who underwent first-time CABG from 2002 to 2005. Creatinine clearance was calculated using the Cockcroft and Gault equation. The effect of on-pump vs. off-pump CABG on renal function was analysed, adjusting for age, gender, diabetes mellitus, left ventricular (LV) function and preoperative creatinine clearance, using multiple regression analysis.

RESULTS

One thousand one hundred and forty-five (73%) patients underwent on-pump CABG and 435 (27%) underwent off-pump CABG. The two groups were similar with respect to age, gender and diabetes. Two hundred and seventy-four (17%) patients were females and 274 (17%) patients had diabetes. Multivariate analysis demonstrated significantly lower creatinine clearance postoperatively in patients with diabetes (P<0.001) and advanced age (P<0.001). The on-pump group had significantly lower postoperative creatinine clearance in comparison to the off-pump group (P= 0.01). The effect remained consistent after adjusting for potential risk factors (age, diabetes, gender, LV function and preoperative creatinine clearance) in the multivariate analysis.

CONCLUSION

Off-pump surgery is associated with a reduction in postoperative renal injury.