Alectinib in Resected ALK-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Platinum-based chemotherapy is the recommended adjuvant treatment for patients with resectable, ALK-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Data on the efficacy and safety of adjuvant alectinib as compared with chemotherapy in patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC are lacking.

METHODS

We conducted a global, phase 3, open-label, randomized trial in which patients with completely resected, ALK-positive NSCLC of stage IB (tumors ≥4 cm), II, or IIIA (as classified according to the seventh edition of the Cancer Staging Manual of the American Joint Committee on Cancer and Union for International Cancer Control) were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to receive oral alectinib (600 mg twice daily) for 24 months or intravenous platinum-based chemotherapy in four 21-day cycles. The primary end point was disease-free survival, tested hierarchically among patients with stage II or IIIA disease and then in the intention-to-treat population. Other end points included central nervous system (CNS) disease-free survival, overall survival, and safety.

RESULTS

In total, 257 patients were randomly assigned to receive alectinib (130 patients) or chemotherapy (127 patients). The percentage of patients alive and disease-free at 2 years was 93.8% in the alectinib group and 63.0% in the chemotherapy group among patients with stage II or IIIA disease (hazard ratio for disease recurrence or death, 0.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.13 to 0.45; P<0.001) and 93.6% and 63.7%, respectively, in the intention-to-treat population (hazard ratio, 0.24; 95% CI, 0.13 to 0.43; P<0.001). Alectinib was associated with a clinically meaningful benefit with respect to CNS disease-free survival as compared with chemotherapy (hazard ratio for CNS disease recurrence or death, 0.22; 95% CI, 0.08 to 0.58). Data for overall survival were immature. No unexpected safety findings were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with resected ALK-positive NSCLC of stage IB, II, or IIIA, adjuvant alectinib significantly improved disease-free survival as compared with platinum-based chemotherapy. (Funded by F. Hoffmann-La Roche; ALINA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03456076.).

First-Line Ipatasertib, Atezolizumab, and Taxane Triplet for Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer: Clinical and Biomarker Results

PURPOSE

To evaluate a triplet regimen combining immune checkpoint blockade, AKT pathway inhibition, and (nab-) paclitaxel as first-line therapy for locally advanced/metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The single-arm CO40151 phase Ib study (NCT03800836), the single-arm signal-seeking cohort of IPATunity130 (NCT03337724), and the randomized phase III IPATunity170 trial (NCT04177108) enrolled patients with previously untreated mTNBC. Triplet therapy comprised intravenous atezolizumab 840 mg (days 1 and 15), oral ipatasertib 400 mg/day (days 1-21), and intravenous paclitaxel 80 mg/m2 (or nab-paclitaxel 100 mg/m2; days 1, 8, and 15) every 28 days. Exploratory translational research aimed to elucidate mechanisms and molecular markers of sensitivity and resistance.

RESULTS

Among 317 patients treated with the triplet, efficacy ranged across studies as follows: median progression-free survival (PFS) 5.4 to 7.4 months, objective response rate 44% to 63%, median duration of response 5.6 to 11.1 months, and median overall survival 15.7 to 28.3 months. The safety profile was consistent with the known toxicities of each agent. Grade ≥3 adverse events were more frequent with the triplet than with doublets or single-agent paclitaxel. Patients with PFS >10 months were characterized by NF1, CCND3, and PIK3CA alterations and increased immune pathway activity. PFS <5 months was associated with CDKN2A/CDKN2B/MTAP alterations and lower predicted phosphorylated AKT-S473 levels.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with mTNBC receiving an ipatasertib/atezolizumab/taxane triplet regimen, molecular characteristics may identify those with particularly favorable or unfavorable outcomes, potentially guiding future research efforts.

Durvalumab ± Tremelimumab + Platinum-Etoposide in Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer (CASPIAN): Outcomes by PD-L1 Expression and Tissue Tumor Mutational Burden

PURPOSE

In the CASPIAN trial, first-line durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide (EP) significantly improved overall survival (OS) versus EP alone in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). We report exploratory analyses of CASPIAN outcomes by programmed cell death ligand-1 (PD-L1) expression and tissue tumor mutational burden (tTMB).

EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN

Patients were randomized (1:1:1) to durvalumab (1,500 mg) plus EP, durvalumab plus tremelimumab (75 mg) plus EP, or EP alone. Treatment effects in PD-L1 and tTMB subgroups were estimated using an unstratified Cox proportional hazards model.

RESULTS

The PD-L1 and tTMB biomarker-evaluable populations (BEP) comprised 54.4% (438/805) and 35.2% (283/805) of the intention-to-treat population, respectively. PD-L1 prevalence was low: 5.7%, 25.8%, and 28.3% had PD-L1 expression on ≥1% tumor cells (TC), ≥1% immune cells (IC), and ≥1% TCs or ICs, respectively. OS benefit with durvalumab plus EP versus EP was similar across PD-L1 subgroups, with HRs all falling within the 95% confidence interval (CI) for the PD-L1 BEP (0.47‒0.79). OS benefit with durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus EP versus EP was greater in PD-L1 ≥1% versus <1% subgroups, although CIs overlapped. There was no evidence of an interaction between tTMB and treatment effect on OS (durvalumab plus EP vs. EP, P = 0.916; durvalumab plus tremelimumab plus EP vs. EP, P = 0.672).

CONCLUSIONS

OS benefit with first-line durvalumab plus EP in patients with ES-SCLC was observed regardless of PD-L1 or tTMB status. PD-L1 expression may prove to be a useful biomarker for combined treatment with PD-(L)1 and CTLA-4 inhibition, although this requires confirmation with an independent dataset. See related commentary by Rolfo and Russo, p. 652.

Efbemalenograstim alfa not inferior to pegfilgrastim in providing neutrophil support in women with breast cancer undergoing myelotoxic chemotherapy: results of a phase 2 randomized, multicenter, open-label trial

PURPOSE

Evaluate the safety and efficacy of efbemalenograstim alfa for neutrophil support in breast cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy in a phase 2, dose-finding, open-label study (NCT01648322, ClinicalTrials.gov, 2012-07-19).

METHODS

232 patients received up to 4 cycles of chemotherapy, 141 patients with docetaxel + cyclophosphamide (TC) and 91 patients with docetaxel + doxorubicin + cyclophosphamide (TAC). Patients were randomized to efbemalenograstim alfa (80, 240, or 320 µg/kg [TC]; 240 or 320 µg/kg [TAC]) or pegfilgrastim (6 mg) on Day 2 of each cycle.

RESULTS

Efbemalenograstim alfa was non-inferior to pegfilgrastim in duration of moderate and severe neutropenia (absolute neutrophil count [ANC] < 1.0 × 109/L) in TAC Cycle 1 (mean [SD] of 2.1 [1.58] and 2.1 [1.46] days for 240 µg/kg and 320 µg/kg efbemalenograstim alfa, respectively, and 1.8 [1.28] days for pegfilgrastim), with a difference (95% CI) of 0.3 (-0.4, 1.1) days. ANC nadir occurred between Days 7-8 of TAC Cycle 1, with mean [SD] of 0.68 [1.064], 0.86 [1.407] and 0.78[1.283] × 109/L for 240 µg/kg, 320 µg/kg efbemalenograstim alfa and pegfilgrastim, respectively. Time to ANC recovery post nadir (defined as an ANC > 2.0 × 109/L after the expected ANC nadir) was 2.0-2.4 and 1.9 days for TAC patients treated with efbemalenograstim alfa and pegfilgrastim, respectively. No significant difference was found between any dose of efbemalenograstim alfa and pegfilgrastim in TAC Cycle 1 for incidence of moderate to severe neutropenia (76%-77% of patients) or incidence of severe neutropenia (ANC < 0.5 × 109/L; 63%-72%). Efbemalenograstim alfa exhibited similar safety profile to pegfilgrastim. Febrile neutropenia occurred in 4 (1.8%) patients, 2 patients each for 320 µg/kg efbemalenograstim alfa and pegfilgrastim, with no event considered related to study drug.

CONCLUSION

Efbemalenograstim alfa was comparable to pegfilgrastim in efficacy and safety.

CLINICALTRIALS

GOV IDENTIFIER

NCT01648322.

Efbemalenograstim alfa, an Fc fusion protein, long-acting granulocyte-colony stimulating factor for reducing the risk of febrile neutropenia following chemotherapy: results of a phase III trial

PURPOSE

Evaluate the safety and efficacy of efbemalenograstim alfa for reducing the risk of febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients undergoing myelosuppressive chemotherapy.

METHODS

A phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted. A total of 122 subjects received up to 4 cycles of TA chemotherapy (75 mg/m2 docetaxel + 60 mg/m2 doxorubicin). Patients were randomized in a 2:1 ratio to subcutaneously inject a single 20 mg of efbemalenograstim alfa or placebo on day 2 of cycle 1, and all subjects received efbemalenograstim alfa on day 2 of cycles 2, 3, and 4. Duration of severe (grade 4) neutropenia (DSN), depth of neutrophil nadir, incidence of febrile neutropenia (FN), time to neutrophil recovery, and safety information were recorded.

RESULTS

For the primary endpoint, the mean DSN in cycle 1 was 1.3 days and 3.9 days for efbemalenograstim alfa and placebo respectively (95% CI, 2.3, 3.4). As the lower bound of the 95% CI was > 0, superiority of efbemalenograstim alfa over placebo can be declared. In addition, the incidence of FN in Cycle 1 was lower in efbemalenograstim alfa group than in placebo group (4.8% vs. 25.6%; p = 0.0016). Patients in the efbemalenograstim alfa group required less intravenous antibiotics (3.6% vs. 17.9%; p = 0.0119). Most adverse events were consistent with those expected for breast cancer patient receiving TA chemotherapy.

CONCLUSION

Efbemalenograstim alfa is effective and safe for significantly decreasing the duration of severe neutropenia and the incidence of febrile neutropenia in breast cancer patients who are receiving TA chemotherapy.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT02872103, August 19, 2016.

Central Nervous System Outcomes of Lazertinib Versus Gefitinib in EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC: A LASER301 Subset Analysis

INTRODUCTION

Lazertinib, a third-generation mutant-selective EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, improved progression-free survival compared with gefitinib in the phase 3 LASER301 study (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04248829). Here, we report the efficacy of lazertinib and gefitinib in patients with baseline central nervous system (CNS) metastases.

METHODS

Treatment-naive patients with EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC were randomized one-to-one to lazertinib (240 mg/d) or gefitinib (250 mg/d). Patients with asymptomatic or stable CNS metastases were included if any planned radiation, surgery, or steroids were completed more than 2 weeks before randomization. For patients with CNS metastases confirmed at screening or subsequently suspected, CNS imaging was performed every 6 weeks for 18 months, then every 12 weeks. End points assessed by blinded independent central review and Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 included intracranial progression-free survival, intracranial objective response rate, and intracranial duration of response.

RESULTS

Of the 393 patients enrolled in LASER301, 86 (lazertinib, n = 45; gefitinib, n = 41) had measurable and or non-measurable baseline CNS metastases. The median intracranial progression-free survival in the lazertinib group was 28.2 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 14.8-28.2) versus 8.4 months (95% CI: 6.7-not reached [NR]) in the gefitinib group (hazard ratio = 0.42, 95% CI: 0.20-0.89, p = 0.02). Among patients with measurable CNS lesions, the intracranial objective response rate was numerically higher with lazertinib (94%; n = 17) versus gefitinib (73%; n = 11, p = 0.124). The median intracranial duration of response with lazertinib was NR (8.3-NR) versus 6.3 months (2.8-NR) with gefitinib. Tolerability was similar to the overall LASER301 population.

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with CNS metastases, lazertinib significantly improved intracranial progression-free survival compared with gefitinib, with more durable responses.

Hybrid palliation versus nonhybrid management for a multi-institutional cohort of infants with critical left heart obstruction

OBJECTIVE

To compare patient characteristics and overall survival for infants with critical left heart obstruction after hybrid palliation (bilateral pulmonary artery banding with or without ductal stenting) versus nonhybrid management (eg, Norwood, primary transplantation, biventricular repair, or transcatheter/surgical aortic valvotomy).

METHODS

From 2005 to 2019, 1045 infants in the Congenital Heart Surgeons' Society critical left heart obstruction cohort underwent interventions across 28 institutions. Using a balancing score propensity analysis, 214 infants who underwent hybrid palliation and 831 infants who underwent nonhybrid management were proportionately matched regarding variables significantly associated with mortality and variables noted to significantly differ between groups. Overall survival between the 2 groups was adjusted by applying balancing scores to nonparametric estimates.

RESULTS

Compared with the nonhybrid management group, infants who underwent hybrid palliation had lower birth weight, smaller gestational age, and higher prevalence of in-utero interventions, noncardiac comorbidities, preoperative mechanical ventilation, absent interatrial communication, and moderate or severe mitral valve stenosis (all P values < .03). Unadjusted 12-year survival after hybrid palliation and nonhybrid management, was 55% versus 69%, respectively. After matching, 12-year survival after hybrid palliation versus nonhybrid management was 58% versus 63%, respectively (P = .37). Among matched infants born weighing <2.5 kg, 2-year survival after hybrid palliation versus nonhybrid management was 37% versus 51%, respectively (P = .22).

CONCLUSIONS

Infants born with critical left heart obstruction who undergo hybrid palliation have more high-risk characteristics and anatomy versus infants who undergo nonhybrid management. Nonetheless, after adjustment, there was no significant difference in 12-year survival after hybrid palliation versus nonhybrid management. Mortality remains high, and hybrid palliation confers no survival advantage, even for lower-birth-weight infants.

Durvalumab in Combination With Olaparib Versus Durvalumab Alone as Maintenance Therapy in Metastatic NSCLC: The Phase 2 ORION Study

INTRODUCTION

Increased DNA damage triggered through poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibition may modify tumor immunogenicity, sensitizing tumors to immunotherapy. ORION (NCT03775486) evaluated the combination of olaparib with durvalumab as maintenance therapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC.

METHODS

ORION is a phase 2, randomized, multicenter, double-blind, international study. Patients with metastatic NSCLC (without activating EGFR or ALK aberrations) and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were enrolled to receive initial therapy with durvalumab (1500 mg intravenously; every 3 wk) plus platinum-based chemotherapy for four cycles. Patients without disease progression were then randomized (1:1) to maintenance durvalumab (1500 mg; every 4 wk) plus either olaparib (300 mg orally) or placebo (both twice daily); randomization was stratified by objective response during initial therapy and tumor histologic type. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) (Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1).

RESULTS

Between January 2019 and February 2020, 269 of 401 patients who received initial therapy were randomized. As of January 11, 2021 (median follow-up: 9.6 mo), median PFS was 7.2 months (95% confidence interval: 5.3-7.9) with durvalumab plus olaparib versus 5.3 months (3.7-5.8) with durvalumab plus placebo (hazard ratio = 0.76, 95% confidence interval: 0.57-1.02, p = 0.074). Safety findings were consistent with the known profiles of durvalumab and olaparib. Anemia was the most common adverse event (AE) with durvalumab plus olaparib (26.1% versus 8.2% with durvalumab plus placebo). The incidence of grade 3 or 4 AEs (34.3% versus 17.9%) and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (10.4% versus 4.5%) was numerically higher with durvalumab plus olaparib versus durvalumab plus placebo.

CONCLUSIONS

Maintenance therapy with durvalumab in combination with olaparib was not associated with a statistically significant improvement in PFS versus durvalumab alone, although numerical improvement was observed.

First-line cemiplimab monotherapy and continued cemiplimab beyond progression plus chemotherapy for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 50% or more (EMPOWER-Lung 1): 35-month follow-up from a mutlicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial

BACKGROUND

Cemiplimab provided significant survival benefit to patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of at least 50% and no actionable biomarkers at 1-year follow-up. In this exploratory analysis, we provide outcomes after 35 months' follow-up and the effect of adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at the time of disease progression.

METHODS

EMPOWER-Lung 1 was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 3 trial. We enrolled patients (aged ≥18 years) with histologically confirmed squamous or non-squamous advanced non-small-cell lung cancer with PD-L1 tumour expression of 50% or more. We randomly assigned (1:1) patients to intravenous cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks for up to 108 weeks, or until disease progression, or investigator's choice of chemotherapy. Central randomisation scheme generated by an interactive web response system governed the randomisation process that was stratified by histology and geographical region. Primary endpoints were overall survival and progression free survival, as assessed by a blinded independent central review (BICR) per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1. Patients with disease progression on cemiplimab could continue cemiplimab with the addition of up to four cycles of chemotherapy. We assessed response in these patients by BICR against a new baseline, defined as the last scan before chemotherapy initiation. The primary endpoints were assessed in all randomly assigned participants (ie, intention-to-treat population) and in those with a PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. We assessed adverse events in all patients who received at least one dose of their assigned treatment. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540.

FINDINGS

Between May 29, 2017, and March 4, 2020, we recruited 712 patients (607 [85%] were male and 105 [15%] were female). We randomly assigned 357 (50%) to cemiplimab and 355 (50%) to chemotherapy. 284 (50%) patients assigned to cemiplimab and 281 (50%) assigned to chemotherapy had verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50%. At 35 months' follow-up, among those with a verified PD-L1 expression of at least 50% median overall survival in the cemiplimab group was 26·1 months (95% CI 22·1-31·8; 149 [52%] of 284 died) versus 13·3 months (10·5-16·2; 188 [67%] of 281 died) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·57, 95% CI 0·46-0·71; p<0·0001), median progression-free survival was 8·1 months (95% CI 6·2-8·8; 214 events occurred) in the cemiplimab group versus 5·3 months (4·3-6·1; 236 events occurred) in the chemotherapy group (HR 0·51, 95% CI 0·42-0·62; p<0·0001). Continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy as second-line therapy (n=64) resulted in a median progression-free survival of 6·6 months (6·1-9·3) and overall survival of 15·1 months (11·3-18·7). The most common grade 3-4 treatment-emergent adverse events were anaemia (15 [4%] of 356 patients in the cemiplimab group vs 60 [17%] of 343 in the control group), neutropenia (three [1%] vs 35 [10%]), and pneumonia (18 [5%] vs 13 [4%]). Treatment-related deaths occurred in ten (3%) of 356 patients treated with cemiplimab (due to autoimmune myocarditis, cardiac failure, cardio-respiratory arrest, cardiopulmonary failure, septic shock, tumour hyperprogression, nephritis, respiratory failure, [n=1 each] and general disorders or unknown [n=2]) and in seven (2%) of 343 patients treated with chemotherapy (due to pneumonia and pulmonary embolism [n=2 each], and cardiac arrest, lung abscess, and myocardial infarction [n=1 each]). The safety profile of cemiplimab at 35 months, and of continued cemiplimab plus chemotherapy, was generally consistent with that previously observed for these treatments, with no new safety signals INTERPRETATION: At 35 months' follow-up, the survival benefit of cemiplimab for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer was at least as pronounced as at 1 year, affirming its use as first-line monotherapy for this population. Adding chemotherapy to cemiplimab at progression might provide a new second-line treatment for patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer.

FUNDING

Regeneron Pharmaceuticals and Sanofi.

A phase Ib/II dose expansion study of subcutaneous sasanlimab in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer and urothelial carcinoma

BACKGROUND

Sasanlimab is an antibody to the programmed cell death protein 1 receptor. We report updated data of subcutaneous sasanlimab in non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and urothelial carcinoma dose expansion cohorts from a first-in-human phase Ib/II study.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were ≥18 years of age with NSCLC or urothelial carcinoma, and no prior immunotherapies, who progressed on or were intolerant to systemic therapy, or for whom systemic therapy was refused or unavailable. Patients received subcutaneous sasanlimab at 300 mg every 4 weeks (q4w). Primary objectives were to evaluate safety, tolerability, and clinical efficacy by objective response rate (ORR).

RESULTS

Sixty-eight and 38 patients with NSCLC and urothelial carcinoma, respectively, received subcutaneous sasanlimab. Overall, sasanlimab was well tolerated; 13.2% of patients experienced grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events. Confirmed ORR was 16.4% and 18.4% in the NSCLC and urothelial carcinoma cohorts, respectively. ORR was generally higher in patients with high programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression (≥25%) and high tumor mutational burden (TMB; >75%). In the NSCLC and urothelial carcinoma cohorts, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 3.7 and 2.9 months, respectively; corresponding median overall survival (OS) was 14.7 and 10.9 months. Overall, longer median PFS and OS correlated with high PD-L1 expression and high TMB. Longer median PFS and OS were also associated with T-cell inflamed gene signature in the urothelial carcinoma cohort.

CONCLUSIONS

Subcutaneous sasanlimab at 300 mg q4w was well tolerated with promising clinical efficacy observed. Phase II and III clinical trials of sasanlimab are ongoing to validate clinical benefit. Subcutaneous sasanlimab may be a potential treatment option for patients with NSCLC or urothelial carcinoma.

Trifluridine-Tipiracil and Bevacizumab in Refractory Metastatic Colorectal Cancer

BACKGROUND

In a previous phase 3 trial, treatment with trifluridine-tipiracil (FTD-TPI) prolonged overall survival among patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Preliminary data from single-group and randomized phase 2 trials suggest that treatment with FTD-TPI in addition to bevacizumab has the potential to extend survival.

METHODS

We randomly assigned, in a 1:1 ratio, adult patients who had received no more than two previous chemotherapy regimens for the treatment of advanced colorectal cancer to receive FTD-TPI plus bevacizumab (combination group) or FTD-TPI alone (FTD-TPI group). The primary end point was overall survival. Secondary end points were progression-free survival and safety, including the time to worsening of the Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance-status score from 0 or 1 to 2 or more (on a scale from 0 to 5, with higher scores indicating greater disability).

RESULTS

A total of 246 patients were assigned to each group. The median overall survival was 10.8 months in the combination group and 7.5 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio for death, 0.61; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49 to 0.77; P<0.001). The median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in the combination group and 2.4 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36 to 0.54; P<0.001). The most common adverse events in both groups were neutropenia, nausea, and anemia. No treatment-related deaths were reported. The median time to worsening of the ECOG performance-status score from 0 or 1 to 2 or more was 9.3 months in the combination group and 6.3 months in the FTD-TPI group (hazard ratio, 0.54; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.67).

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients with refractory metastatic colorectal cancer, treatment with FTD-TPI plus bevacizumab resulted in longer overall survival than FTD-TPI alone. (Funded by Servier and Taiho Oncology; SUNLIGHT ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04737187; EudraCT number, 2020-001976-14.).

Five-Year Outcomes With Pembrolizumab Versus Chemotherapy as First-Line Therapy in Patients With Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer and Programmed Death Ligand-1 Tumor Proportion Score ≥ 1% in the KEYNOTE-042 Study

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.We report 5-year results from the phase III KEYNOTE-042 study (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02220894). Eligible patients with locally advanced/metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without EGFR/ALK alterations and with programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥ 1% received pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks for 35 cycles or chemotherapy (carboplatin + paclitaxel or pemetrexed) for 4-6 cycles with optional maintenance pemetrexed. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) in PD-L1 TPS ≥ 50%, ≥ 20%, and ≥ 1% groups. Patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab with ≥ stable disease could begin second-course pembrolizumab upon progression. One thousand two hundred seventy-four patients were randomly assigned (pembrolizumab, n = 637; chemotherapy, n = 637). Median follow-up time was 61.1 (range, 50.0-76.3) months. OS outcomes favored pembrolizumab (v chemotherapy) regardless of PD-L1 TPS (hazard ratio [95% CI] for TPS ≥ 50%, 0.68 [0.57 to 0.81]; TPS ≥ 20%, 0.75 [0.64 to 0.87]; TPS ≥ 1%, 0.79 [0.70 to 0.89]), with estimated 5-year OS rates with pembrolizumab of 21.9%, 19.4%, and 16.6%, respectively. No new toxicities were identified. Objective response rate was 84.3% among 102 patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab and 15.2% among 33 patients who received second-course pembrolizumab. First-line pembrolizumab monotherapy continued to show durable clinical benefit versus chemotherapy after 5 years of follow-up in PD-L1-positive, locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC without EGFR/ALK alterations and remains a standard of care.

Far-reaching impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine on global cancer research

Clinical research is crucial for national cancer control plans. Prior to the Russian invasion on 24th Feb 2022 both Russia and Ukraine were significant contributors to global clinical trials and cancer research. In this short analysis we describe this and the impact that the conflict has had with wider consideration for the global cancer research ecosystems.

Trifluridine/tipiracil plus bevacizumab for third-line treatment of refractory metastatic colorectal cancer: The phase 3 randomized SUNLIGHT study

4

Background: Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) plus bevacizumab (Bev) demonstrated promising efficacy in a randomized phase 2 trial of heavily pretreated patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). SUNLIGHT was conducted to confirm these findings. Methods: The global phase 3 SUNLIGHT study enrolled pts aged ≥18 years with histologically confirmed mCRC, ECOG PS 0/1, and treated with 1-2 prior chemotherapy regimens in an advanced setting, including fluoropyrimidines, irinotecan, oxaliplatin, an anti-VEGF monoclonal antibody (if medically considered) and/or anti-EGFR monoclonal antibody for RAS wild-type tumors. Pts were randomised (1:1) to receive FTD/TPI (35 mg/m2 twice daily on days 1–5 and 8–12 of each 28-day cycle) alone or combined with Bev (5 mg/kg on days 1 and 15). Primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Results: Between Nov 2020 and Feb 2022, 492 pts were randomised to receive FTD/TPI + Bev (n = 246) or FTD/TPI (n = 246). Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. FTD/TPI + Bev significantly extended OS over FTD/TPI, median OS was 10.8 months vs 7.5 months, respectively (HR, 0.61; 95% CI, 0.49, 0.77; P< 0.001). OS rates at 12 months were 43% in the FTD/TPI + Bev arm and 30% in the FTD/TPI arm. Median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in the FTD/TPI + Bev arm and 2.4 months in the FTD/TPI arm (HR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.36,0.54; P< 0.001). Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) were not significantly increased in the FTD/TPI + Bev arm vs the FDT/TPI arm (72.4% vs 69.5%). No new safety signals were noted. Conclusions: FTD/TPI + Bev provided a statistically significant and a clinically meaningful 3.3-month improvement in OS, extending mOS up to 10.8 months, with a 39% reduction in the HR of death in pts with refractory mCRC and with a predictable and acceptable safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT04737187 .

Patient-reported outcomes with cemiplimab monotherapy for first-line treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer with PD-L1 of ≥50%: The EMPOWER-Lung 1 study

BACKGROUND

In the EMPOWER-Lung 1 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03088540), cemiplimab conferred longer survival than platinum-doublet chemotherapy for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with programmed cell death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥50%. Patient-reported outcomes were evaluated among trial participants.

METHODS

Adults with NSCLC and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status 0 to 1 were randomly assigned cemiplimab 350 mg every 3 weeks or platinum-doublet chemotherapy. At baseline and day 1 of each treatment cycle, patients were administered the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) and Lung Cancer Module (QLQ-LC13) questionnaires. Mixed-model repeated measures analysis estimated overall change from baseline for PD-L1 ≥50% and intention-to-treat populations. Kaplan-Meier analysis estimated time to definitive deterioration.

RESULTS

In PD-L1 ≥50% patients (cemiplimab, n = 283; chemotherapy, n = 280), baseline QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13 scores showed moderate-to-high functioning and low symptom burden. Change from baseline favored cemiplimab on global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL), functioning, and most symptom scales. Risk of definitive deterioration across functioning scales was reduced versus chemotherapy; hazard ratios were 0.48 (95% CI, 0.32-0.71) to 0.63 (95% CI, 0.41-0.96). Cemiplimab showed lower risk of definitive deterioration for disease-related (dyspnea, cough, pain in chest, pain in other body parts, fatigue) and treatment-related symptoms (peripheral neuropathy, alopecia, nausea/vomiting, appetite loss, constipation, diarrhea) (nominal p < .05). Results were similar in the intention-to-treat population.

CONCLUSIONS

Results support cemiplimab for first-line therapy of advanced NSCLC from the patient's perspective. Improved survival is accompanied by improvements versus platinum-doublet chemotherapy in GHS/QOL and functioning and reduction in symptom burden.

Overall Survival with Palbociclib and Fulvestrant in Women with HR+/HER2- ABC: Updated Exploratory Analyses of PALOMA-3, a Double-blind, Phase III Randomized Study

PURPOSE

To conduct an updated exploratory analysis of overall survival (OS) with a longer median follow-up of 73.3 months and evaluate the prognostic value of molecular analysis by circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) advanced breast cancer (ABC) were randomized 2:1 to receive palbociclib (125 mg orally/day; 3/1 week schedule) and fulvestrant (500 mg intramuscularly) or placebo and fulvestrant. This OS analysis was performed when 75% of enrolled patients died (393 events in 521 randomized patients). ctDNA analysis was performed among patients who provided consent.

RESULTS

At the data cutoff (August 17, 2020), 258 and 135 deaths occurred in the palbociclib and placebo groups, respectively. The median OS [95% confidence interval (CI)] was 34.8 months (28.8-39.9) in the palbociclib group and 28.0 months (23.5-33.8) in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.65-0.99). The 6-year OS rate (95% CI) was 19.1% (14.9-23.7) and 12.9% (8.0-19.1) in the palbociclib and placebo groups, respectively. Favorable OS with palbociclib plus fulvestrant compared with placebo plus fulvestrant was observed in most subgroups, particularly in patients with endocrine-sensitive disease, no prior chemotherapy for ABC and low circulating tumor fraction and regardless of ESR1, PIK3CA, or TP53 mutation status. No new safety signals were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

The clinically meaningful improvement in OS associated with palbociclib plus fulvestrant was maintained with >6 years of follow-up in patients with HR+/HER2- ABC, supporting palbociclib plus fulvestrant as a standard of care in these patients.

Abstract CT551: Randomized phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of CT-P16, a new biosimilar, to reference bevacizumab (Avastin®) in patients with metastatic or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

Background: CT-P16 is a proposed biosimilar to FDA approved reference bevacizumab (BV), namely Avastin®. This trial (NCT03676192) compared the efficacy and safety of CT-P16 and BV in patients with metastatic or recurrent non-squamous NSCLC.

Methods: This double blind, randomized, multicenter study randomly assigned patients to CT-P16 or BV with carboplatin and paclitaxel, up to 6 cycles (Induction Period), followed by maintenance CT-P16 or BV monotherapy until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR) during the Induction Period. ORR includes complete or partial responses based on RECIST v1.1 assessed by an independent reviewer. Secondary endpoints were Quality of life (QoL), PK, safety, and immunogenicity.

Results: A total of 689 patients were randomized (CT-P16: 342, BV: 347). The baseline characteristics were well balanced. ORRs were similar between the two treatment arms and the 90% confidence intervals (CIs) for the risk ratio estimate (0.7368, 1.3572) and 95% CIs for risk difference estimate (±12.5%) were within the equivalence margin in both ITT (intent-to-treat) and PP (per-protocol) sets. QoL results (QLQ-C30 and QLQ-LC13) and PK parameter (Ctrough) were comparable between the two treatment arms. The overall incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs), serious AEs (TESAEs), AEs leading to discontinuation, and AEs leading to death was similar between the two treatment arms (96.2% vs. 92.4%, 19.4% vs. 20.1%, 15.1% vs. 14.5%, and 6.4% vs. 6.4% for the CT-P16 and BV treatment arm, respectively). The incidence of treatment-emergent anti-drug antibodies was comparable (14.2% vs. 16.0%).

Conclusions: This study demonstrated that CT-P16 is equivalent to BV as measured by ORR in patients with metastatic or recurrent adenocarcinoma of the lung. Other endpoints including PK, QoL, safety and immunogenicity were comparable.

Primary endpoint ITT PP CT-P16 (N=342) BV (N=347) CT-P16 (N=318) BV (N=303) Independent reviewer ORR (%) 95% CI 42.40 (37.16 - 47.64) 42.07 (36.88 - 47.27) 45.28 (39.81 - 50.75) 47.19 (41.57 - 52.82) Risk ratio estimate (90% CI) 1.0136 (0.8767, 1.1719) 0.9662 (0.8387, 1.1132) Risk difference estimate (%) (95% CI) 0.40 (-7.02, 7.83) -1.90 (-9.80, 6.00) Investigator ORR (%) 95% CI 43.86 (38.60 - 49.12) 39.19 (34.06 - 44.33) 46.54 (41.06 - 52.02) 43.89 (38.31 - 49.48) Risk ratio estimate (90% CI) 1.1234 (0.9683, 1.3032) 1.0648 (0.9209, 1.2313) Risk difference estimate (%) (95% CI) 4.87 (-2.53, 12.26) 2.90 (-4.99, 10.79)

Citation Format: Yuichiro Ohe, Igor Bondarenko, Zoran Andric, Yuriy Ostapenko, Tudor Ciuleanu, Fedor Moiseenko, Tamta Makharadze, Sergii Shevnya, Alona Oleksiienko, Eduardo Yañez Ruiz, SungHyun Kim, KeumYoung Ahn, TaeHong Park, Sijin Park, JiEun Lee, MinJi Kim, Claire Verschraegen. Randomized phase III study comparing the efficacy and safety of CT-P16, a new biosimilar, to reference bevacizumab (Avastin®) in patients with metastatic or recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr CT551.

Abstract CT533: Durvalumab (D) plus tremelimumab (T) in platinum-refractory/resistant extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): Efficacy, safety and ctDNA dynamics from Arm A of the phase 2 BALTIC study

Background: Molecular response based on ctDNA dynamics may be predictive of benefit from immunotherapy in NSCLC, complementing radiologic disease assessment and potentially enabling early clinical decision-making, but data in SCLC are lacking. The phase 2, multi-arm, signal-searching BALTIC study (NCT02937818) assessed novel treatment combinations in platinum-refractory/resistant ES-SCLC; we report efficacy, safety, and exploratory ctDNA and PD-L1 analyses from pts who received D + T in Arm A.

Methods: Eligible pts had ES-SCLC, progressive disease (PD) during or within 90 days of completing 1L platinum-based CT, WHO PS 0-1, and life expectancy ≥8 weeks. In Arm A, pts received D 1500 mg + T 75 mg q4w for 4 cycles, followed by maintenance D 1500 mg q4w until PD. The primary endpoint was ORR (investigator assessment, RECIST v1.1). Secondary endpoints included DCR, PFS, OS, and safety and tolerability. Prespecified exploratory analyses included assessment of baseline/on-treatment ctDNA levels measured by maximum variant allele frequency (MaxVAF), and PD-L1 expression on tumor cells (TC) and immune cells (IC) (VENTANA PD-L1 [SP263] Assay).

Results: 41 pts received treatment with D + T (median age 63 years; 76% male; 76% PS 1). At the data cut-off (DCO; Jun 22, 2020), median treatment duration was 12 weeks, with 3 pts ongoing D treatment (these pts had received ≥38, ≥21, and ≥19 doses of D, respectively, at DCO). Confirmed ORR was 7.3% (95% CI 1.54‒19.92; 3 partial responses [PR]). DCR at 12 weeks was 27%. 21 pts (51%) were PD-L1 evaluable. Of 12 pts with PD-L1 expression (TC or IC) ≥1%, 3 (25%) had a best response of PR or stable disease, compared with 1 (11%) of 9 pts with PD-L1 (TC or IC) &lt;1%. Median PFS was 1.84 mo (95% CI 1.77‒1.91) and median OS was 5.36 mo (95% CI 2.89‒7.23). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 8 pts (20%); TRAEs led to treatment discontinuation in 5 pts (12%) and death in 1 pt (hemorrhagic enterocolitis). 26 pts (63%) were evaluable for ctDNA at baseline, and 10 pts (24%) had on-treatment ctDNA data. Pts with baseline MaxVAF in low (n=9), medium (n=8), and high (n=9) tertiles had a median OS of 12.8, 4.5, and 2.3 mo, respectively. Pts with a decrease in on-treatment ctDNA level (delta MaxVAF &lt;0) had a longer median OS (12.0 mo) vs those with an increase (5.6 mo).

Conclusions: Although limited antitumor activity was observed in refractory/resistant ES-SCLC in BALTIC, association of lower baseline ctDNA levels (MaxVAF) with longer OS may reflect the prognostic effect of disease burden. Association of on-treatment reduction in ctDNA level with longer OS suggests potential use of ctDNA as a surrogate of treatment response in ES-SCLC. Further analyses in larger datasets and in a randomized setting are warranted.

Citation Format: Niels Reinmuth, Oscar Juan-Vidal, Zsolt Horváth, Dariusz Kowalski, Anna Kryzhanivska, Eszter Csánky, Gabriella Gálffy, Maciej Bryl, David Vicente, Ihor Vynnychenko, Zsolt Pápai-Székely, Jon Armstrong, Tapashi Dalvi, Yashaswi Shrestha, Mingchao Xie, Haiyi Jiang, Igor Bondarenko. Durvalumab (D) plus tremelimumab (T) in platinum-refractory/resistant extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC): Efficacy, safety and ctDNA dynamics from Arm A of the phase 2 BALTIC study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2022; 2022 Apr 8-13. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2022;82(12_Suppl):Abstract nr CT533.

A phase II study (TACTI-002) in first-line metastatic non–small cell lung carcinoma investigating eftilagimod alpha (soluble LAG-3 protein) and pembrolizumab: Updated results from a PD-L1 unselected population

9003

Background: Eftilagimod alpha (E) is a soluble LAG-3 protein binding to a subset of MHC class II molecules to mediate antigen presenting cell (APC)/CD8 T-cell activation. Stimulation of the APCs and subsequent T cell recruitment with E may lead to stronger anti-tumor responses than observed with pembrolizumab (P) alone. We hereby report results of the extended first-line non-small cell lung carcinoma (NSCLC) cohort of the TACTI-002 (“Two ACTive Immunotherapies”) phase II trial. Methods: Pts with untreated metastatic NSCLC, unselected for PD-L1 expression were recruited. Objective response rate (ORR) by iRECIST was the primary endpoint (EP) and secondary EPs include ORR by RECIST 1.1, tolerability, disease control rate (DCR), progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and exploratory biomarker. Pts received 30 mg E SC q2w for 8 cycles (1 cycle= 3 weeks) and then q3w for up to 1 year with P (200 mg IV q3w for up to 2 years). Imaging was done every 8 weeks. PD-L1 was assessed centrally. This has been approved by relevant CAs, ECs, and IRBs. Results: From Mar 2019 to Nov 2021 114 pts were enrolled. Median age was 67 years (44-85) and 74% were male. ECOG PS was 0 and 1 in 37% and 63% of pts, respectively. Pts presented squamous (35%) or non-squamous (62%) NSCLC with 88% of pts at stage IV at the time of study entry. All PD-L1 subgroups were represented (Table). Pts received median 6.0 (range 1–35) P and 7.0 (1-22) E administrations. 19 (17%) pts discontinued treatment due to adverse events (AEs). The most common (≥15%) AEs were dyspnea (33%), asthenia (30%), decreased appetite (22%), cough (20%), anemia (20%), fatigue (19%), pruritus (18%), constipation (17%) and diarrhea (15%). At data cut-off (Jan 2022), 75 pts with a minimum follow-up of 6 months were evaluated for efficacy. ORR (iRECIST) was 37.3% in the ITT and 41.8%% in the evaluable pts assessed by local read. DCR 73.3% was reported. Response rate for squamous and non-squamous pathology were 33.3 % and 40.3 %, respectively. Results according to RECIST 1.1 were comparable. Responses were observed in all PD-L1 subgroups (Table). 24/28 (86%) responses were already confirmed while median duration of response was not yet reached (5 events). Conclusions: E + P is safe and shows encouraging antitumor activity in first-line metastatic NSCLC patients unselected for PD-L1, warranting further investigation. Clinical trial information: NCT03625323. [Table: see text]

Outcomes of Patients with Sickle Cell Disease and Trait Following Congenital Heart Disease Surgery

BACKGROUND

Sickle cell disease (SCD) is a hemoglobinopathy which can cause multi-organ dysfunction. The objective of our paper was to assess the perioperative outcomes of patients undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease who had either SCD or sickle cell trait (SCT).

METHODS

We performed a retrospective review of patients with SCD and SCT who had records in the Society of Thoracic Surgeons Congenital Heart Surgery Database between 2014 and 2019. The primary outcome was operative mortality; secondary outcomes included post-operative complications. One-to-one propensity score matching was performed between the SCD and SCT groups and the control group for further analysis.

RESULTS

Our study population consisted of 73, 411, and 36501 patients in the SCD, SCT, and control groups respectively. Median age at surgery in years (25-75% interquartile range) was 2.8(0.4, 9.7), 0.60(0.2, 3.1), and 0.70(0.2, 6.4) years in the SCD, SCT, and control cohort respectively. Operative mortality, surgery duration, cardiopulmonary bypass time, and cross clamp time were not significantly different among the three groups. The SCD group had a higher rate of post-surgical cardiac arrest than its propensity score matched control group (5.5% vs 0%, p<0.05); otherwise there were no statistically significant differences in the outcomes between the SCD and SCT groups and their respective matched control groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Operative mortality following cardiothoracic procedures in patients with SCD and SCT appeared similar to our control patients. While these patients may require unique peri-operative management, they can undergo cardiac surgery without an observed increase in mortality.

Evaluating Alternative Ramucirumab Doses as a Single Agent or with Paclitaxel in Second-Line Treatment of Locally Advanced or Metastatic Gastric/Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma: Results from Two Randomized, Open-Label, Phase II Studies

Simple Summary

Ramucirumab is indicated at a dosage of 8 mg/kg every 2 weeks as monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel for second-line advanced/metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. A post hoc analysis of the phase III trials REGARD and RAINBOW suggested a positive correlation between ramucirumab exposure and efficacy. Studies JVDB and JVCZ explored different ramucirumab dosing regimens as monotherapy and in combination with paclitaxel, respectively. Here we report results from these studies, in which JVDB evaluated the pharmacokinetics and safety of the currently registered dosing regimen for ramucirumab monotherapy and three exploratory dosing regimens, and JVCZ evaluated the efficacy and safety of a higher dosing regimen of ramucirumab in combination with paclitaxel in second-line gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma. Overall, the safety profiles were similar between the registered dose and the exploratory dosing regimens. However, a lack of a dose/exposure-response relationship supports the standard dose of ramucirumab as second-line treatment for patients with advanced/metastatic gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma.

Abstract

Studies JVDB and JVCZ examined alternative ramucirumab dosing regimens as monotherapy or combined with paclitaxel, respectively, in patients with advanced/metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) adenocarcinoma. For JVDB, randomized patients (N = 164) received ramucirumab monotherapy at four doses: 8 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) (registered dose), 12 mg/kg Q2W, 6 mg/kg weekly (QW), or 8 mg/kg on days 1 and 8 (D1D8) every 3 weeks (Q3W). The primary objectives were the safety and pharmacokinetics of ramucirumab monotherapy. For JVCZ, randomized patients (N = 245) received paclitaxel (80 mg/m²-D1D8D15) plus ramucirumab (8 mg/kg- or 12 mg/kg-Q2W). The primary objective was progression-free survival (PFS) of 12 mg/kg-Q2W arm versus placebo from RAINBOW using meta-analysis. Relative to the registered dose, exploratory dosing regimens (EDRs) led to higher ramucirumab serum concentrations in both studies. EDR safety profiles were consistent with previous studies. In JVDB, serious adverse events occurred more frequently in the 8 mg/kg-D1D8-Q3W arm versus the registered dose; 6 mg/kg-QW EDR had a higher incidence of bleeding/hemorrhage. In JVCZ, PFS was improved with the 12 mg/kg plus paclitaxel combination versus placebo in RAINBOW; however, no significant PFS improvement was observed between the 12 mg/kg and 8 mg/kg arms. The lack of a dose/exposure-response relationship in these studies supports the standard dose of ramucirumab 8 mg/kg-Q2W as monotherapy or in combination with paclitaxel as second-line treatment for advanced/metastatic gastric/GEJ adenocarcinoma.

Ipatasertib plus paclitaxel for PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered hormone receptor-positive HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: primary results from cohort B of the IPATunity130 randomized phase 3 trial

PURPOSE

PI3K/AKT pathway alterations are frequent in hormone receptor-positive (HR+) breast cancers. IPATunity130 Cohort B investigated ipatasertib-paclitaxel in PI3K pathway-mutant HR+ unresectable locally advanced/metastatic breast cancer (aBC).

METHODS

Cohort B of the randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 IPATunity130 trial enrolled patients with HR+ HER2-negative PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered measurable aBC who were considered inappropriate for endocrine-based therapy (demonstrated insensitivity to endocrine therapy or visceral crisis) and were candidates for taxane monotherapy. Patients with prior chemotherapy for aBC or relapse < 1 year since (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy were ineligible. Patients were randomized 2:1 to ipatasertib (400 mg, days 1-21) or placebo, plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m², days 1, 8, 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS).

RESULTS

Overall, 146 patients were randomized to ipatasertib-paclitaxel and 76 to placebo-paclitaxel. In both arms, median investigator-assessed PFS was 9.3 months (hazard ratio, 1.00, 95% CI 0.71-1.40) and the objective response rate was 47%. Median paclitaxel duration was 6.9 versus 8.8 months in the ipatasertib-paclitaxel versus placebo-paclitaxel arms, respectively; median ipatasertib/placebo duration was 8.0 versus 9.1 months, respectively. The most common grade ≥ 3 adverse events were diarrhea (12% with ipatasertib-paclitaxel vs 1% with placebo-paclitaxel), neutrophil count decreased (9% vs 7%), neutropenia (8% vs 9%), peripheral neuropathy (7% vs 3%), peripheral sensory neuropathy (3% vs 5%) and hypertension (1% vs 5%).

CONCLUSION

Adding ipatasertib to paclitaxel did not improve efficacy in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered HR+ HER2-negative aBC. The ipatasertib-paclitaxel safety profile was consistent with each agent's known adverse effects. Trial registration NCT03337724.

Phase III double-blind study comparing the efficacy and safety of proposed biosimilar MYL-1402O and reference bevacizumab in stage IV non-small-cell lung cancer

Purpose:

This phase III study compared the efficacy and safety of proposed biosimilar MYL-1402O with reference bevacizumab (BEV), as first-line treatment for patients with stage IV non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer.

Patients and methods:

Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive MYL-1402O or bevacizumab with carboplatin-paclitaxel up to 18 weeks (6 cycles), followed by up to 24 weeks (8 cycles) of bevacizumab monotherapy. The primary objective was comparison of overall response rate (ORR), based on independently reviewed best tumor responses as assessed during the first 18 weeks. ORR was analyzed per US Food and Drug Administration (ratio of ORR) and European Medicines Agency (difference in ORRs) requirements for equivalence evaluation. Secondary end points included progression-free survival, disease control rate, duration of response, overall survival, safety, and immunogenicity over a period of 42 weeks, and pharmacokinetics (up to 18 weeks).

Results:

A total of 671 patients were included in the intent-to-treat population. The ratio of ORR was 0.96 [confidence interval (CI) 0.83, 1.12] and the difference in ORR was −1.6 (CI −9.0, 5.9) between treatment arms; CIs were within the predefined equivalence margins. Overall, the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events and serious adverse events was comparable. Treatment-emergent anti-drug antibody (ADA) positivity was transient, with no notable differences between treatment arms (6.5% versus 4.8% ADA positivity rate in MYL-1402O versus BEV, respectively). The incidence of neutralizing antibody post-baseline was lower in the MYL-1402O arm (0.6%) compared to the bevacizumab arm (2.5%).

Conclusions:

MYL-1402O is therapeutically equivalent to bevacizumab, based on the ORR analyses, with comparable secondary endpoints.

Trial Registry Information

EU Clinical Trials Register, Registration # EudraCT no. 2015-005141-32https://www.clinicaltrialsregister.eu/ctr-search/search?query=2015-005141-32

Plain language summary

Previous studies established bioequivalence of the proposed bevacizumab biosimilar MYL-1402O to reference bevacizumab. In this randomized, double-blind, phase III trial, MYL-1402O (n = 337) demonstrated comparable efficacy to bevacizumab (n = 334) in treating advanced non-squamous non-small-cell lung cancer per Food and Drug Administration and European Medicines Agency requirements for equivalence; the ratio of objective response rate (ORR) was 0.96 [90% confidence interval (CI) 0.83, 1.12] and the difference in ORR (MYL-1402O:bevacizumab) was −1.6 (95% CI −9.0, 5.9). Median progression-free survival at 42 weeks was comparable: 7.6 (7.0, 9.5) with MYL-1402O versus 9.0 (7.2, 9.7) months (p = 0.0906) with bevacizumab, by independent review. Treatment-emergent adverse events leading to death (2.4% vs 1.5%), serious adverse events (17.6% vs 16.7%), and antidrug antibodies (6.5% vs 4.8%), were comparable in the MYL-1402O vs bevacizumab arms, respectively. The incidence of neutralizing antibody post-baseline was lower with MYL-1402O (0.6%) than with bevacizumab (2.5%). These findings confirm therapeutic equivalence of MYL-1402O to bevacizumab, providing opportunities for improving access to bevacizumab.

363 KEYNOTE-042 5-year survival update: pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated, PD-L1–positive, locally advanced or metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer

Background

Primary analysis of KEYNOTE-042 (NCT02220894), a global, randomized, phase 3 trial, showed that pembrolizumab significantly improved OS versus platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) without sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations and with PD-L1 tumor proportion score (TPS) ≥50%, ≥20%, and ≥1% with fewer treatment-related AEs than chemotherapy. We report an updated analysis with ~5 years of follow-up.

Methods

Eligible adults were randomized 1:1 to receive pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W for 35 cycles or investigator’s choice of chemotherapy (carboplatin + paclitaxel or pemetrexed) Q3W for 4–6 cycles with optional maintenance pemetrexed (nonsquamous only). Primary endpoints were OS in patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥50%, ≥20%, and ≥1%; secondary endpoints included PFS and ORR per RECIST v1.1 by central review, and safety (secondary). Eligible patients randomized to pembrolizumab who completed 35 cycles with SD or better or stopped treatment after confirmed CR could begin a second course of pembrolizumab at the time of progression.

Results

1274 patients were randomized to pembrolizumab or chemotherapy (n = 637 each). Median (range) time from randomization to data cutoff (Apr 28, 2021) was 61.1 (50.0–76.3) months. OS outcomes favored the pembrolizumab group (vs chemotherapy alone) regardless of PD-L1 TPS (HR [95% CI] for TPS ≥50%, 0.68 [0.57–0.81]; TPS ≥20%, 0.75 [0.64–0.87]; TPS ≥1%, 0.79 [0.70–0.89]), with estimated 5-year OS rates (95% CI) of 21.9% (17.3%–26.9%), 19.4% (15.6%–23.4%) and 16.6% (13.7%–19.6%), respectively, in the pembrolizumab group (table 1). Median duration of response (DOR) was 28.1 vs 10.8 months in PD-L1 TPS ≥50% group, 27.7 vs 10.8 months in PD-L1 TPS ≥20% group and, 26.5 vs 8.4 months in PD-L1 TPS ≥1% for pembrolizumab group vs chemotherapy. Treatment-related grade 3–5 AEs occurred in 120 patients (18.9%) in the pembrolizumab group and 257 (41.8%) in the chemotherapy group. Among 102 patients who completed 35 cycles of pembrolizumab: ORR was 84.3%; estimated 4-year OS rate after completion of 35 cycles of pembrolizumab (ie, approximately 6 years after randomization) was 61.8%. Among 33 patients who received second-course pembrolizumab, ORR was 15.2%.

Abstract 363 Table 1

Key efficacy outcomes in the KEYNOTE-042 ITT population

Conclusions

With 5 years of follow-up, first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy continued to show substantial clinical benefit with higher 5-year OS rates, and durable response over chemotherapy in patients with PD-L1–positive, locally advanced/metastatic NSCLC without EGFR/ALK alterations. First-line pembrolizumab remains a standard of care in patients with PD-L1 TPS ≥1%, as underscored by these long-term results.

Acknowledgements

Medical writing assistance was provided by Kathleen Estes, PhD, of ICON plc (North Wales, PA, USA). This assistance was funded by Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., a subsidiary of Merck & Co., Inc., Kenilworth, NJ, USA.

Trial Registration

Clinicaltrials

gov, NCT02220894

Ethics Approval

The protocol and all amendments were approved by the appropriate ethics committee at each center, the study was conducted in accordance with the standards of Good Clinical Practice and in compliance with the Declaration of Helsinki. Patients provided written informed consent before enrollment.

Final results from the PERUSE study of first-line pertuzumab plus trastuzumab plus a taxane for HER2-positive locally recurrent or metastatic breast cancer, with a multivariable approach to guide prognostication

BACKGROUND

The phase III CLinical Evaluation Of Pertuzumab And TRAstuzumab (CLEOPATRA) trial established the combination of pertuzumab, trastuzumab and docetaxel as standard first-line therapy for human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive locally recurrent/metastatic breast cancer (LR/mBC). The multicentre single-arm PERtUzumab global SafEty (PERUSE) study assessed the safety and efficacy of pertuzumab and trastuzumab combined with investigator-selected taxane in this setting.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Eligible patients with inoperable HER2-positive LR/mBC and no prior systemic therapy for LR/mBC (except endocrine therapy) received docetaxel, paclitaxel or nab-paclitaxel with trastuzumab and pertuzumab until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was safety. Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Prespecified subgroup analyses included subgroups according to taxane, hormone receptor (HR) status and prior trastuzumab. Exploratory univariable analyses identified potential prognostic factors; those that remained significant in multivariable analysis were used to analyse PFS and OS in subgroups with all, some or none of these factors.

RESULTS

Of 1436 treated patients, 588 (41%) initially received paclitaxel and 918 (64%) had HR-positive disease. The most common grade ≥3 adverse events were neutropenia (10%, mainly with docetaxel) and diarrhoea (8%). At the final analysis (median follow-up: 5.7 years), median PFS was 20.7 [95% confidence interval (CI) 18.9-23.1] months overall and was similar irrespective of HR status or taxane. Median OS was 65.3 (95% CI 60.9-70.9) months overall. OS was similar regardless of taxane backbone but was more favourable in patients with HR-positive than HR-negative LR/mBC. In exploratory analyses, trastuzumab-pretreated patients with visceral disease had the shortest median PFS (13.1 months) and OS (46.3 months).

CONCLUSIONS

Mature results from PERUSE show a safety and efficacy profile consistent with results from CLEOPATRA and median OS exceeding 5 years. Results suggest that paclitaxel is a valid alternative to docetaxel as backbone chemotherapy. Exploratory analyses suggest risk factors that could guide future trial design.

Final overall survival analysis of the phase 3 HERITAGE study demonstrates equivalence of trastuzumab-dkst to trastuzumab in HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer

Purpose

The phase 3 HERITAGE trial demonstrated that the biosimilar trastuzumab-dkst is well tolerated with similar efficacy (measured by overall response rate [ORR] and progression-free survival [PFS]) compared with originator trastuzumab combined with taxane followed by monotherapy in patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Herein, we present final overall survival (OS) from HERITAGE.

Methods

HERITAGE is a multicenter, double-blind, randomized, parallel-group study. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive trastuzumab-dkst or trastuzumab plus taxane followed by continued monotherapy until disease progression. Overall survival was to be assessed at 36 months or after 240 deaths, whichever occurred first, as observed from time of randomization of last patient.

Results

At the final analysis (36 months), 242 patients in the intention-to-treat population had died during the study: 116 and 124 in the trastuzumab-dkst and trastuzumab groups, respectively, and 1 untreated patient from each treatment group. Median OS by Kaplan–Meier analysis was 35.0 months with trastuzumab-dkst and 30.2 months with trastuzumab. Evaluation of PFS showed a median of 11.1 months in both treatment groups. No new safety concerns were reported from week 48 until the end of the survival follow-up.

Conclusion

This is the first phase 3 trial of a trastuzumab biosimilar to report long-term survival data similar to originator trastuzumab in patients with MBC. The comparable long-term OS between the trastuzumab-dkst and originator trastuzumab groups further supports the similarity of trastuzumab-dkst with originator trastuzumab and establishes trastuzumab-dkst as a safe and effective treatment option for patients with HER2-positive MBC.

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02472964; 6/16/2015

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10549-021-06197-5.

Subgroup analysis of rucaparib versus chemotherapy as treatment for BRCA-mutated, advanced, relapsed ovarian carcinoma: Effect of platinum sensitivity in the randomized, phase 3 study ARIEL4

5517

Background: In ARIEL4 (NCT02855944), rucaparib significantly improved the primary endpoint of progression-free survival (PFS) vs chemotherapy (CT) in patients with advanced, relapsed ovarian carcinoma (OC) harboring a deleterious BRCA1/2 (BRCA) mutation (median PFS 7.4 [95% CI 7.3–9.1] vs 5.7 [5.5–7.3] months; hazard ratio (HR) 0.64 [95% CI 0.49–0.84]; P=0.001). This prespecified exploratory analysis investigated the effect of platinum sensitivity on the efficacy of rucaparib vs CT in ARIEL4. Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to oral rucaparib 600 mg twice daily or CT and stratified based on progression-free interval (≥1 to <6 months = platinum resistant; ≥6 to <12 months = partially platinum sensitive; ≥12 months = fully platinum sensitive). In the CT group, patients with platinum-resistant or partially platinum-sensitive disease received weekly paclitaxel 60–80 mg/m2; patients with fully platinum-sensitive disease received investigator’s choice of platinum-based CT (single-agent carboplatin or cisplatin, or platinum doublet). Patients could crossover from CT to rucaparib following radiologic disease progression. Efficacy endpoints were explored in patients with a confirmed BRCA mutation (patients with a reversion mutation were excluded), based on the randomization strata of platinum sensitivity. Results: The visit cutoff date was September 30, 2020. PFS and objective response rates (ORR) per RECIST v1.1 for rucaparib vs CT across subgroups are presented in the Table. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events in the rucaparib group were anemia/decreased hemoglobin (platinum-resistant patients: rucaparib 47% vs CT 40%; partially platinum-sensitive patients: 63% vs 27%; fully platinum-sensitive patients: 58% vs 20%) and nausea (52% vs 21%; 51% vs 23%; 60% vs 68%). In the intent-to-treat population, 74/116 (64%) patients in the CT group crossed over to receive rucaparib: 39/59 (66%) with platinum-resistant, 25/31 (81%) with partially platinum-sensitive, and 10/26 (38%) with fully platinum-sensitive disease. Conclusions: Results from this exploratory subgroup analysis suggest that rucaparib is a reasonable treatment option for heavily pretreated patients across all platinum sensitivity subgroups. Safety was consistent with prior rucaparib studies. Clinical trial information: NCT02855944. [Table: see text]

Overall survival (OS) with palbociclib (PAL) + fulvestrant (FUL) in women with hormone receptor–positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2–negative (HER2–) advanced breast cancer (ABC): Updated analyses from PALOMA-3

1000

Background: In PALOMA-3, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study, PAL+FUL significantly prolonged progression-free survival (PFS) compared with placebo (PBO) + FUL (1-sided P<0.0001). The final protocol-specified OS analysis, which was conducted with a median follow-up of 44.8 months (mo), showed improved OS with PAL+FUL vs PBO+FUL (median OS, 34.9 vs 28.0 mo; hazard ratio, 0.814 [95% CI, 0.644–1.029]; 1-sided P=0.0429). Here, we report the results from an OS analysis with a longer median follow-up of 73.3 mo. Methods: A total of 521 patients (pts) with HR+/HER2– ABC who had progressed on prior endocrine therapy were randomized 2:1 to PAL (125 mg/d orally, 3/1 week schedule) + FUL (500 mg intramuscular injection) or PBO+FUL. Investigator-assessed PFS was the primary endpoint; OS was a key secondary endpoint. An ad hoc OS analysis was performed when 393 events (75% of the total population) were observed. Circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) analysis was conducted among pts who consented for this study. Results: Improvement in OS continues to be observed with longer follow-up, with a hazard ratio of 0.806 (95% CI, 0.654–0.994; 1-sided nominal P=0.0221). The 5-year OS rate was 23.3% (95% CI, 18.7–28.2) with PAL+FUL and 16.8% (95% CI, 11.2–23.3) with PBO+FUL. Favorable OS with PAL+FUL vs PBO+FUL was observed in most subgroups except among pts who were endocrine resistant or had prior chemotherapy for ABC. No new safety signals were identified. Eighteen pts remain on study treatment, including 15 (4.3%) on PAL+FUL and 3 (1.7%) on PBO+FUL. A post-study cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor was received by 20 pts (7.5%) in the PAL+FUL arm and 32 pts (22.2%) in the PBO+FUL arm. ctDNA analyses of tumor mutation profiles (ie, ESR1, PIK3CA, RB1) at the end of treatment and their effect on OS will also be presented. Conclusions: The clinically meaningful improvement in OS with PAL+FUL was maintained with >6 years of median follow-up in pts with HR+/HER2– ABC who had progressed on prior endocrine treatment. Pfizer (NCT01942135) Clinical trial information: NCT01942135 .[Table: see text]

Bevacizumab biosimilar (MB02) and reference bevacizumab in patients with stage IIIB/IV non-squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (STELLA study): Multiple Imputation analysis

e15003

Background: Stella Trial is a phase III, multinational, double-blind and randomized study to confirm clinical similarity between MB02 and EU-bevacizumab in patients with stage IIIB/IV no squamous NSCLC. 627 subjects with newly diagnosed or recurrent stage IIIb/IV NSCLC were randomized 1:1 to receive either MB02 or EU-bevacizumab plus chemotherapy (paclitaxel and carboplatin) every 3-week cycle for six cycles (week 18) followed by MB02/bevacizumab in blinded monotherapy until disease progression, treatment intolerance, death, patient withdrawal or end of study (w52). An approach targeting the MI of the continuous sum of target diameters (mm), and subsequent categorization of Overall Response (OR) was performed as sensitivity analysis for the assessment of the primary endpoint. Multiple Imputation (MI) has emerged as a credible method to assess the effects of missing data (MD), an inescapable problem with a potential ability to undermine research results' strength and validity in a clinical study, providing the user with a valuable toolset to sufficiently account for the varying types of MD and appropriately adjust the assumptions. Methods: The primary endpoint of the study was Objective Response Rate (ORR) at week 18 per an Independent Radiological Committee (IRC) in the Intention to treat set (ITT). The ORR was analysed with a Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel model, including the stratification factors of sex, smoking status, disease diagnosis and disease stage, comparing the stratified estimates risk difference (RD). In addition, these results were analysed implementing a pattern-mixture MI process accounting for missing at random (MAR) and missing not at random (MNAR) data based on the sum of target diameters in subjects without tumour response data or falling into the categories NonCR/NonPD or non-evaluable (NE). Results: The clinical equivalence of MB02 with EU-bevacizumab is demonstrated by the efficacy data provided through the primary endpoint and the MI sensitive analysis applied. The MI (MAR and MNAR) represents an added value that supports the biosimilarity of MB02 and EU-bevacizumab. The results for the primary analysis of the RD in ORR at w18 in the ITT set were entirely contained within the boundaries of predefined margins (±12): -4.02 [95% CI: -11.76 to 3.71]). Under MI, the ORR RD showed similarity at 95% CIs (-1.92; 95% CI: -10.02 to 6.19) and using the multiple imputations for subjects without tumour response data (missing, NonCR/NonPD or NE), the ORR RD was -2.22 with 95% CI of (-10.54 to 6.10) at w18 in the ITT. Conclusions: The clinical equivalence of MB02 with EU-bevacizumab is demonstrated by the efficacy data provided through the primary endpoint and the MI sensitive analysis applied. The MI (MAR and MNAR) represent an added value that supports the biosimilarity of MB02 and EU-bevacizumab. Clinical trial information: NCT03296163.

Head-to-head comparison of single agent (SA) plinabulin (Plin) versus pegfilgrastim (Peg) for the prevention of chemotherapy-induced neutropenia (CIN) in the phase 3 trial PROTECTIVE-1

547

Background: Peg is the current standard of care (SoC) for the prevention of CIN, with a low absolute neutrophil (N) count (ANC) week 1 after chemotherapy (chemo) with normalization in week 2. Breakthrough designation agent from FDA, Plin, a novel, non-G-CSF agent for the prevention of CIN, produces a normal ANC in week 1 of cycle (C) 1 by potentially protecting progenitor cells in bone marrow from chemo assault, and also has anticancer activity (Blayney, St Gallen 2019; ASCO 2019). Here we report data from a pre-specified interim analysis from PROTECTIVE-1 (Study 105; NCT03102606). Methods: Breast cancer (BC), lung (NSCLC) and prostate cancer (HRPC) pts with at least 1 risk factor as per NCCN, received docetaxel (Doc) 75 mg/m2 with either Peg 6mg (n=53) or Plin 40 mg (n=52) over 4 cycles, and had ANC blood draws on Day (D) 1, 2,6,7,8,9,10,15 in C1 (Covance Central Laboratory). Plin was given on D1, as a 30 min IV infusion, 30 min after Doc, and Peg, 24 hrs after Doc. Primary objective was to demonstrate non-inferiority (NI) of SA Plin vs SA Peg for duration of severe neutropenia (DSN) in C1. NI of Plin vs Peg would be declared if the upper limit of 95% confidence interval for the mean DSN difference between Plin and Peg would be <0.65 day. Other endpoints included C1 platelet count, C1 bone pain scores (validated questionnaire), C1-4 clinical sequelae of CIN through [febrile neutropenia (FN), infection, antibiotic and hospitalization rate, and Doc discontinuation (Discont) and delays], and safety (AEs, hematology and chemistry, vital signs) Results: Predefined DSN NI criterion between SA Plin and SA Peg was met. C1 Grade 4 toxicity was not different between Plin and Peg (p=NS). Clinical sequelae of CIN were comparable or slightly better for Plin vs Peg (see Table). Plin caused less bone pain (p=0.01) and less thrombocytopenia (p<0.0001 on D15) vs Peg. AE frequency and overall safety was comparable for SA Plin and SA Peg. Conclusions: SA Plin has efficacy for Doc CIN prevention non-inferior compared to SoC Peg, and accordingly has comparable (or numerically better) profile for clinical sequelae of CIN. Plin has an advantage for bone pain, platelet counts, convenience of use (same day vs next day dosing) over SoC Peg and has anticancer activity. Clinical trial information: NCT03102606. [Table: see text]