Tepotinib in patients with non-small cell lung cancer with high-level MET amplification detected by liquid biopsy: VISION Cohort B

High-level MET amplification (METamp) is a primary driver in ∼1%-2% of non-small cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). Cohort B of the phase 2 VISION trial evaluates tepotinib, an oral MET inhibitor, in patients with advanced NSCLC with high-level METamp who were enrolled by liquid biopsy. While the study was halted before the enrollment of the planned 60 patients, the results of 24 enrolled patients are presented here. The objective response rate (ORR) is 41.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 22.1-63.4), and the median duration of response is 14.3 months (95% CI, 2.8-not estimable). In exploratory biomarker analyses, focal METamp, RB1 wild-type, MYC diploidy, low circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) burden at baseline, and early molecular response are associated with better outcomes. Adverse events include edema (composite term; any grade: 58.3%; grade 3: 12.5%) and constipation (any grade: 41.7%; grade 3: 4.2%). Tepotinib provides antitumor activity in high-level METamp NSCLC (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT02864992).

Systemic and intracranial outcomes with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer and baseline brain metastases from CheckMate 227 Part 1

INTRODUCTION

In CheckMate 227 Part 1, nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC), regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression. Here, we report post hoc exploratory systemic/intracranial efficacy outcomes and safety by baseline brain metastasis status at 5 years' minimum follow-up.

METHODS

Treatment-naive adults with stage IV/recurrent NSCLC without EGFR/ALK alterations, including asymptomatic patients with treated brain metastases, were enrolled. Patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥1% were randomized to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, or chemotherapy; patients with tumor PD-L1 <1% were randomized to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy. Assessments included OS, systemic/intracranial progression-free survival (PFS) per blinded independent central review, new brain lesion development, and safety. Brain imaging was performed at baseline (all randomized patients) and approximately every 12 weeks thereafter (patients with baseline brain metastases only).

RESULTS

Overall, 202/1739 randomized patients had baseline brain metastases (nivolumab plus ipilimumab: 68; chemotherapy: 66). At 61.3 months' minimum follow-up, nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged OS versus chemotherapy in patients with baseline brain metastases (HR: 0.63; 95% CI: 0.43-0.92) and in those without (HR: 0.76; 95% CI: 0.66-0.87). In patients with baseline brain metastases, 5-year systemic and intracranial PFS rates were higher with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (12% and 16%, respectively) than chemotherapy (0% and 6%). Fewer patients with baseline brain metastases developed new brain lesions with nivolumab plus ipilimumab (4%) versus chemotherapy (20%). No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSIONS

With all patients off immunotherapy for ≥3 years, nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to provide long-term, durable survival benefit in patients with or without brain metastases. Intracranial efficacy outcomes favored nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy. These results further support nivolumab plus ipilimumab as an efficacious first-line treatment for patients with mNSCLC, regardless of baseline brain metastasis status.

Five-Year Survival Outcomes With Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab Versus Chemotherapy as First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer in CheckMate 227

PURPOSE

We present 5-year results from CheckMate 227 Part 1, in which nivolumab plus ipilimumab improved overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer, regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) status.

METHODS

Adults with stage IV/recurrent non-small-cell lung cancer without EGFR mutations or ALK alterations and with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% or < 1% (n = 1739) were randomly assigned. Patients with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% were randomly assigned to first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab alone, or chemotherapy. Patients with tumor PD-L1 < 1% were randomly assigned to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy. End points included exploratory 5-year results for efficacy, safety, and quality of life.

RESULTS

At a minimum follow-up of 61.3 months, 5-year OS rates were 24% versus 14% for nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 19% versus 7% (PD-L1 < 1%). The median duration of response was 24.5 versus 6.7 months (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 19.4 versus 4.8 months (PD-L1 < 1%). Among patients surviving 5 years, 66% (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 64% (PD-L1 < 1%) were off nivolumab plus ipilimumab without initiating subsequent systemic anticancer treatment by the 5-year time point. Survival benefit continued after nivolumab plus ipilimumab discontinuation because of treatment-related adverse events, with a 5-year OS rate of 39% (combined PD-L1 ≥ 1% and < 1% populations). Quality of life in 5-year survivors treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab was similar to that in the general US population through the 5-year follow-up. No new safety signals were observed.

CONCLUSION

With all patients off immunotherapy treatment for ≥ 3 years, nivolumab plus ipilimumab increased 5-year survivorship versus chemotherapy, including long-term, durable clinical benefit regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. These data support nivolumab plus ipilimumab as an effective first-line treatment for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer.

Long-term survival with first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in patients with advanced non-small-cell lung cancer: a pooled analysis

BACKGROUND

First-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolongs survival versus chemotherapy in advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). We further characterized clinical benefit with this regimen in a large pooled patient population and assessed the effect of response on survival.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Data were pooled from four studies of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab in advanced NSCLC (CheckMate 227 Part 1, 817 cohort A, 568 Part 1, and 012). Overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, duration of response, and safety were assessed. Landmark analyses of OS by response status at 6 months and by tumor burden reduction in responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab were also assessed.

RESULTS

In the pooled population (N = 1332) with a minimum follow-up of 29.1-58.9 months, median OS was 18.6 months, with a 3-year OS rate of 35%; median PFS was 5.4 months (3-year PFS rate, 17%). Objective response rate was 36%; median duration of response was 23.7 months, with 38% of responders having an ongoing response at 3 years. In patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) <1%, ≥1%, 1%-49%, or ≥50%, 3-year OS rates were 30%, 38%, 30%, and 48%. Three-year OS rates were 30% and 38% in patients with squamous or non-squamous histology. Efficacy outcomes in patients aged ≥75 years were similar to the overall pooled population (median OS, 20.1 months; 3-year OS rate, 34%). In the pooled population, responders to nivolumab plus ipilimumab at 6 months had longer post-landmark OS than those with stable or progressive disease; 3-year OS rates were 66%, 22%, and 14%, respectively. Greater depth of response was associated with prolonged survival; in patients with tumor burden reduction ≥80%, 50% to <80%, or 30% to <50%, 3-year OS rates were 85%, 72%, and 44%, respectively. No new safety signals were identified in the pooled population.

CONCLUSION

Long-term survival benefit and durable response with nivolumab plus ipilimumab in this large patient population further support this first-line treatment option for advanced NSCLC.

Safety of First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Patients With Metastatic NSCLC: A Pooled Analysis of CheckMate 227, CheckMate 568, and CheckMate 817

INTRODUCTION

We characterized the safety of first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab (NIVO+IPI) in a large patient population with metastatic NSCLC and efficacy outcomes after NIVO+IPI discontinuation owing to treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs).

METHODS

We pooled data from three first-line NIVO+IPI studies (NIVO, 3 mg/kg or 240 mg every 2 wk; IPI, 1 mg/kg every 6 wk) in metastatic NSCLC (CheckMate 227 part 1, CheckMate 817 cohort A, CheckMate 568 part 1). Safety end points included TRAEs and immune-mediated adverse events (IMAEs) in the pooled population and patients aged 75 years or older.

RESULTS

In the pooled population (N = 1255), any-grade TRAEs occurred in 78% of the patients, grade 3 or 4 TRAEs in 34%, and discontinuation of any regimen component owing to TRAEs in 21%. The most frequent TRAE and IMAE were diarrhea (20%; grade 3 or 4, 2%) and rash (17%; grade 3 or 4, 3%), respectively. The most common grade 3 or 4 IMAEs were hepatitis (5%) and diarrhea/colitis and pneumonitis (4% each). Pneumonitis was the most common cause of treatment-related death (5 of 16). Safety in patients aged 75 years or older (n = 174) was generally similar to the overall population, but discontinuation of any regimen component owing to TRAEs was more common (29%). In patients discontinuing NIVO+IPI owing to TRAEs (n = 225), 3-year overall survival was 50% (95% confidence interval: 42.6-56.0), and 42% (31.2-52.4) of 130 responders remained in response 2 years after discontinuation.

CONCLUSIONS

First-line NIVO+IPI was well tolerated in this large population with metastatic NSCLC and in patients aged 75 years or older. Discontinuation owing to TRAEs did not reduce long-term survival.

Assessment of Spanish hospitals involved in the Quality Oncology Practice Initiative program

305

Background: Measuring and tracking quality of care is highly relevant in today’s healthcare. The Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI) program is a referral for evaluating oncology practices worldwide. The ECO Foundation (Excellence and Quality in Oncology), a collaboration of oncology experts from the major Spanish hospitals involved in cancer treatment, reached an agreement with ASCO (American Society of Clinical Oncology) to include Spanish hospitals in its QOPI program. Methods: We analyzed the scores of the QOPI rounds from 14 Spanish hospitals, which submitted their charts from 2016 to 2021, and the measures obtained from 2018 to 2021, regarding the core/symptom, breast, colorectal (CRC) and NSCLC modules, in comparison with the QOPI aggregate measures. Results: Since 2016, 14 Spanish hospitals have participated in the QOPI program, achieving the certification 12 of them, and 3 are in process. Along the years, they have obtained a score over 85%, being 87,41% the worse in 2021, and 92,80% the best in 2020. We also analyzed the outstanding measures from 2018 onwards. The highest scores in Spanish hospitals were for information of infertility risks and chemotherapy intent prior to prescription, and documented plan for oral chemotherapy. However, measures regarding pain addressed, appropriate antiemetic therapy for high- and moderate-emetic-risk antineoplastic agents and action taken to address problems with emotional well-being by the second office visit, were among the lowest scored measures. When we focused in breast and NSCLC modules, Spanish hospitals didn´t show negative values, highlighting in the administration of Tamoxifen or AI within 1 year of diagnosis by patients with AJCC Stage IA (T1c) and IB - III ER or PR positive and in the status documentation for patients with initial AJCC Stage IV or distant metastatic NSCLC. In CRC module, Spanish hospitals showed lower scores in colonoscopy before or within 6 months of curative colorectal resection or completion of primary adjuvant chemotherapy. Conclusions: This study evaluates QOPI scores in Spain, showing that repeated participation enhances quality of care, although there is room for improvement. ECO Foundation will continue supporting Spanish practices to increase their participation aiming of improve oncology care in Spain.

Five-year survival outcomes with nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) versus chemotherapy (chemo) as first-line (1L) treatment for metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Results from CheckMate 227

LBA9025

Background: In CheckMate 227 part 1 (NCT02477826), 1L NIVO + IPI demonstrated long-term, durable survival benefit vs platinum-doublet chemo in patients (pts) with metastatic NSCLC regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression level. Here we present the longest reported follow-up (5 y) of a phase 3 trial of 1L combination immunotherapy in metastatic NSCLC. Methods: Adults with previously untreated stage IV or recurrent NSCLC, no known EGFR/ ALK alterations , and an ECOG performance status ≤ 1 were enrolled and stratified by histology. Pts with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% were randomized 1:1:1 to NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W), NIVO (240 mg Q2W), or chemo. Pts with tumor PD-L1 < 1% were randomized 1:1:1 to NIVO + IPI, NIVO (360 mg Q3W) + chemo, or chemo. Pts were treated until progression, toxicity, or ≤ 2 y for immunotherapy. Assessments included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DOR), and a novel efficacy endpoint, treatment-free interval. Treatment-free interval was measured in pts who discontinued study therapy (for any reason including treatment completion) and was defined as the time from last study dose to start of subsequent systemic therapy or death, whichever occurred first. Results: Minimum follow-up was 61.3 mo (database lock, Feb 15, 2022). In pts with tumor PD-L1 ≥ 1% (N = 1189), continued long-term OS benefit was seen with NIVO + IPI vs chemo (HR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.66–0.91]); 5-y OS rates were 24% (NIVO + IPI), 17% (NIVO), and 14% (chemo). OS benefit also continued in pts with tumor PD-L1 < 1% (N = 550) for NIVO + IPI vs chemo (HR, 0.65 [95% CI, 0.52–0.81]); 5-y OS rates were 19% (NIVO + IPI), 10% (NIVO + chemo), and 7% (chemo). Clinical benefit with NIVO + IPI vs chemo was observed across additional efficacy endpoints in the overall population and in pts alive at 5 y (table). PFS, ORR, and DOR with NIVO and NIVO + chemo will be presented. Among pts alive at 5 y in the NIVO + IPI group, 66% (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 64% (PD-L1 < 1%) remained treatment-free ≥ 3 y after discontinuing study therapy; median (range) duration of NIVO ± IPI therapy was 17.7 (0-25.5) mo (PD-L1 ≥ 1%) and 9.5 (0-25.1) mo (PD-L1 < 1%). No new safety signals were observed. Conclusions: With a 5-y minimum follow-up, NIVO + IPI continues to provide long-term, durable clinical benefit vs chemo in previously untreated pts with metastatic NSCLC, regardless of PD-L1 expression. NIVO + IPI led to increased 5-y survivorship; the majority of these pts were treatment-free for ≥ 3 y post-treatment discontinuation. Clinical trial information: NCT02477826. [Table: see text]

First-line (1L) nivolumab (NIVO) + ipilimumab (IPI) + 2 cycles of chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo alone (4 cycles) in patients (pts) with metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): 3-year update from CheckMate 9LA

LBA9026

Background: In CheckMate 9LA (NCT03215706), 1L NIVO + IPI combined with 2 cycles of chemo was shown to provide survival benefit vs chemo alone in pts with metastatic NSCLC. Here, we report updated efficacy and safety with a 3-year minimum follow-up, as well as exploratory biomarker analyses from this study. Methods: Adults with stage IV or recurrent NSCLC, no known sensitizing EGFR/ ALK alterations, and ECOG performance status ≤ 1 were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 360 mg Q3W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W + 2 cycles of chemo (n = 361) or 4 cycles of chemo alone (n = 358). Pts were stratified by tumor PD-L1 expression, sex, and histology. Pts with non-squamous (NSQ) NSCLC in the chemo-alone arm could receive pemetrexed maintenance. Assessments included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR). For all pts with NSQ NSCLC and with tissue evaluable for mutational analysis (n = 313), the FoundationOne CDxTM assay was used to identify mutant (mut) or wild type (wt) KRAS and STK11 genes. Exploratory assessments included evaluation of OS and PFS with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo by mutation status and safety. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 36.1 mo (database lock: Feb 15, 2022), pts continued to derive long-term, durable OS benefit with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo (HR, 0.74 [95% CI, 0.62–0.87]); 3-y OS rates were 27% vs 19%. Clinical benefit with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was observed in all randomized pts and across most subgroups, including by PD-L1 expression level (Table) or histology. In an exploratory analysis in pts evaluable for mutations including KRAS and STK11, OS appeared to be improved with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo (median OS, 16.3 vs 13.1 mo). Similar trends of prolonged OS with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo were also seen in pts with or without KRAS mutation (median OS, mut: 19.2 vs 13.5 mo; wt: 15.6 vs 12.7 mo) or STK11 mutation (mut: 13.8 vs 10.7 mo; wt: 17.8 vs 13.9 mo), respectively. Additional efficacy outcomes will be presented. No new safety signals were identified with extended follow-up. Conclusions: With a 3-year minimum follow-up, 1L NIVO + IPI + chemo demonstrated long-term, durable efficacy benefit vs chemo in pts with metastatic NSCLC. Survival benefit of NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was observed regardless of KRAS and STK11 mutation status. Clinical trial information: NCT03215706. [Table: see text]

KeyVibe-008: Randomized, phase 3 study of first-line vibostolimab plus pembrolizumab plus etoposide/platinum versus atezolizumab plus EP in extensive-stage small cell lung cancer

TPS8606

Background: Current standard of care immunotherapy plus chemotherapy options for first-line extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) are associated with modest improvements in median OS and PFS. In the KEYNOTE-604 study, first-line pembrolizumab plus etoposide/platinum (EP) significantly improved PFS (HR 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61‒0.91; P = 0.0023) compared with placebo plus EP in ES-SCLC; OS was also longer with pembrolizumab plus EP vs placebo plus EP but did not reach statistical significance (HR 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64‒0.98; P = 0.0164). Preclinical and clinical data suggest that blocking the interaction between the T-cell immunoreceptor with immunoglobulin and ITIM domains (TIGIT) and its ligands CD112 and CD155 with the anti-TIGIT humanized monoclonal antibody vibostolimab (MK-7684) yields promising antitumor activity when combined with pembrolizumab, with or without chemotherapy, including in patients with lung cancer. The current phase 3 study, KeyVibe-008 (NCT05224141), is comparing the efficacy and safety of first-line treatment with MK-7684A, a co-formulation of vibostolimab plus pembrolizumab, in combination with EP vs atezolizumab plus EP in patients with ES-SCLC. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 study is enrolling patients aged ≥18 years with histologically or cytologically confirmed, previously untreated ES-SCLC. Patients must have measurable disease per RECIST v1.1; ECOG PS of 0 or 1; no active CNS metastases/carcinomatous meningitis, autoimmune disease, neurologic paraneoplastic syndromes, pneumonitis, or interstitial lung disease; and must provide a pretreatment tumor sample. Patients are randomized 1:1 to receive up to 4 cycles of EP (cisplatin or carboplatin) in combination with MK-7684A (vibostolimab 200 mg + pembrolizumab 200 mg) Q3W or atezolizumab (1200 mg) Q3W, followed by MK-7684A or atezolizumab, respectively, until disease progression, unacceptable AEs, intercurrent illness, protocol violation, or investigator/patient decision. Randomization is stratified by ECOG PS (0 vs 1), LDH (≤ULN vs > ULN), liver metastases (yes vs no), and brain metastases (yes vs no). The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include PFS, ORR, and duration of response per RECIST v1.1 by blinded independent central review; safety; and patient-reported outcomes (PROs). Tumor imaging occurs at baseline, every 6 weeks until 48 weeks, and every 9 weeks thereafter until disease progression, start of new anticancer treatment, withdrawal of consent, or death. PROs are assessed using validated instruments including the EORTC quality of life and EuroQol questionnaires. AEs are graded according to NCI CTCAE v5.0. Enrollment is ongoing worldwide. Clinical trial information: NCT05224141.

PD-L1, VISTA, and CD47 expression and prognosis impact in malignant pleural mesothelioma

8562

Background: Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma (MPM) has been characterized by an immune suppressive microenvironment. The immune checkpoint (IC) VISTA is notably expressed in MPM, in contrast to other IC proteins such us PD-L1. Recently, CD47 has been described as a possible diagnostic biomarker for MPM, although its impact in prognosis has not been established yet. Methods: This is a retrospective observational study of immunotherapy naïve MPM patients. Immunochemistry (IHC) assessment of PD-L1, VISTA and CD47 protein expression was performed on tissue microarray of 46 surgical samples. Means were compared using Mann-Whitney U test. Correlation was estimated using Pearson’s coefficients. Overall survival (OS) was assessed using Kaplan–Meier curves and Cox proportional hazard models. A two-sided alpha error of 0.05 was used to assess statistical significance. Statistical analysis was conducted with Stata/SE version 16.1. Results: A total of 46 patients, 71.7% (33/46) male, were included in our study. Among them, 77.8% (35/45) had stage IIIB-IV, 84.8% (39/46) had received systemic therapy and 16.7% (7/42) had undergone radical-intent surgery. Asbestos exposure was confirmed in 65,7% (23/35) patients. Regarding the histological subtype, 71.7% (33/46) were epithelioid (Ep) and 13.0% (6/46) non-epithelioid (NEp), including 5 sarcomatoid and 1 biphasic. In IHC analysis, VISTA and CD47 were expressed in 63.0% (29/46) and 58.7% (27/46), respectively, whereas only 28.3% (13/46) patients had positive PD-L1 expression (≥1%). Median expression of VISTA, CD47 and PD-L1 in tumor samples was 41.8 (95% IC 0.5 - 50.7), 26.3 (95% IC 0 - 45.8) and 0 (95% IC 0-0.5), respectively. VISTA and CD47 expression were significantly higher in the Ep subgroup vs. the NEp subgroup (VISTA 39.4% vs 7.2% p = 0.028; CD47 37.3 vs. 0.8 p = 0.01). Additionally, we found a significant positive correlation between VISTA and CD47 protein expression (Pearson's r = 0.55, p < 0.001), which was consistent with the results we found in an independent MPM patient series from TCGA PanCancer Atlas (N = 87) based on RNA expression (r = 0.46; p < 0.001). Median OS, available in 40/46 cases, was 16.6 months (95% CI 12.03-20.43). On multivariate analysis, CD47 ≥1% expression was significantly associated with longer OS (29.7 vs 10.53 months, HR 0.35, [IC 95% 0.14-0.86]; p = 0.02) after adjusting for histological subtype, PDL1 and VISTA expression. In contrast, PD-L1 ≥1% showed a trend towards worse prognosis (10.3 vs 19.3 months), without reaching statistical significance (HR 2.23 [95% IC 0.95-5.23]; p = 0.065). No OS differences were found regarding VISTA expression. Conclusions: To our knowledge, this is the first study to describe VISTA and CD47 correlation in MPM. Moreover, we demonstrate CD47 expression to be an independent prognostic marker in MPM, suggesting C47 may play a key role in tumor biology of MPM, for which further validation and functional studies are necessary.

Final survival outcomes and immune biomarker analysis of a randomized, open-label, phase I/II study combining oncolytic adenovirus ONCOS-102 with pemetrexed/cisplatin (P/C) in patients with unresectable malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM)

8561

Background: MPM is an aggressive malignancy without curative treatment. ONCOS-102 is an oncolytic adenovirus expressing GM-CSF (Ad5/3-D24-GMCSF) with a clinically documented ability to stimulate local and systemic immune responses and re-modulate the tumor microenvironment, both as a monotherapy and in combination with anti-PD1 blockade. The study objectives included determining safety and tolerability, efficacy and immunological activation in repeat tumor biopsies, and correlations with clinical outcomes. Methods: Following a safety run-in of n = 6 pts, 25 patients were randomized to receive ONCOS-102 intratumorally under CT or US guidance at a dose of 3 x 1011 Virus Particles on Day 1, 4, 8, 36, 78 and 120, plus six cycles of P/C starting on Day 22, or control comprising six cycles of P/C only. Both treatment-naïve (1L) and previously treated patients (2L) were enrolled. Imaging was done at baseline, Day 43-64 and 127-148 and tumor biopsy were collected at baseline and at Day 36. Final survival analysis (n = 25) was performed after 30 mo follow up. Multiplex immunofluorescence for immune cell subsets, RNASeq and qPCR was performed on repeat tumor samples. Results: The most frequent adverse events were anaemia, neutropenia and asthenia reported by > 50% in both groups with more frequent reports of pyrexia and nausea in the experimental (exp) group. No difference in the rate of severe events (Gr 3/4 acc to NCI CTCAE vs 4.0) were observed. 30-month survival rate (n = 25) was 34.3 % vs 18.2 % (NS) with mOS of 19.3 mo (95% CI: 4.6, NA) vs 18.3 mo (95% CI: 3.1, 28.9) in the exp group vs control. For patients treated in the 1L setting, 30 mo survival was 33.3 % in the exp group (n = 8) and 0% in the control group (n = 6) with mOS of 25.0 months and 13.5 months, respectively (NS). mPFS was unchanged from prior cut-offs; 9.8 months in the exp group and 7.6 in the control (NS). ONCOS-102 + P/C induced a pronounced increase in tumor infiltration by CD4+, CD8+ and granzyme B expressing CD8+ T-cells as well as M1:M2 macrophage polarization in patients with disease control (n = 13) vs progressing patients (n = 3). The data from RNAseq and qPCR analysis will be presented. Conclusions: The addition of ONCOS-102 to P/C was well tolerated by MPM patients and resulted in numerically improved 30-month survival rate in the overall population, and improved mOS in chemotherapy-naïve patients, albeit not statistically significant. Substantial immunological activation in tumor associated with ONCOS-102 was demonstrated, correlating with clinical benefit. Further exploration of ONCOS-102 as a treatment option in MPM is warranted Clinical trial information: NCT02879669.

Adverse events self-reported by patients (pts) with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) treated with durvalumab (D) plus platinum-etoposide (EP) or EP in the CASPIAN study

8571

Background: The CASPIAN phase 3 study established D+EP as a global standard of care in ES-SCLC. Patient-Reported Outcomes - Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE) was developed to complement standard adverse event (AE) reporting in oncology trials. Here we describe patient-reported symptomatic AEs using PRO-CTCAE in CASPIAN, the first time the PRO-CTCAE tool has been piloted in SCLC research. Methods: In CASPIAN, treatment-naïve pts (WHO PS 0/1) with ES-SCLC received 4 cycles of D+EP q3w followed by maintenance D q4w until progressive disease (PD), or up to 6 cycles of EP q3w. As part of exploratory analyses, where validated local language versions were available (in English, German, Japanese or Spanish), pts were asked to complete the PRO-CTCAE by e-device at baseline, q3w during EP (in both arms), then q4w until PD, followed by day 28 post-PD, 2 months post-PD, and q8w until second progression/death. Presence/absence, frequency or severity were examined during the first 24 weeks after starting treatment across 11 AEs selected as being relevant to pts with ES-SCLC (Table). Results: In total, 164 of the 537 pts randomized to D+EP and EP in CASPIAN (31%; D+EP: 83; EP: 81) were asked to complete the PRO-CTCAE. At baseline, the PRO-CTCAE was completed by 84% of these pts in the D+EP arm and 81% in the EP arm; compliance rates > 60% were achieved up to cycle 32 for D+EP and cycle 6 for EP. Examined AEs were reported by a minority of pts before starting treatment in both arms (range D+EP vs EP: 4% vs 3% for hand-foot syndrome to 34% vs 41% for dry mouth). Baseline AE rates were generally maintained in both arms up to 24 weeks after starting treatment, except for itchy skin, which showed a numerical increase from 13% at baseline to a peak of 34% at cycle 6 in the D+EP arm and 12% at baseline to a peak of 42% at cycle 8 in the EP arm; and dizziness, which showed a numerical increase from 16% at baseline to a peak of 40% at cycle 5 in the D+EP arm, while rates were maintained vs baseline in the EP arm. Most pts reporting these AEs indicated that they occurred rarely or occasionally, or were mild or moderate in severity. Conclusions: Self-reported data from pts in CASPIAN showed that the 11 AEs examined during the 24 weeks after starting treatment were reported by a minority of pts, mostly with rare or occasional occurrence, and mild to moderate severity. Rates and patterns of AEs over time were broadly similar in the D+EP and EP arms. These results complement the CASPIAN safety profile and give insight into pts’ experience of treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT03043872. [Table: see text]

Phase 1/2a trial of nadunolimab, a first-in-class fully humanized monoclonal antibody against IL1RAP, in combination with cisplatin and gemcitabine (CG) in patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

9020

Background: Interleukin-1 Receptor Accessory Protein (IL1RAP) is expressed by cancer and stromal cells of many solid tumors. The IL-1 pathway is active in tumors and upregulated in response to chemotherapy. IL1RAP interacts with IL-1R1 and modulates downstream factors (e.g. IL-6, IL-8) and CRP level. Nadunolimab (CAN04), a fully humanized ADCC-enhanced IgG1 antibody, targets IL1RAP and blocks IL-1α and IL-1β signaling. Here, results are reported from the phase 1/2a clinical trial CANFOUR evaluating nadunolimab combined with CG in NSCLC. Methods: Patients (pts) with unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, progressed on pembrolizumab or in first line for advanced disease, were eligible. Pts received 1 (n =17), 2.5 (n = 3) or 5 mg/kg (= 13) nadunolimab given Q1W in Cycle 1 and Q2W from Cycle 2, combined with standard CG. Due to risk of infusion-related reactions, a priming dose of 0.5 mg/kg nadunolimab was given one week before CG. Primary objective was safety; secondary objectives included ORR, PFS and OS, and exploratory objectives included effects on serum and tumor tissue biomarkers. Results: Thirty-three pts were enrolled: median age 64 years (39-77), 30% female, 42% ECOG 0, 55% non-squamous histology, 82% stage IV, 45% received previous pembrolizumab monotherapy. Treatment-related adverse events of grade≥3 were observed in 73% of pts, including neutropenia (58%), febrile neutropenia (9%), thrombocytopenia (30%) and anemia (18%). Neutropenia could be managed by G-CSF. Thirty pts received combination therapy and were included in the efficacy analysis. Three pts did not receive chemotherapy due to clinical deterioration (n = 2) or consent withdrawal (n = 1). ORR was 53% (95% CI 34-72%), disease control rate 80% (61-92%) and median duration of response 5.5 months (3.7-7.0) with 23% of pts still on treatment. The lower limit of the 95% CI for the observed ORR excludes the pre-specified 30%. ORR in pts with squamous histology was 46% and non-squamous 56%. Median PFS was 6.7 months (5.5-7.3) and median OS 13.7 months. The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio was reduced throughout the trial and was driven by the reduction in circulating neutrophil numbers. IL1RAP expression on both cancer and stromal cells was confirmed in tumor biopsies. Conclusions: Nadunolimab combined with CG shows manageable safety and promising efficacy with a response rate of 53% in NSCLC pts. Nadunolimab is currently evaluated in several clinical trials investigating chemotherapy or IO combinations, including carboplatin and pemetrexed in non-squamous NSCLC. Clinical trial information: NCT03267316.

Phase 2 study of tarlatamab, a DLL3-targeting, half life–extended, bispecific T-cell engager (HLE BiTE)immuno-oncology therapy, in relapsed/refractory small cell lung cancer (SCLC)

TPS8603

Background: SCLC is characterized by rapid growth and early development of metastases. Platinum-based first-line chemotherapy is associated with a high initial response rate; however, disease recurrence is common. Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3) is a Notch ligand that is upregulated and aberrantly expressed on the cell surface in most SCLC, making it a compelling therapeutic target. Tarlatamab is an HLE BiTE immuno-oncology therapy designed to bind DLL3 on target cancer cells and CD3 on T cells, forming a cytolytic synapse inducing T cell activation and expansion and T cell-dependent killing of tumor cells. Interim results of an ongoing first-in-human study in patients with relapsed/refractory SCLC (NCT03319940) show preliminary evidence for tarlatamab efficacy in pretreated patients with confirmed partial responses in 20% of patients and duration of response of 8.7 months (Owonikoko TK, et al. Abstract 8510. Presented at: ASCO Annual Meeting, June 4–8, 2021; Virtual). Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 27% of patients and TRAEs resulted in discontinuation in 5% of patients. This promising efficacy/safety profile supports further study of tarlatamab in SCLC. Methods: NCT05060016 is a phase 2, open-label study evaluating tarlatamab in patients with relapsed/refractory SCLC after two or more lines of prior treatment. Part 1 is a dose characterization phase in which subjects will be randomized 1:1 to two active doses of tarlatamab. Part 2 will continue enrollment for the selected target dose only based on interim analysis of Part 1. Key eligibility criteria include adults with histologically or cytologically confirmed SCLC whose disease progressed/recurred after two or more lines of prior treatment including at least 1 platinum-based regimen (including a PD-L1 inhibitor, if standard of care, with certain exceptions per protocol), treated brain metastases, ECOG performance status ≤1, and life expectancy ≥ 12 weeks in the opinion of the investigator. The primary endpoint for the primary analysis is ORR per RECIST 1.1 as assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary objectives are to evaluate antitumor activity by additional measures (duration of response, progression-free survival, disease control rate and duration, overall survival), safety and tolerability, immunogenicity, and pharmacokinetics. Sites in North America, Asia and Europe are participating in the trial with subjects already enrolled and enrollment ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT05060016.

First-Line Nivolumab Plus Ipilimumab in Advanced NSCLC: 4-Year Outcomes From the Randomized, Open-Label, Phase 3 CheckMate 227 Part 1 Trial

INTRODUCTION

In CheckMate 227, nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged overall survival (OS) versus chemotherapy in patients with tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) greater than or equal to 1% (primary end point) or less than 1% (prespecified descriptive analysis). We report results with minimum 4 years' follow-up.

METHODS

Adults with previously untreated stage IV or recurrent NSCLC were randomized (1:1:1) to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 ≥1%); or to nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab plus chemotherapy, or chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Efficacy included OS and other measures. Safety included timing and management of immune-mediated adverse events (AEs). A post hoc analysis evaluated efficacy in patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to treatment-related AEs (TRAEs).

RESULTS

After 54.8 months' median follow-up, OS remained longer with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy in patients with PD-L1 greater than or equal to 1% (hazard ratio = 0.76; 95% confidence interval: 0.65-0.90) and PD-L1 less than 1% (0.64; 0.51-0.81); 4-year OS rate with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy was 29% versus 18% (PD-L1 ≥1%); and 24% versus 10% (PD-L1 <1%). Benefits were observed in both squamous and nonsquamous histologies. In a descriptive analysis, efficacy was improved with nivolumab plus ipilimumab relative to nivolumab (PD-L1 ≥1%) and nivolumab plus chemotherapy (PD-L1 <1%). Safety was consistent with previous reports. The most common immune-mediated AE with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, nivolumab, and nivolumab plus chemotherapy was rash; most immune-mediated AEs (except endocrine events) occurred within 6 months from start of treatment and resolved within 3 months after, mainly with systemic corticosteroids. Patients who discontinued nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs had long-term OS benefits, as seen in the all randomized population.

CONCLUSIONS

At more than 4 years' minimum follow-up, with all patients off immunotherapy treatment for at least 2 years, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate durable long-term efficacy in patients with advanced NSCLC. No new safety signals were identified. Immune-mediated AEs occurred early and resolved quickly with guideline-based management. Discontinuation of nivolumab plus ipilimumab due to TRAEs did not have a negative impact on the long-term benefits seen in all randomized patients.

Pralsetinib for RET fusion-positive non-small-cell lung cancer (ARROW): a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study

BACKGROUND

Oncogenic alterations in RET have been identified in multiple tumour types, including 1-2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). We aimed to assess the safety, tolerability, and antitumour activity of pralsetinib, a highly potent, oral, selective RET inhibitor, in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC.

METHODS

ARROW is a multi-cohort, open-label, phase 1/2 study done at 71 sites (community and academic cancer centres) in 13 countries (Belgium, China, France, Germany, Hong Kong, Italy, Netherlands, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Taiwan, the UK, and the USA). Patients aged 18 years or older with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumours, including RET fusion-positive NSCLC, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-2 (later limited to 0-1 in a protocol amendment) were enrolled. In phase 2, patients received 400 mg once-daily oral pralsetinib, and could continue treatment until disease progression, intolerance, withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Phase 2 primary endpoints were overall response rate (according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1·1 and assessed by blinded independent central review) and safety. Tumour response was assessed in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC and centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease who had received platinum-based chemotherapy or were treatment-naive because they were ineligible for standard therapy. This ongoing study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03037385, and enrolment of patients with treatment-naive RET fusion-positive NSCLC was ongoing at the time of this interim analysis.

FINDINGS

Of 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC enrolled between March 17, 2017, and May 22, 2020 (data cutoff), 92 with previous platinum-based chemotherapy and 29 who were treatment-naive received pralsetinib before July 11, 2019 (efficacy enrolment cutoff); 87 previously treated patients and 27 treatment-naive patients had centrally adjudicated baseline measurable disease. Overall responses were recorded in 53 (61%; 95% CI 50-71) of 87 patients with previous platinum-based chemotherapy, including five (6%) patients with a complete response; and 19 (70%; 50-86) of 27 treatment-naive patients, including three (11%) with a complete response. In 233 patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, common grade 3 or worse treatment-related adverse events were neutropenia (43 patients [18%]), hypertension (26 [11%]), and anaemia (24 [10%]); there were no treatment-related deaths in this population.

INTERPRETATION

Pralsetinib is a new, well-tolerated, promising, once-daily oral treatment option for patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC.

FUNDING

Blueprint Medicines.

First-in-human study of PM14 in patients with advanced solid tumors

3078

Background: PM14 is a new chemical entity that forms DNA adducts which specifically inhibit RNA synthesis and block active transcription of protein-coding genes. Antitumor activity has been demonstrated in vitro in several cell lines (e.g. lung, kidney, prostate), and in vivo in mice bearing xenografted human-derived tumors (soft tissue sarcoma, small cell lung cancer, ovarian, gastric, breast and renal cancer). Methods: Open-label, dose-escalating, phase I trial of PM14 administered as a 3-hour infusion i.v. every 3 weeks (q3wk) in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors, adequate organ function and ECOG PS score of 0-1. Two schedules were explored: Schedule A (Day 1 [D1], Day 8 [D8]) and Schedule B (D1). Results: 37 pts were treated (Schedule A/B: 28/9 pts). Baseline characteristics of pts (A/B): median age 56/47 years; male 57%/56%; ECOG PS 0: 57%/56%; median of prior lines (range): 3 (1-8)/4 (1-10). Most common tumor types (A + B): STS (n=7 pts), ovarian (n=6), pancreatic (n=4), prostate cancer (n=3). The maximum tolerated dose was 4.5 mg/m2 for A (dose-limiting toxicities [DLTs]: D8 omission due to lack of recovery of lab parameters for re-treatment [n=2 pts]) and 5.6 mg/m2 (DLTs: G4 febrile neutropenia [n=1], G4 transaminase increase [n=1]) for B. The recommended dose (RD) was 3.0 mg/m2 on D1,D8 (A), and 4.5 mg/m2 on D1 (B). No DLTs were present at the RDs. Most common toxicities were hematological abnormalities and transaminase increase. Main toxicities at the RDs are shown below. Antitumor activity comprised stable disease ≥4 months in 7 heavily pretreated pts (6 in A; 1 in B) at all dose levels. Linear pharmacokinetics were observed for PM14 at tested doses (0.25-5.6 mg/m²), with geometric mean (CV%) total plasma clearance 5.9 L/h (88%), volume of distribution 128 L (81%) and median (range) terminal half-life 15.9 h (7.5-34.3 h). Less than 1.6% of administered dose was recovered in urine. Conclusions: RDs were determined for two PM14 schedules in pts with advanced solid tumors. At the RDs, PM14 is well tolerated and has a manageable safety profile. An expansion phase in specific tumor types, with an optional Bayesian continual reassessment method for RD fine-tuning, is ongoing with both schedules.[Table: see text]

AdvanTIG-302: Anti-TIGIT monoclonal antibody (mAb) ociperlimab (OCI) plus tislelizumab (TIS) versus pembrolizumab (PEM) in programmed death ligand-1 (PD-L1) selected, previously untreated, locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

TPS9128

Background: Monotherapy with programmed death 1 (PD-1)/PD-L1 antibodies has improved clinical outcomes for patients (pts) with non-oncogenic driven NSCLC but clinical responses are limited by primary and secondary resistance, and improvements in durability of response are required. T-cell immunoreceptor with immunoglobulin and immunoreceptor tyrosine-based inhibition motif domain (TIGIT) is a co-inhibitory, immune checkpoint receptor upregulated on T-cells and natural killer cells in multiple solid tumors, which can inhibit anticancer immune responses. OCI (BGB-A1217) is a novel, humanized mAb that binds to TIGIT with high affinity and specificity, which has demonstrated competent binding with C1q and all Fcγ receptors while inducing antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity. Preclinical and clinical studies suggest that dual targeting with anti-TIGIT and anti-PD-1 antibodies produces synergistic immune cell activation and enhanced antitumor activity. Methods: AdvanTIG-302 is a Phase 3, multicenter, international, randomized, double-blind study (NCT04746924) investigating OCI in combination with TIS compared with PEM in adult pts (≥ 18 years of age) with PD-L1 selected, previously untreated, locally advanced, unresectable or metastatic NSCLC without oncogenic EGFR or ALK mutation. Approximately 605 pts will be randomized 5:5:1 to receive: OCI 900 mg intravenously (IV) plus TIS 200 mg IV every three weeks (Q3W; Arm A), PEM 200 mg IV plus placebo IV Q3W (Arm B) or TIS 200 mg IV plus placebo IV Q3W (Arm C). Pts will be treated until disease progression, loss of clinical benefit, intolerable toxicity or withdrawal of consent. Stratification factors include histology (squamous vs non-squamous) and region (Asian vs non-Asian). Cross-over is not permitted. Key eligibility criteria include histologically confirmed disease, PD-L1 expression ≥ 50%, no known EGFR or ALK mutations and no prior checkpoint inhibitor therapy. Dual primary endpoints are investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS; RECIST v1.1) and overall survival (Arms A and B) in the Intention-to-Treat population. Secondary endpoints include PFS (assessed by Blinded Independent Review Committee), investigator-assessed overall response rate and duration of response, safety and tolerability, and patient-reported health-related quality of life (EORTC-QLQ-C30, QLQ-LC13 and EQ-5D-5L; Arms A and B). Exploratory endpoints include disease control rate, clinical benefit rate and time to response. This study will also evaluate the association between biomarkers and response or resistance. Study enrollment has begun and recruitment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT04746924.

Lurbinectedin (LUR) in combination with Irinotecan (IRI) in patients (pts) with advanced endometrial carcinoma

5586

Background: LUR is a new agent that exerts antitumor activity through inhibition of trans-activated transcription and modulation of tumor microenvironment. Preclinical synergism/additivity in combination with IRI has been reported, thus prompting the conduct of this trial. This synergism had been evaluated and recently reported in patients with Small Cell Lung Cancer, with encouraging results (Ponce et al. WCLC, 2020). Methods: Phase I trial to evaluate escalating doses of LUR on Day (D) 1 plus a fixed dose of IRI 75 mg/m2 on D1 and D8 every 3 weeks (q3w) in pts with advanced solid tumors, enrolled following a standard 3+3 dose escalation design. Phase II to expand in selected indications at the Recommended Dose (RD). In this abstract, the cohort of patients with endometrial carcinoma treated at the RD is presented. Results: 21 pts (all female) with endometrial carcinoma were treated at the RD (LUR 2 mg/m2 + IRI 75 mg/m2 + G-CSF); 57% had ECOG PS=1; median age was 64 years (range 34-74); subtype of tumour was split: 67% (14 pts) endometroid, 33% non-endometroid (3 pts serous-papilar, 3 pts clear-cell and 1 pt undifferentiated); median of 2 prior lines (range, 1−7) per pt. Common G1/2 toxicities were nausea, vomiting, fatigue, diarrhea and anorexia; G3/4 hematological toxicities comprised neutropenia (33%), thrombocytopenia (5%) and anemia (38%). Two episodes of febrile neutropenia occurred (9.5%). G3/4 non hematological toxicities consisted of diarrhea (24%), asthenia (19%), nausea (14%) and vomiting (5%), all were transient and manageable. 1 patient (5%) discontinued treatment due to toxicity drug-related (generalized muscular weakness), but no treatment-related deaths were reported. Objective RECIST responses were documented in 4/21 evaluable pts (19%). With 6 pts censored for progression, median PFS was 4.4 months (95% CI 2.1-9.6 months), and PFS at 6 months was 40.4%. The clinical benefit rate (% of pts with Complete Response (CR), Partial Response (PR) or Stable Disease > 4 months) was 43%, and the Disease Control Rate (% of pts with CR, PR or SD) 81%. 3/21 pts (14%) have been more than 12 months on treatment so far. Conclusions: The combination of Lurbinectedin and Irinotecan is active in heavily pretreated patients with endometrial carcinoma. The combination was well-tolerated and consistent with the known safety profile for this combination. Myelosuppression, diarrhea, nausea and asthenia were predictable and manageable. Updated results of this cohort will be presented at the meeting. Clinical trial information: NCT02611024.

Updated results from a phase 1 study of AMG 757, a half-life extended bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE) immuno-oncology therapy against delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3), in small cell lung cancer (SCLC)

8510

Background: DLL3, an inhibitory Notch ligand, is a promising target as it is highly expressed in SCLC compared to normal tissue. AMG 757, a half-life extended BiTE immuno-oncology therapy, binds DLL3 on tumor cells and CD3 on T cells, leading to T cell-dependent killing of tumors. Results from the first nine dosing cohorts showing preliminary efficacy of AMG 757 (confirmed partial response [PR], 14% of pts) were previously presented. Here, updated safety, efficacy, and pharmacokinetic data from 10 cohorts from the ongoing phase 1 study of AMG 757 in SCLC are reported (NCT03319940). Methods: AMG 757 (0.003–100 mg) was administered IV every 2 weeks ± step dosing. Eligible patients (pts) had SCLC that progressed after ≥1 platinum-based regimen. Antitumor activity was assessed by modified RECIST 1.1. Results: As of 11 Jan 2021, 64 pts enrolled at 10 dose levels (DLs; 0.003–100 mg) had received ≥1 AMG 757 dose and were available for analyses. Median age was 64 (range, 32–80) y; 63 pts (98%) had ECOG PS 0–1 and median number of prior lines of therapy was 2 (range, 1–6), with 28 pts (44%) receiving prior PD-1/PD-L1 therapy. Median treatment duration was 6 (range, 0.1–71) wk. Treatment-related AEs occurred in 53 pts (83%): 16 (25%) ≥ grade (G) 3, 4 (6%) ≥G4, 1 (2%) G5 (pneumonitis; DL5 [0.3 mg]). AEs led to discontinuation in 1 pt (G3 encephalopathy, DL10 [100 mg]). Cytokine release syndrome (CRS; graded per Lee 2014 criteria) was reported in 27 pts (42%): G2 in 7 (11%), ≥G3 in 1 (2%). CRS presented mainly as fever (31%), tachycardia (17%), nausea (13%), fatigue (9%), and hypotension (9%). CRS was usually reversible and was managed with supportive care, corticosteroids, and/or anti-IL-6R. CRS did not lead to any treatment discontinuations. Sixty pts treated across 10 DLs, with a median follow-up of 4.2 (range, 0.2–18.6) mo, were evaluated for efficacy. Confirmed PR across all DLs was reported in 8/60 pts (13%), with 5/8 pts (63%) pts achieving unconfirmed PR at 100 mg (DL10). The median time to response was 1.7 (range, 1.2–3.7) mo. The estimated duration of response was >6 months in 71% pts (95% CI: 26, 92) with any PR. Disease control rate was 43%, with any tumor shrinkage in 23/60 pts (38%). AMG 757 serum exposures increased approximately dose proportionally within the evaluated dose range. Conclusions: AMG 757 has an acceptable safety profile at doses up to 100 mg. Responses were rapid and durable. Encouraging anti-tumor activity was seen across dose ranges, with ongoing unconfirmed PR in 5/8 pts (63%) at the highest DL. The study is ongoing; updated data, including response rates and duration of response, will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03319940.

Evaluation of bintrafusp alfa, a bifunctional fusion protein targeting TGF-β and PD-L1, in cervical cancer: Data from phase 1 and phase 2 studies

5509

Background: The accelerated FDA approval of pembrolizumab validated the efficacy of anti–PD-(L)1 therapy for pts with recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer; however, the objective response rate (ORR) with pembrolizumab was 14.3% in pts with PD-L1 expressing tumors. HPV infection is implicated in > 95% of cervical cancers and is linked to upregulation of TGF-β signaling. Bintrafusp alfa is a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of the extracellular domain of the TGF-βRII receptor (a TGF-β “trap”) fused to a human IgG1 mAb blocking PD-L1. We report pooled safety and efficacy in pts with immune checkpoint inhibitor–naive, recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer treated with bintrafusp alfa in phase 1 (INTR@PID 001; NCT02517398) and phase 2 (study 012; NCT03427411) studies. Methods: Pts with pretreated, immune checkpoint inhibitor–naive, recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer received bintrafusp alfa 0.3-30 mg/kg (phase 1 dose escalation) or 1200 mg Q2W (phase 1 expansion/phase 2) until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal. Treatment past progression was allowed. Primary endpoints were safety for the dose-escalation part of the phase 1 study and best overall response per RECIST 1.1 for the expansion part of phase 1 and phase 2 studies. Secondary endpoints for the expansion part of the phase 1 and 2 studies included safety. Results: As of May 15, 2020 (phase 1) and December 22, 2020 (phase 2), 39 pts had received bintrafusp alfa for a median duration of 2.8 months (range, 0.5-19.3). The median follow-up to data cutoff was 35.0 months and 24.1 months for the phase 1 and phase 2 studies, respectively. All pts had received prior anticancer therapy; 16 pts (41.0%) had received ≥3 prior anticancer regimens. There were 2 complete responses and 9 partial responses (PRs; ORR per RECIST 1.1, 28.2%). Median duration of response was 11.7 months (range, 1.4-41.2), and 5 pts (45.5%) had ongoing responses (duration 1.5-41.2 months). An additional delayed PR was observed (duration 23.7 months). Reponses occurred irrespective of tumor histology or prior bevacizumab or radiation treatment. Median overall survival (mOS) was 13.4 months (95% CI, 5.5 to not reached); 24-month OS rate was 33.2%. Any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 33 pts (84.6%). Grade 3 TRAEs occurred in 8 pts (20.5%; anemia, colitis, gastroparesis, upper gastrointestinal hemorrhage, keratoacanthoma, cystitis noninfective, hematuria, pneumonitis, rash macular [n = 1 each]); 1 patient (2.6%) had a grade 4 TRAE (asymptomatic hypokalemia related to the above grade 3 gastroparesis). No treatment-related deaths occurred. Conclusions: Bintrafusp alfa had a manageable safety profile and demonstrated clinical activity in pts with heavily pretreated, immune checkpoint inhibitor–naive recurrent/metastatic cervical cancer. Clinical trial information: NCT02517398 , NCT03427411.

First-line nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) plus two cycles of chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo alone (4 cycles) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Two-year update from CheckMate 9LA

9000

Background: In the randomized phase 3 CheckMate 9LA trial (NCT03215706), first-line NIVO + IPI combined with 2 cycles of chemo significantly improved overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) vs chemo alone (4 cycles). Clinical benefit was observed regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression level and histology. Here we report data with 2 years’ minimum follow-up from this study. Methods: Adult patients (pts) with stage IV / recurrent NSCLC, ECOG performance status ≤ 1, and no known sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations were stratified by PD-L1 (< 1% vs ≥ 1%), sex, and histology (squamous vs non-squamous) and were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 360 mg Q3W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W + chemo (2 cycles; n = 361) or chemo alone (4 cycles; n = 358). Pts with non-squamous NSCLC in the chemo-alone arm could receive pemetrexed maintenance. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included PFS and ORR by blinded independent central review, and efficacy by different PD-L1 levels. Safety was exploratory. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 24.4 months for OS (database lock: Feb 18, 2021), pts treated with NIVO + IPI + chemo continued to derive OS benefit vs chemo, with a median OS of 15.8 months vs 11.0 months, respectively (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.61–0.86]); 2-year OS rates were 38% vs 26%. Median PFS with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was 6.7 months vs 5.3 months (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56–0.79]); 8% and 37% of pts who had disease progression received subsequent immunotherapy, respectively. ORR was 38% with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs 25% with chemo. Similar clinical benefit with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was observed in all randomized pts and across the majority of subgroups, including by PD-L1 expression level (Table) or histology. Any grade and grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 92% and 48% of pts in the NIVO + IPI + chemo arm vs 88% and 38% in the chemo arm, respectively. Conclusion: With 2 years’ minimum follow-up, first-line NIVO + IPI + chemo demonstrated durable survival and benefit versus chemo in pts with advanced NSCLC; no new safety signals were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT03215706. [Table: see text]

Brigatinib (BRG) in ALK+ crizotinib (CRZ)-refractory non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Final results of the phase 1/2 and phase 2 (ALTA) trials

9071

Background: BRG is a kinase inhibitor approved for the treatment of patients (pts) with ALK+ metastatic NSCLC; specific details for BRG use vary by indication and country. We report long-term efficacy and safety results of the Phase 1/2 and Phase 2 (ALTA) trials of BRG. Methods: The Phase 1/2 study was a single-arm, open-label trial (NCT01449461) of BRG 30–300 mg/d in pts with advanced malignancies. ALTA (NCT02094573) randomized pts with CRZ-refractory ALK+ NSCLC to receive BRG at 90 mg qd (arm A) or 180 mg qd with 7-d lead-in at 90 mg (arm B). For the Phase 1/2 study, investigator assessments of confirmed objective response rate (cORR; RECIST v1.1), duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety in pts with ALK+ NSCLC are reported. The primary endpoint of ALTA was cORR per investigator; secondary endpoints included cORR per independent review committee (IRC), DoR, PFS, and OS. Results: In the Phase 1/2 study, 137 pts received BRG; of these, 79 pts had ALK+ NSCLC (71/79 had prior CRZ; 28/79 received 180 mg qd [7-d lead-in at 90 mg]; 14/79 received 90 mg qd). In ALTA, 222 pts with CRZ-refractory ALK+ NSCLC were randomized (n = 112/110, arm A/B). At the end of the Phase 1/2 study (Feb 18, 2020), with median 27.7 mo follow-up (̃67 mo after last pt enrolled), 4 pts remained on BRG. At the end of ALTA (Feb 27, 2020), with median 19.6/28.3 mo follow-up in arm A/B (̃53 mo after last pt enrolled), 10/17 pts in arm A/B were still on treatment. Table shows efficacy results from final analyses with long-term follow-up. In ALTA, the IRC-assessed intracranial cORR in pts with measurable baseline brain metastases was 50% (13/26) in arm A and 67% (12/18) in arm B; Kaplan-Meier (KM) estimated median intracranial DoR was 9.4 mo (95% CI, 3.7, not reached [NR]) in arm A and 16.6 mo (3.7, NR) in arm B. With long-term follow-up, no new safety signals were identified. Treatment-emergent adverse events led to dose interruption (Phase 1/2: 59%; ALTA arm A/B: 49%/61%), dose reduction (13%; 8%/33%), or discontinuation (10%; 4%/13%). Conclusions: BRG showed sustained long-term activity, PFS, and manageable safety in pts with CRZ-refractory ALK+ NSCLC. The 180 mg/d dose after 7-d lead-in at 90 mg/d led to numerically higher median PFS and OS. Final results are similar to those reported for other approved ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitors in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT01449461, NCT02094573. [Table: see text]

Tepotinib in patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with MET amplification (METamp)

9021

Background: METamp is an oncogenic driver occurring in 1–5% of NSCLCs that confers a poor prognosis and lacks approved targeted therapies. Tepotinib, a highly selective MET inhibitor, provided durable response in NSCLC with MET exon 14 ( METex14) skipping in Cohort A of the Phase II VISION trial (NCT02864992). VISION Cohort B evaluated tepotinib in pts with advanced NSCLC and METamp, as detected by a convenient and minimally invasive liquid biopsy assay, in the absence of METex14 skipping. Methods: Pts with locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (ECOG PS) 0–1, 0–2 prior lines of therapy, EGFR/ ALK wild-type status, no METex14 skipping, and METamp by liquid biopsy (Guardant360®; MET gene copy number ≥2.5) received oral tepotinib 500 mg QD (450 mg active moiety). The primary endpoint was objective response (RECIST v1.1) by independent review committee (IRC). Secondary endpoints included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. The data cut-off was July 1, 2020. Results: Among 24 enrolled pts, median age was 63.4 years (range: 38–73), 21 pts (88%) were male, 21 (88%) had ECOG PS 1 and 21 (88%) were smokers. Tepotinib was given to 7 pts (29%) in first line (1L), 10 pts (42%) in second line (2L) and 7 pts (29%) in third line (3L). As of November 2020, treatment was ongoing for > 1 year in 5 pts (1L, n = 2; 2L, n = 2; 3L, n = 1). Objective response rate (ORR) by IRC was 42% (10/24 pts) overall, 71% (5/7 pts) in 1L, 30% (3/10 pts) in 2L and 29% (2/7 pts) in 3L (Table). Median DOR by IRC was not estimable (NE; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.8 months–NE). Investigator-assessed outcomes were similar. Five pts (20.8%) discontinued due to adverse events (AEs), which were considered unrelated to tepotinib. Treatment-related AEs were reported in 16 pts (67%; Grade 3/4, 7 pts [29%]) and included peripheral edema (9 pts [38%]; Grade 3/4, 2 pts [8%]), generalized edema (4 pts [17%]; Grade 3/4, 2 pts [8%]) and constipation (4 pts [17%]; Grade 3/4, 0 pts). Conclusions: In the first study of a MET inhibitor in NSCLC with METamp prospectively detected by liquid biopsy, tepotinib showed high and clinically meaningful activity, especially in 1L, and was generally well tolerated. Tepotinib warrants further evaluation in NSCLC with METamp. Clinical trial information: NCT02864992. [Table: see text]

Nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) versus chemotherapy (chemo) as first-line (1L) treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): 4-year update from CheckMate 227

9016

Background: 1L NIVO + IPI was shown to provide durable long-term overall survival (OS) benefit vs chemo regardless of tumor programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression in patients (pts) with advanced NSCLC in CheckMate 227 Part 1 (NCT02477826); 3-year OS rates were 33% vs 22% in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% (HR, 0.79 [95% CI, 0.67–0.93]) and 34% vs 15% in pts with PD-L1 < 1% (HR, 0.64 [95% CI, 0.51–0.81]). Here we report updated results from the study with 4 years’ minimum follow-up. Methods: Adults with previously untreated stage IV / recurrent NSCLC, no known EGFR/ ALK alterations , and ECOG performance status ≤ 1 were enrolled; pts were stratified by squamous (SQ) and non-squamous (NSQ) histology. Pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% (n = 1189) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W), NIVO alone (240 mg Q2W), or chemo. Pts with PD-L1 < 1% (n = 550) were randomized 1:1:1 to receive NIVO + IPI, NIVO (360 mg Q3W) + chemo, or chemo. OS with NIVO + IPI vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% was the primary endpoint. Results: With minimum follow-up of 49.4 months (database lock, Feb 18, 2021), pts were at least 2 years beyond the protocol-specified end of immunotherapy treatment. Pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% continued to show durable benefit with NIVO + IPI vs chemo (HR, 0.76 [95% CI, 0.65–0.90]); 4-year OS rates were 29% (NIVO + IPI), 21% (NIVO), and 18% (chemo). At 4 years, 14% (NIVO + IPI), 10% (NIVO), and 4% (chemo) remained progression free. Among responders, 34%, 30%, and 7% remained in response, respectively. In an exploratory analysis in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 50%, 4-year OS rates were 37% (NIVO + IPI), 26% (NIVO), and 20% (chemo). In pts with PD-L1 < 1%, OS HR for NIVO + IPI vs chemo was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.51–0.81); 4-year OS rates were 24% (NIVO + IPI), 13% (NIVO + chemo) and 10% (chemo). At 4 years, 12% (NIVO + IPI), 7% (NIVO + chemo), and 0% (chemo) remained progression free. Among responders, 31%, 13%, and 0% remained in response, respectively. Among pts who progressed on NIVO + IPI vs chemo, 7% vs 40% (PD-L1 ≥ 1%), and 9% vs 33% (PD-L1 < 1%), received subsequent immunotherapy. Benefit with NIVO + IPI vs chemo was observed for both SQ and NSQ histology (Table). With long-term follow-up, no new safety signals were identified. Conclusions: With 4 years’ minimum follow-up, 1L NIVO + IPI continued to provide durable, long-term OS benefit vs chemo in pts with advanced NSCLC regardless of PD-L1 expression or histology. Clinical trial information: NCT02477826. [Table: see text]

Clinical activity and safety of the RET inhibitor pralsetinib in patients with RET fusion-positive solid tumors: Update from the ARROW trial

3079

Background: RET fusions are targetable oncogenic drivers in multiple solid tumor types. ARROW study (NCT03037385) data supported the US FDA approval of pralsetinib, a once-daily (QD) oral highly potent and selective RET inhibitor, for RET-altered metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and advanced/metastatic thyroid cancer. Here we provide an update on the clinical activity of pralsetinib in patients (pts) with advanced RET fusion-positive solid tumors other than NSCLC and thyroid cancer (“other” RET fusion–positive solid tumors). Methods: The global ongoing ARROW study (84 sites in 13 countries) includes phase 1 dose-escalation (30–600 mg [QD or twice daily]) and phase 2 expansion cohorts (400 mg QD) defined by tumor type and RET alteration status. Primary objectives are overall response rate (ORR; blinded independent central review per RECIST v1.1) and safety. Results: Updated analyses were completed as of Nov 6, 2020 (data cut-off) for 21 pts with other RET fusion–positive solid tumors enrolled by May 22, 2020 (enrollment cut-off) (lung other than NSCLC, n = 4; pancreatic, n = 3; colon, n = 3; cholangiocarcinoma, n = 3; unknown primary [UP], n = 2; other, n = 6). Overall, 11 (52%) pts received ≥2 prior lines of therapy for metastatic disease. The most common RET fusion partners were CCDC6 and KIF5B (24% each), NCOA4 (19%), other (10%), and unknown (24%). Two pts with colon cancer were excluded from efficacy analyses due to other driver mutations ( KRAS, PIK3CB). In 19 evaluable pts, ORR was 53% (95% CI, 29–76) with 2 (11%) complete responses (CR) and 8 (42%) partial responses (PR). Responses occurred across multiple tumor types including 3/3 pts with pancreatic cancer (including a CR ongoing at 20.8 months on treatment), 2/2 pts with UP, 2/3 pts with cholangiocarcinoma, and in pts with mesenchymal, salivary duct, and lung carcinoid tumors. Median duration of response was 19.0 months (95% CI, 5.5–not estimable). Clinical benefit rate (proportion with CR, PR, or stable disease persisting ≥16 weeks) was 68% (95% CI, 43–87). Tumor shrinkage was observed in 89% of 18 evaluable pts with post-baseline tumor assessment. In all pts enrolled in ARROW who received pralsetinib 400 mg QD irrespective of tumor type (n = 471) the most common (≥25%) treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were increased aspartate aminotransferase (39%), anemia (35%), increased alanine aminotransferase (28%), constipation (26%), and hypertension (25%). Overall, 6% of pts discontinued treatment due to TRAEs. Conclusions: Pralsetinib showed robust, durable antitumor activity in patients with multiple RET fusion‒positive, heavily pre-treated, advanced solid tumors, and was well tolerated. These data highlight the need for broad RET testing to identify candidates who could benefit from treatment with pralsetinib. Enrollment of patients with other RET fusion–positive solid tumors in ARROW is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385.

PD-(L)1 inhibitors as monotherapy for the first-line treatment of non-small cell lung cancer patients with high PD-L1 expression: A network meta-analysis

9076

Background: PD-L1 has emerged as a potential biomarker for predicting responses to immunotherapy and as a prognostic factor in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). In this network meta-analysis, we aimed to evaluate the efficacy of first-line PD-(L)1 monotherapy in advanced NSCLC patients with high PD-L1 expression. Methods: We conducted a systematic search in PubMed to identify all eligible trials from inception until 1 November 2020, with no start date limit applied. Only phase III trials evaluating the efficacy of first-line (1L) PD-(L)1 monotherapy in patients with stage IIIB/stage IV NSCLC and high PD-L1 expression were included. Results: Six clinical trials (KEYNOTE-024, KEYNOTE-042, EMPOWER Lung-01, IMpower110, MYSTIC and CheckMate-026) with 2,111 patients were included. In head-to-head comparisons, immunotherapy showed a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS: HRpooled = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.52-0.90, p = 0.007), overall survival (OS: HRpooled = 0.69, 95% CI: 0.61-0.78; p < 0.001) and overall response rate (ORR) (Risk ratio [RR]pooled = 1.354, 95% CI: 1.04-1.762, p = 0.024) compared to chemotherapy (CT). In the assessment of relative efficacy for PFS through indirect comparisons, pembrolizumab (results from KEYNOTE-024) ranked highest followed by cemiplimab and atezolizumab, with statistical significance determined across some of the drugs. In terms of OS, cemiplimab ranked highest followed by atezolizumab and pembrolizumab, although non-significant OS was determined across these drugs. Overall, 1L PD-(L)1 monotherapy improved OS in almost all subgroups, reaching statistical significance in men (HRpooled = 0.624, 95% CI: 0.51-0.72, p < 0.001), non-Asian patients (HRpooled = 0.66, 95% CI: 0.55-0.79, p < 0.001), all patients regardless of age ( < 65 years [HRpooled = 0.72, 95% CI: 0.57-0.90, p = 0.005]; ≥65 years [HRpooled = 0.61, 95% CI: 0.48-0.77, p < 0.001]), ECOG PS status (ECOG PS = 0 [HRpooled = 0.68, 95% CI: 0.56-0.82, p < 0.001; ECOG PS = 1 [HRpooled = 0.59, 95% CI: 0.43-0.82, p = 0.001) and histological tumour type (Squamous [HRpooled = 0.49, 95% CI: 0.37-0.67, p < 0.001; Non-squamous [HRpooled = 0.67, 95% CI: 0.52-0.87, p = 0.003). In the case of smokers and NSCLC stage, only current/former smokers (HRpooled = 0.623, 95% CI: 0.47-0.83, p = 0.001) and patients with stage IV disease* (HRpooled = 0.687, 95% CI: 0.59-0.81, p < 0.001) benefited from single PD-(L)1 monotherapy over CT. Conclusions: PD-(L)1 inhibitor monotherapy improves efficacy outcomes in the 1L setting of advanced NSCLC patients with high PD-L1 expression. Current/former smokers ≥65 years, with ECOG PS = 1 and squamous NSCLC benefited most from this therapy. *KEYNOTE-042 was the only study including patients with stage IIIB NSCLC.

Safety and efficacy of pralsetinib in patients with advanced RET fusion-positive non-small cell lung cancer: Update from the ARROW trial

9089

Background: RET fusions are targetable oncogenic drivers in 1–2% of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). ARROW (NCT03037385) supported the US FDA approval of pralsetinib, a highly potent oral selective RET inhibitor for RET-altered NSCLC and thyroid cancer. Here, we present updated results for a larger population of patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLC enrolled in ARROW. Methods: ARROW is a phase 1/2 open-label study conducted at 84 sites in 13 countries. Phase 2 expansion cohorts included patients with RET fusion–positive NSCLC. Initially, all treatment-naïve patients were not candidates for platinum-based therapy, a requirement removed by protocol amendment in July 2019. Primary objectives are overall response rate (ORR; blinded independent central review [BICR] per RECIST v1.1), assessed for patients with baseline measurable disease, and safety. Results: Updated analyses were completed as of Nov 6, 2020 (data cut-off), for patients who initiated pralsetinib 400 mg QD by May 22, 2020 (enrollment cut-off). Efficacy results, including analyses for treatment-naïve patients enrolled after eligibility criteria were revised to allow candidates for platinum-based therapy, are shown in the Table. Conclusions: Pralsetinib showed rapid, potent, and durable clinical activity in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC (regardless of prior therapies), including poor prognosis patients not eligible for platinum-based therapy. Overall, pralsetinib was well-tolerated. These data highlight the need for RET testing early in the course of disease to identify candidates who may benefit from treatment with pralsetinib. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385. [Table: see text]

Five-year survival outcomes with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in unresectable stage III NSCLC: An update from the PACIFIC trial

8511

Background: In the placebo-controlled Phase III PACIFIC trial of patients with unresectable Stage III NSCLC whose disease had not progressed after platinum-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT), durvalumab improved overall survival (OS) (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53–0.87; p=0.0025; data cutoff [DCO] Mar 22, 2018) and progression-free survival (PFS) (stratified HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.42–0.65; p<0.0001; DCO Feb 13, 2017) based on the DCOs used for the primary analyses, and the degree of benefit remained consistent in subsequent updates. Durvalumab was associated with a manageable safety profile, and did not detrimentally affect patient-reported outcomes, compared with placebo. These findings established consolidation durvalumab after CRT (the ‘PACIFIC regimen’) as the standard of care in this setting. We report updated, exploratory analyses of OS and PFS, assessed approximately 5 years after the last patient was randomized. Methods: Patients with WHO PS 0/1 (and any tumor PD-L1 status) whose disease did not progress after cCRT (≥2 overlapping cycles) were randomized (2:1) 1–42 days following cCRT (total prescription radiotherapy dose typically 60–66 Gy in 30–33 fractions) to receive 12 months’ durvalumab (10 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks) or placebo, stratified by age (<65 vs ≥65 years), sex, and smoking history (current/former smoker vs never smoked). The primary endpoints were OS and PFS (blinded independent central review; RECIST v1.1) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. HRs and 95% CIs were estimated using stratified log-rank tests in the ITT population. Medians and OS/PFS rates at 60 months were estimated with the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Overall, 709/713 randomized patients received treatment in either the durvalumab (n/N=473/476) or placebo (n/N=236/237) arms. The last patient had completed study treatment in May 2017. As of Jan 11, 2021 (median follow-up duration of 34.2 months in all patients; range, 0.2–74.7 months), updated OS (stratified HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59–0.89; median 47.5 vs 29.1 months) and PFS (stratified HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.45–0.68; median 16.9 vs 5.6 months) remained consistent with the results from the primary analyses. The 60-month OS rates were 42.9% and 33.4% with durvalumab and placebo, respectively, and 60-month PFS rates were 33.1% and 19.0%, respectively. Updated treatment effect estimates for patient subgroups will be presented. Conclusions: These updated survival analyses, based on 5-year data from PACIFIC, demonstrate robust and sustained OS plus durable PFS benefit with the PACIFIC regimen. An estimated 42.9% of patients randomized to durvalumab remain alive at 5 years and approximately a third remain both alive and free of disease progression. Clinical trial information: NCT02125461.

Phase I Study of the Efficacy and Safety of Ramucirumab in Combination with Osimertinib in Advanced T790M-positive EGFR-mutant Non-small Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

We report the final analysis of JVDL (NCT02789345), which examined the combination of the EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) osimertinib plus the VEGFR2-directed antibody ramucirumab in patients with T790M-positive EGFR-mutant non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This open-label, single-arm phase I study enrolled patients with EGFR T790M-positive NSCLC, who had progressed following EGFR TKI but were third-generation EGFR TKI-naïve. A dose-limiting toxicity (DLT) period with as-needed dose deescalation was followed by an expansion cohort. Patients received daily oral osimertinib and intravenous ramucirumab every 2 weeks until progression or discontinuation.

RESULTS

Twenty-five patients were enrolled. No DLTs were observed. Median follow-up time was 25.0 months. Common grade 3 or higher treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were hypertension (8%) and platelet count decreased (16%); grade 5 TRAE (subdural hemorrhage) occurred in 1 patient. Patients with (N = 10) and without central nervous system (CNS) metastasis (N = 15) had similar safety outcomes. Five patients remain on treatment. Objective response rate (ORR) was 76%. Median duration of response was 13.4 months [90% confidence interval (CI): 9.6-21.2]. Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.0 months (90% CI: 5.5-19.3). Efficacy was observed in patients with and without CNS metastasis (ORR 60% and 87%; median PFS 10.9 and 14.7 months, respectively). Exploratory biomarker analyses in circulating tumor DNA suggested that on-treatment loss of EGFR Exon 19 deletion or L858R mutations, detectable at baseline, correlated with longer PFS, but on-treatment loss of T790M did not. Emergent genetic alterations postprogression included C797S, MET amplification, and EGFR amplification.

CONCLUSIONS

Ramucirumab plus osimertinib demonstrated encouraging safety and antitumor activity in T790M-positive EGFR-mutant NSCLC.See related commentary by Garon, p. 905.

Precision Prevention and Cancer Interception: The New Challenges of Liquid Biopsy

Despite major therapeutic progress, most advanced solid tumors are still incurable. Cancer interception is the active way to combat cancer onset, and development of this approach within high-risk populations seems a logical first step. Until now, strategies for the identification of high-risk subjects have been based on low-sensitivity and low-specificity assays. However, new liquid biopsy assays, "the Rosetta Stone of the new biomedicine era," with the ability to identify circulating biomarkers with unprecedented sensitivity, promise to revolutionize cancer management. This review focuses on novel liquid biopsy approaches and the applications to cancer interception. Cancer interception involves the identification of biomarkers associated with developing cancer, and includes genetic and epigenetic alterations, as well as circulating tumor cells and circulating epithelial cells in individuals at risk, and the implementation of therapeutic strategies to prevent the beginning of cancer and to stop its development. Large prospective studies are needed to confirm the potential role of liquid biopsy for early detection of precancer lesions and tumors.

Thoracic Cancers International COVID-19 Collaboration (TERAVOLT): Impact of type of cancer therapy and COVID therapy on survival

LBA111

Background: Early reports on cancer patients infected with COVID-19 have suggested a high mortality rate compared to the general population. Patients with thoracic malignancies are considered high risk given their age, preexisting comorbidities, smoking, and pre-existing lung damage in addition to therapies administered to treat their illness. Method: We launched a global consortium to collect data on patients with thoracic malignancies diagnosed with COVID-19 infection to understand the impact on this patient population. Goals of this consortium are to provide data for guidance to oncology professionals on treating patients with thoracic malignancies while understanding the risk factors for morbidity and mortality from this novel virus. Results: As of April 23, 2020, a total of 295 patients across 59 centers and 9 countries have been entered; median age 68, 31% female, 79% current/former smokers, HTN and COPD most common comorbidities; 73% NSCLC, 14% SCLC, 4% meso and thymic, 49% patients with stage IV disease, majority on chemo or chemo-IO and 24% receiving RT. The use of IO or chemo-IO does not appear to impact risk of hospitalization, while treatment with TKI appears to be associated with a decreased risk of hospitalization. 73% patients required hospitalization, most common therapy given to treat COVID was antibiotics 67%, antivirals 33%, and steroids 30%. Conclusion: With an ongoing global pandemic of COVID-19 our data suggest that patients with thoracic malignancies are at high risk for hospitalization. Updated results to be presented will include impact on specific chemo-IO regimens and number of lines of therapy, which may impact hospitalization and risk of death as well as which therapies administered may impact survival in patients treated for COVID-19.

Durvalumab ± tremelimumab + platinum-etoposide in first-line extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC): Updated results from the phase III CASPIAN study

9002

Background: CASPIAN is an open-label, Phase 3 study of durvalumab (D) ± tremelimumab (T) + etoposide and either cisplatin or carboplatin (EP) for pts with 1L ES-SCLC. At the planned interim analysis (data cutoff Mar 11, 2019; 63% maturity), D + EP demonstrated a statistically significant improvement in OS compared with EP alone (HR 0.73 [95% CI 0.59–0.91]; p=0.0047). Here we present a planned updated analysis of OS for D + EP vs EP and the first results for D + T + EP vs EP. Methods: Treatment-naïve pts with ES-SCLC (WHO PS 0/1) were randomized 1:1:1 to D 1500 mg + EP q3w, D 1500 mg + T 75 mg + EP q3w, or EP q3w. In the IO arms, pts received 4 cycles of EP + D ± T, followed by maintenance D 1500 mg q4w until disease progression. Pts received one additional dose of T 75 mg post EP in the D + T + EP arm. In the EP arm, pts received up to 6 cycles of EP and optional PCI (investigator’s discretion). The two primary endpoints were OS for D + EP vs EP and for D + T + EP vs EP. Results: 268, 268 and 269 pts were randomized to D + EP, D + T + EP and EP, respectively; baseline characteristics were generally well balanced across arms. As of Jan 27, 2020, the median follow-up was 25.1 mo, 82% maturity. D + EP continued to demonstrate improvement in OS vs EP, with a HR of 0.75 (95% CI 0.62–0.91; nominal p=0.0032); median OS 12.9 vs 10.5 mo, respectively. 22.2% of pts were alive at 2 y with D + EP vs 14.4% of pts with EP. D + T + EP numerically improved OS vs EP, however this did not reach statistical significance per the prespecified statistical plan: HR 0.82 (95% CI 0.68–1.00; p=0.0451 [p≤0.0418 required for stat sig]); the median OS was 10.4 mo and 23.4% of pts were alive at 2 y. Secondary endpoints of PFS and ORR remained improved with D + EP vs EP and will be presented. Confirmed investigator-assessed ORR was similar for D + T + EP vs EP (58.4% vs 58.0%). Median PFS was similar for D + T + EP vs EP (4.9 mo vs 5.4 mo), but the 12-mo PFS rate was numerically higher (16.9% vs 5.3%); PFS HR 0.84 (95% CI 0.70–1.01). In the D + EP, D + T + EP and EP arms, respectively, incidences of all-cause AEs of Grade 3/4 were 62.3%, 70.3% and 62.8%; AEs leading to discontinuation 10.2%, 21.4% and 9.4%; and AEs leading to death 4.9%, 10.2% and 5.6%. Conclusions: The addition of durvalumab to EP continued to demonstrate improvement in OS compared with a robust control arm, further supporting this regimen as a new standard of care for 1L ES-SCLC offering the flexibility of platinum choice. No additional benefit was observed when T was combined with D + EP in this pt population. Safety findings in all arms remained consistent with the known safety profiles of all agents. Clinical trial information: NCT03043872.

Nivolumab (NIVO) + ipilimumab (IPI) + 2 cycles of platinum-doublet chemotherapy (chemo) vs 4 cycles chemo as first-line (1L) treatment (tx) for stage IV/recurrent non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): CheckMate 9LA

9501

Background: NIVO + IPI was shown to improve overall survival (OS) and durability of response vs chemo in 1L advanced NSCLC in CheckMate 227 Part 1, regardless of PD-L1 expression. We hypothesized that a limited course of chemo combined with NIVO + IPI could provide rapid disease control while building on the durable OS benefit seen with dual PD-1 and CTLA-4 inhibition. CheckMate 9LA (NCT03215706) is a phase 3 randomized study evaluating NIVO + IPI + 2 cycles chemo vs chemo in 1L stage IV/recurrent NSCLC. Methods: Adults with tx-naive, histologically confirmed stage IV/recurrent NSCLC, ECOG performance status 0–1, and no known sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 360 mg Q3W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W + chemo (2 cycles) (n = 361) or chemo (4 cycles) alone (n = 358), stratified by PD-L1 (< 1% vs ≥ 1%), sex, and histology (squamous vs non-squamous). Chemo was based on histology. Pts with non-squamous NSCLC in the chemo-only arm could receive optional pemetrexed maintenance. Pts were treated with immunotherapy until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or for 2 y. The primary endpoint was OS; the interim analysis using Lan–DeMets alpha spending function with O’Brien–Fleming boundary was planned at ~80% information fraction (ie, after observing ~322 total events). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review, and efficacy by PD-L1 subgroups. Exploratory endpoints included safety/tolerability. Results: Baseline characteristics were balanced across arms. At a preplanned interim analysis (minimum follow-up 8.1 mo), OS was significantly prolonged with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo (HR 0.69, 96.71% CI: 0.55–0.87; P = 0.0006); statistically significant improvements in PFS and ORR were seen. With longer follow-up (minimum 12.7 mo), NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo continued to provide longer OS; median 15.6 vs 10.9 mo (HR 0.66, 95% CI: 0.55–0.80); 1-y OS rates were 63 vs 47%. Clinical benefit was consistent across all efficacy measures in key subgroups including by PD-L1 and histology. Grade 3–4 tx-related adverse events were reported in 47 vs 38% of pts in the NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo arms, respectively. Conclusions: CheckMate 9LA met its primary endpoint: a statistically significant improvement in OS was observed with NIVO + NSCLC-optimized IPI + a limited course of chemo vs chemo (4 cycles) in 1L advanced NSCLC. No new safety signals were reported. Clinical trial information: NCT03215706 .

Nivolumab + ipilimumab versus platinum-doublet chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced non-small cell lung cancer: Three-year update from CheckMate 227 Part 1

9500

Background: In the phase 3 CheckMate 227 Part 1 (NCT02477826; minimum follow-up, 29.3 mo), 1L NIVO + IPI significantly improved overall survival (OS) vs chemo in treatment-naive patients (pts) with aNSCLC and tumor PD-L1 expression ≥ 1% (primary analysis) or < 1% (pre-specified descriptive analysis). Here we report data with 3-y minimum follow-up. Methods: Pts with stage IV / recurrent NSCLC and PD-L1 ≥ 1% (n = 1189) were randomized 1:1:1 to NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W), NIVO (240 mg Q2W) alone, or chemo. Pts with PD-L1 < 1% (n = 550) were randomized to NIVO + IPI, NIVO (360 mg Q3W) + chemo, or chemo. Primary endpoint was OS with NIVO + IPI vs chemo in pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1%. An exploratory analysis of OS in pts by response status (CR/PR, SD, progressive disease [PD]) at 6 mo was conducted. Results: After a median follow-up of 43.1 mo (database lock, 28 Feb 2020), pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% continued to derive OS benefit from NIVO + IPI vs chemo (HR: 0.79; 95% CI, 0.67–0.93); 3-y OS rates were 33% (NIVO + IPI), 29% (NIVO), and 22% (chemo). At 3 y, 18% of pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% treated with NIVO + IPI remained progression-free vs 12% with NIVO and 4% with chemo; 38% of confirmed responders remained in response in the NIVO + IPI arm at 3 y vs 32% in the NIVO arm and 4% in the chemo arm. In pts with PD-L1 < 1%, OS HR for NIVO + IPI vs chemo was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.51–0.81); 3-y OS rates were 34% (NIVO + IPI), 20% (NIVO + chemo), and 15% (chemo); 13%, 8%, and 2% of pts remained progression-free; and 34%, 15%, and 0% of confirmed responders remained in response, respectively. Pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% with either CR/PR at 6 mo had longer subsequent OS with NIVO + IPI vs chemo; pts with SD or PD at 6 mo had generally similar subsequent OS between treatments (Table); results in PD-L1 < 1% pts will be presented. Any-grade / grade 3–4 treatment-related AEs were observed in 77% / 33% of all pts treated with NIVO + IPI, and 82% / 36% with chemo. Conclusions: With 3 y minimum follow-up, NIVO + IPI continued to provide durable and long-term OS benefits vs chemo for pts in 1L aNSCLC. Pts with PD-L1 ≥ 1% who achieved CR/PR at 6 mo had marked OS benefit with NIVO + IPI vs chemo. No new safety signals were identified for NIVO + IPI. Clinical trial information: NCT02477826. [Table: see text]

Primary analysis of a randomized, double-blind, phase II study of the anti-TIGIT antibody tiragolumab (tira) plus atezolizumab (atezo) versus placebo plus atezo as first-line (1L) treatment in patients with PD-L1-selected NSCLC (CITYSCAPE)

9503

Background: The immunomodulatory receptor TIGIT is a novel inhibitory immune checkpoint present on activated T cells and NK cells in multiple cancers, including NSCLC. In a phase I study (GO30103), co-inhibition of TIGIT and PD-L1 signaling with tira plus atezo in CIT-naïve PD-L1 positive NSCLC potentially improved overall response rates (ORR) compared to historical ORR with PD-L1/PD-1 inhibitors. We conducted this phase II trial to confirm the efficacy and safety of tira plus atezo (TA) compared to placebo plus atezo (PA) in 1L NSCLC (GO40290, NCT NCT03563716). Methods: This prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial enrolled patients (pts) with chemotherapy-naïve PD-L1+ (TPS ≥ 1% by 22C3 IHC pharmDx Dako assay) locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC with measurable disease, ECOG PS 0-1, and without EGFR or ALK alterations. Pts were randomized 1:1 to TA (tira 600 mg IV plus atezo 1200 mg IV) or PA (placebo plus atezo 1200 mg IV) on day 1 of every 3-week cycle. Stratification factors were PD-L1 status (TPS ≥ 50% vs TPS 1-49%), histology, and tobacco history. Co-primary endpoints were investigator assessed ORR and PFS, and additional endpoints were duration of response (DOR), OS, and safety. Exploratory endpoints were the effect of PD-L1 status on ORR and PFS. Results: 135 pts were randomized to PA (n = 68) or TA (n = 67). At primary analysis (30 Jun 2019), TA improved ORR and median PFS (mPFS) compared to PA, with median follow-up of 5.9 mo. In the safety population (68 in PA, 67 in TA), treatment-related AEs (TRAEs) occurred in 72% (PA) and 80.6% (TA); Grade ≥3 TRAEs occurred in 19.1% (PA) and 14.9% (TA). AEs leading to treatment withdrawal occurred in 10.3% (PA) and 7.5% (TA). Clinical trial information: NCT03563716 . With an additional six months of follow-up since the primary analysis (2 Dec 2019, median follow-up of 10.9 mo), improvement in ORR and mPFS was maintained in ITT for TA (37.3% [25.0, 49.6] and 5.6 mo [4.2, 10.4]) vs PA (20.6% [10.2, 30.9] and 3.9 mo [2.7, 4.5]). The safety profile remained tolerable. Conclusions: Treatment with TA compared to PA showed clinically meaningful improvement in ORR and PFS in ITT. The safety profile of TA was similar to PA. [Table: see text]

A phase Ib study of abemaciclib in combination with pembrolizumab for patients (pts) with stage IV Kirsten rat sarcoma mutant (KRAS-mut) or squamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) (NCT02779751): Interim results

9562

Background: Abemaciclib is an orally administered, selective small molecule cyclin-dependent kinase 4 and 6 inhibitor. In preclinical models, abemaciclib induced intratumor immune inflammation and synergized with PD-1 blockade to enhance antitumor efficacy in anti-PD-L1 refractory disease. Here, we report the safety and antitumor activity of abemaciclib plus the approved NSCLC treatment pembrolizumab in 2 cohorts for pts with nonsquamous and squamous NSCLC. Methods: Eligible pts for this nonrandomized, open-label, multicohort, phase 1b study were either chemotherapy-naive with ≥ 1% tumor cell (TC) PD-L1 staining, KRAS-mut nonsquamous NSCLC (Cohort A) or had a squamous subtype and received ≤ 1 prior platinum-containing chemotherapy regimen (Cohort B) for metastatic NSCLC. Primary endpoint was safety; secondary objectives included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Results: Twenty-five pts with NSCLC were enrolled in each cohort. Most pts (68%) in Cohort B had received 1 prior line of chemotherapy. Safety profiles observed in both cohorts were largely consistent with previous reports for abemaciclib and pembrolizumab monotherapy. Grades 3/4 AEs in Cohorts A and B, respectively, included ALT increase (6 pts [24%]/ 0 pts), diarrhea (3 pts [12%]/ 0 pts), neutropenia (3 pts [12%]/ 0 pts), and pneumonitis (3 pts [12%]/ 1 pt [4%]). Six pts in Cohort A (24%) and 2 pts in Cohort B (8%) had a confirmed partial response for a disease control rate (CR+PR+SD) of 52% and 64%, respectively. In Cohort A, the ORR in pts with strong (≥50% TC) PD-L1 staining (n = 13) was 31% vs. 17% in pts with weak (1-49% TC) PD-L1 expression (n = 12). Median PFS and OS were 7.6 months (95% CI: 1.6, NR) and 22.0 months (95% CI: 9.9, NR) in Cohort A and 3.3 months (95% CI: 1.4, 5.2) and 6.0 months (95% CI: 3.7, 13.1) in Cohort B, respectively. Conclusions: Abemaciclib plus pembrolizumab resulted in a numerical higher rate of transaminase elevations and pneumonitis. Antitumor activity was remarkable in the KRAS-mut nonsquamous NSCLC but not noticeably higher as compared to historical data for pembrolizumab monotherapy. Clinical trial information: NCT02779751 .

Phase I study of AMG 757, a half-life extended bispecific T-cell engager (HLE BiTE immune therapy) targeting DLL3, in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC)

TPS9080

Background: SCLC is an aggressive neuroendocrine tumor with poor prognosis and few treatment options. Delta-like ligand 3 (DLL3) is an inhibitory Notch ligand that is highly expressed on the surface of most SCLC tumors but minimally expressed in normal tissues. As such, DLL3 may be a promising therapeutic target. AMG 757 is an HLE BiTE immune therapy designed to redirect cytotoxic T cells to cancer cells by binding to DLL3 on cancer cells and CD3 on T cells, resulting in T cell activation and expansion and T cell-dependent killing of tumor cells. In addition to its direct antitumor effect, BiTE immune therapy can inflame the tumor microenvironment. Combining AMG 757 with a PD-1 pathway inhibitor may lead to increased antitumor activity by enabling sustained T cell-dependent killing of tumor cells. Methods: NCT03319940 is an open-label, ascending, multiple-dose, phase 1 study evaluating AMG 757 as monotherapy; the protocol was recently amended to also evaluate AMG 757 in combination with pembrolizumab. The study will include a dose exploration (monotherapy and combination) followed by a dose expansion (monotherapy). Key eligibility criteria: adult patients with relapsed/refractory SCLC whose disease progressed or recurred after at least 1 platinum-based chemotherapy regimen, ECOG performance status 0–2, at least 2 measurable lesions per modified RECIST 1.1, no untreated or symptomatic brain metastases, and adequate organ function. Primary objectives are to evaluate safety/tolerability and determine the maximum tolerated dose or recommended phase 2 dose of AMG 757 as monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab. Secondary objectives are to characterize pharmacokinetics and evaluate preliminary antitumor activity; exploratory objectives are to assess immunogenicity and changes in biomarkers in blood and tumor tissue. In the dose exploration phase, dose escalation/de-escalation decisions will be guided by a Bayesian logistic regression model; backfill enrollment at dose levels deemed safe and tolerable will be allowed. The study is open and recruiting patients. Clinical trial information: NCT03319940.

Registrational dataset from the phase I/II ARROW trial of pralsetinib (BLU-667) in patients (pts) with advanced RET fusion+ non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

9515

Background: Pralsetinib is an investigational, highly potent, selective RET kinase inhibitor targeting oncogenic RET alterations. We provide the registrational dataset for pts with RET fusion+ NSCLC with and without prior treatment from the global ARROW study. Methods: ARROW (75 sites in 11 countries; NCT03037385) consists of a phase I dose escalation to establish recommended phase II dose (400 mg once daily [QD] orally) and phase II expansion cohorts defined by tumor type and/or RET alteration. Primary objectives were overall response rate (ORR; blinded independent central review per RECIST v1.1) and safety. Efficacy analyses are shown for response-evaluable pts (REP) with RET fusion+ NSCLC who initiated 400 mg QD pralsetinib by July 11 2019 and safety for all pts (regardless of diagnosis) treated with 400 mg QD. Results: As of November 18 2019, 354 pts with advanced solid tumors had received pralsetinib at starting dose of 400 mg QD with median follow-up 8.8 months. ORR, disease control rate (DCR), and % of pts with tumor size reduction are shown in the table for pts with metastatic RET fusion+ NSCLC (n=116; 72% KIF5B; 16% CCDC6; 12% other/fusion present but type unknown) and with prior platinum treatment (n=80) or without prior systemic treatment (n=26). ORR was similar regardless of RET fusion partner, prior therapies, or central nervous system involvement. Overall there were 7 (6%) complete responses, 4 (5%) in prior platinum pts and 3 (12%) in treatment naïve pts; median time to response overall was 1.8 months and median duration of response (DOR) was not reached (95% CI, 11.3–NR). In the safety population (n=354), most treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were grade 1-2, and included increased aspartate aminotransferase (31%), anemia (22%), increased alanine aminotransferase (21%), constipation (21%) and hypertension (20%). 4% of pts in the safety population (all tumor types) discontinued due to TRAEs. Conclusions: Updated, registrational, centrally reviewed data demonstrate that pralsetinib has rapid, potent, and durable clinical activity in pts with advanced RET fusion+ NSCLC regardless of RET fusion genotype or prior therapies, and QD oral dosing is well-tolerated. Clinical trial information: NCT03037385 . [Table: see text]

RESILIENT part II: an open-label, randomized, phase III study of liposomal irinotecan injection in patients with small-cell lung cancer who have progressed with platinum-based first-line therapy

TPS9081

Background: Although small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is often sensitive to established first-line therapies, many patients relapse and develop drug resistance, and second-line therapies are limited. RESILIENT (NCT03088813) is a two-part phase 2/3 study assessing the safety, tolerability, and efficacy of liposomal irinotecan monotherapy in patients with SCLC who progressed with platinum-based first-line therapy. Preliminary data from the dose-ranging part of the study (part 1) showed that liposomal irinotecan 70 mg/m2 administered every 2 weeks was well tolerated and had promising antitumor activity (Paz-Ares et al. ASCO 2019; poster 318). Here, we present the design of the second, larger part of the study, which will evaluate the efficacy and safety of liposomal irinotecan versus topotecan in the same patient population. Methods: Part 2 of RESILIENT is a phase 3, open-label study with a planned sample size of 450. Patients are randomly allocated 1:1 to intravenous liposomal irinotecan or intravenous topotecan. Liposomal irinotecan is administered every 2 weeks at 70 mg/m2 (free-base equivalent) and topotecan is administered for 5 consecutive days every 3 weeks at 1.5 mg/m2. As of January 2020, 80 patients have been enrolled in part 2 of the trial. Tumor assessments are performed using the Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 and the Response Assessment in Neuro-oncology criteria for CNS lesions; symptom improvement is measured using the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30. Safety assessments include monitoring for adverse events. The primary endpoint is overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints are progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and proportion of patients reporting symptom improvement. Patients will continue study treatment until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or study withdrawal and will then be followed for survival until death or study end (when all patients have died, withdrawn consent or are lost to follow-up). Clinical trial information: NCT03088813.

Lurbinectedin (LUR) in combination with Irinotecan (IRI) in patients (pts) with advanced solid tumors: Updated results from a phase Ib-II trial

3514

Background: LUR is a novel agent that exerts antitumor activity through inhibition of trans-activated transcription and modulation of tumor microenvironment. Preclinical synergism/additivity in combination with IRI has been reported, thus prompting the conduct of this clinical trial. Methods: Phase Ib-II trial to evaluate escalating doses of LUR on Day (D) 1 plus a fixed dose of IRI 75 mg/m2 on D1 and D8 every 3 weeks (q3w) in pts with advanced solid tumors (+/- G-CSF, if dose-limiting toxicities [DLTs] were neutropenia). Starting dose was LUR 1.0 m/m2 + IRI 75 mg/m2. Results: 77 pts have been treated to date at 5 dose levels, 51 of them at the recommended dose (RD). Baseline characteristics of all 77 pts were: 48% females, 68% ECOG PS=1; median age 57 years (range, 19-75 years); median of 2 prior lines (range, 0−4 lines). The maximum tolerated dose (MTD) was LUR 2.4 mg/m2 + IRI 75 mg/m2 with G-CSF, and the RD was LUR 2.0 mg/m2 + IRI 75 mg/m2 with G-CSF. DLTs in Cycle 1 occurred in 2/3 evaluable pts at the MTD and 3/13 evaluable pts at the RD, and comprised omission of IRI D8 infusion due to grade (G) 3/4 neutropenia (n=3 pts) or G2-4 thrombocytopenia (n=2). At the RD (n=51), common G1/2 non-hematological toxicities were nausea, vomiting, fatigue, diarrhea, anorexia and neuropathy. G3 non-hematological toxicities (diarrhea 10%, fatigue 10%) and G3/4 hematological abnormalities (neutropenia 49%, thrombocytopenia 10%) were transient. Conclusions: The combination of LUR and IRI had acceptable tolerance, with no unexpected toxicities. Transient myelosuppression was dose-limiting. The RD is LUR 2.0 mg/m2 on D1 + IRI 75 mg/m2 on D1 and D8 q3w with G-CSF. Antitumor activity was observed at the RD in SCLC pts, as well as in endometrial carcinoma pts. Hints of activity were also observed in STS pts. Updated results will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT02611024 . [Table: see text]

Two-year follow-up of bintrafusp alfa, a bifunctional fusion protein targeting TGF-β and PD-L1, for second-line (2L) treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

9558

Background: Bintrafusp alfa (M7824) is a first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of the extracellular domain of the TGF-βRII receptor (a TGF-β “trap”) fused to a human IgG1 mAb blocking PD-L1. Interim analysis of a global phase 1 study (NCT02517398) found an objective response rate (ORR) of 27.5% and a manageable safety profile in patients with NSCLC who received bintrafusp alfa 1200 mg in the 2L setting; median overall survival (OS) was not reached. Here we present the longest efficacy and safety follow-up in a cohort receiving bintrafusp alfa. Methods: Patients with advanced NSCLC unselected for PD-L1 expression level who progressed after first-line standard treatment (no prior immunotherapy) were randomized to receive bintrafusp alfa 500 or 1200 mg (n = 40 each) Q2W until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or trial withdrawal. The primary objective was best overall response (BOR) per RECIST 1.1; secondary and exploratory objectives include safety and OS, respectively. Results: As of October 15, 2019, a total of 40 patients received bintrafusp alfa at the recommended phase 2 dose of 1200 mg Q2W for a median of 17 (range, 2-136) weeks, with a median follow-up of 128 weeks; 18 patients were still alive, 3 patients had an ongoing response, and 1 patient remained on treatment. Results for the 1200 mg dose cohort showed an ORR of 27.5%, and a median duration of response of 18 months. The 18- and 24-month progression-free survival and OS rates were 18.4% and 11.0%, and 49.7% and 39.7%, respectively. Duration of response rates at 18 and 24 months were 42.4% and 21.2%, respectively. Median OS in patients with positive (≥1%) PD-L1 expression was 21.7 months; 6 of 7 patients with high (≥80% with Ab clone 73-10, which is equivalent to ≥50% with 22C3) PD-L1 expression were still alive. The overall safety profile has remained consistent since the interim analysis, with no new safety signals or deaths and 1 additional treatment-related discontinuation (blood alkaline phosphatase increased). Conclusions: After two years of follow-up, bintrafusp alfa continues to show manageable safety with durable responses and encouraging long-term survival, especially in patients with high PD-L1 expression. A study evaluating bintrafusp alfa vs pembrolizumab as first-line treatment for NSCLC is ongoing in patients with high PD-L1 expression (NCT03631706). Clinical trial information: NCT02517398 .

CANOPY-A: A phase III, multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluating canakinumab as adjuvant therapy in patients (pts) with completely resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

TPS9075

Background: In the CANTOS study, canakinumab (selective IL-1β inhibitor) treatment was associated with reduced incidence and mortality from NSCLC in pts with stable post-myocardial infarction with elevated high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP) levels. In CANOPY-A study, we investigate the therapeutic role of canakinumab in NSCLC. Methods: The CANOPY-A study (NCT03447769) is evaluating the efficacy and safety of canakinumab as adjuvant therapy in adult pts with completely resected NSCLC. Pts with AJCC/UICC v.8 stages II–IIIA and IIIB (T > 5 cm, N2), any histology, completely resected (R0) NSCLC who completed adjuvant cisplatin-based chemotherapy (≥2 cycles) and radiotherapy (if applicable) are eligible. Pts must not have had prior neoadjuvant chemotherapy or radiotherapy. Pts (~1500) are randomized 1:1 to receive canakinumab (200 mg Q3W, SC) or placebo (Q3W, SC) for 18 cycles or until disease recurrence as determined by investigator, unacceptable toxicity, treatment discontinuation at the discretion of the investigator or patient, start of a new antineoplastic therapy, death, or loss to follow-up. Randomization is stratified by AJCC/UICC v.8 stage (IIA vs IIB vs IIIA vs IIIB with T > 5 cm, N2 disease), tumor histology (squamous vs non-squamous), and region (western Europe and North America vs eastern Asia vs rest of the world). Primary objective: disease-free survival (DFS) per local investigator assessment. Secondary objectives: overall survival (OS), lung cancer specific survival, safety, pharmacokinetics, immunogenicity, and patient reported outcomes. Adult pts with stage IIA–IIIA, IIIB (N2 disease only) NSCLC who are candidates for complete resection surgery (and therefore prospective candidates for the main study) will be asked to participate in a biomarker sub-study to understand how resection may impact biomarkers involved in the IL-1β inflammatory pathway and mutations present in blood. In the sub-study, the levels of hs-CRP, other cytokines, and additional biomarkers in blood will be assessed at pre- and post-surgery (endpoint: summary statistics of hs-CRP and other pharmacodynamics [PD] biomarkers). For pts who will enroll in the main study, possible associations between pre- and post-surgery biomarker levels with canakinumab efficacy will be assessed (endpoint: DFS and OS by hs-CRP and other PD biomarkers). The CANOPY-A study is currently enrolling. As of Jan 13, 2020, there are 307 study locations. Clinical trial information: NCT03447769.

First-line durvalumab plus platinum-etoposide in extensive-stage (ES)-SCLC (CASPIAN): Impact of brain metastases on treatment patterns and outcomes

9068

Background: In the Phase 3, randomized, open-label CASPIAN study, first-line durvalumab (D) added to etoposide plus either cisplatin or carboplatin (EP) significantly improved OS vs EP alone (HR 0.73 [95% CI 0.59–0.91]; p = 0.0047) in pts with ES-SCLC at the planned interim analysis. Here we describe treatment patterns and outcomes for pts according to brain metastases. Methods: Treatment-naïve pts (WHO PS 0/1) with ES-SCLC received 4 cycles of D 1500 mg + EP q3w followed by maintenance D 1500 mg q4w until disease progression (PD) or up to 6 cycles of EP q3w and optional prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI; investigator’s discretion). Pts with either asymptomatic or treated and stable brain metastases were eligible. Brain imaging was suggested for pts with suspected brain metastases, but was not mandated at screening or during treatment. The primary endpoint was OS. Analysis of OS and PFS in pt subgroups with and without brain metastases was prespecified. Other analyses in these subgroups were post hoc. Data cutoff: Mar 11, 2019. Results: At baseline, 28 (10.4%) of 268 pts in the D + EP arm and 27 (10.0%) of 269 pts in the EP arm had known brain metastases; of these, only 3 pts (~11% of those with baseline brain metastases) in each arm received radiotherapy (RT) to the brain prior to study entry. D + EP consistently improved OS vs EP in pts with or without known brain metastases at baseline (HR 0.69 [95% CI 0.35–1.31] and 0.74 [0.59–0.93], respectively); PFS was also consistently improved with D + EP regardless of the presence or not of baseline brain metastases (HR 0.73 [0.42–1.29] and 0.78 [0.64–0.95]). Among pts without known brain metastases at baseline, similar proportions developed new brain metastases at first PD in the D + EP (20/240; 8.3%) and EP arms (23/242; 9.5%), despite 19 (7.9%) pts in the EP arm having received PCI. Overall, 48 of 268 (17.9%) and 49 of 269 (18.2%) pts in the D + EP and EP arms received RT to the brain subsequent to study treatment; rates remained similar across the D + EP and EP arms regardless of baseline brain metastases (11 of 28 [39.3%] and 11 of 27 [40.7%] pts with known baseline brain metastases, compared to 37 of 240 [15.4%] and 38 of 242 [15.7%] pts without known baseline brain metastases). Conclusions: In CASPIAN, OS and PFS outcomes were improved with D + EP vs EP regardless of baseline brain metastases, consistent with the ITT analyses. Rates of new brain metastases at first PD were similar between arms, although PCI was permitted only in the control arm. Rates of subsequent RT to the brain were also similar in both arms. Clinical trial information: NCT03043872.

Genomic testing among patients (pts) with newly diagnosed advanced non-small cell lung cancer (aNSCLC) in the United States: A contemporary clinical practice patterns study

9592

Background: We describe contemporary clinical patterns of guideline-mandated genomic testing in newly diagnosed US pts with aNSCLC. Methods: From the Flatiron Health electronic health record-derived de-identified database, we included pts with newly diagnosed advanced non-squamous cell carcinoma of the lung between 1.1.2018–6.30.2019 who had received first-line (1L) therapy. We defined inadequate testing as no successful test for at least one of four examined genes: ALK, BRAF, EGFR, and ROS1. We grouped pts according to testing received into users of next-generation sequencing (NGS) testing, including a subgroup using comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP, exemplified by Foundation Medicine, Inc.), users of non-NGS testing, and no testing. We describe the following aspects of genomic testing before the start of 1L therapy: occurrence of testing, patterns of use of testing technologies, occurrence of inadequate testing, test failures, percentage of pts with potentially missed targeted therapy with US Food and Drug Administration approval (no positive test and <4 successful tests), and recent trends in genomic testing. Results: Among 2971 included pts, 690 (23.2%) had no genomic testing before 1L treatment. Among pts who had a test (n=2281), 59.4% (n=1355) received NGS (CGP: 18.8%, n=429), while 40.6% (n=926) received non-NGS tests only. In the CGP user group, 79.7% of pts received no other type of test, compared with 29.8% of pts in the other NGS group. Inadequate testing was recorded in 13.4% of NGS-tested pts (CGP: 4.9%), compared with 52.5% of pts tested by non-NGS only. Test failures contributed to unsuccessful testing in 4.2% of pts tested by NGS (CGP: 1.2%) and in 6.8% of pts who received non-NGS tests. In the NGS group, 10.1% (CGP: 3.0%) of patients potentially missed a targeted therapy option, compared with 40.3% in the non-NGS group. EGFR and ALK testing were performed in ≥95% of pts, regardless of the testing group; however, only 83.6% and 55.7% of pts received tests for ROS1 and BRAF, respectively, in the non-NGS group. In the latter group, for the first 6 months of 2019, 88.4% and 58.2% of pts were tested for ROS1 and BRAF mutations, respectively. Conclusions: Not performing any, or performing only inadequate genomic testing in pts with newly diagnosed aNSCLC remains a concern in clinical practice. The use of NGS, particularly CGP, may help to avoid suboptimal testing, minimize test failures, and improve uptake of testing for newly introduced biomarkers, enabling individualized, targeted therapy.

RESILIENT part I, an open-label, safety run-in of liposomal irinotecan in adults with small cell lung cancer (SCLC) who have progressed with platinum-based first-line (1L) therapy: Subgroup analyses by platinum sensitivity

9069

Background: Most patients with extensive SCLC develop drug resistance to platinum-based 1L therapy or discontinue for other reasons, and second-line (2L) therapies are limited. RESILIENT (NCT03088813) is a two-part phase 2/3 study assessing the safety, tolerability and efficacy of 2L liposomal irinotecan monotherapy in adults with SCLC who progressed with platinum-based 1L therapy. Preliminary data from RESILIENT part 1 (cut-off May 8 2019; ≥ 12 weeks follow-up) showed that liposomal irinotecan 70 mg/m2 free base every 2 weeks was generally well tolerated and had encouraging antitumor activity (Paz-Ares et al. WCLC 2019 OA03.03). Objective response rate (ORR; secondary endpoint) was 44% (11/25). Here we report efficacy analyses in post hoc subgroups by platinum sensitivity. Methods: RESILIENT part 1 was an open-label, single-arm study comprising dose-finding and dose-expansion phases. Eligible patients were aged ≥ 18 y, with an ECOG performance status score of 0/1 and adequate organ function; a single line of prior immunotherapy was allowed. Participants received liposomal irinotecan 70 mg/m2 or 85 mg/m2 free base every 2 weeks, with tumor assessments every 6 weeks (RECIST v1.1). Analyses were undertaken for the dose-finding phase recommended dose (RD) in subgroups of platinum-resistant/sensitive patients (with/without progression within 90 days from completion of 1L therapy). Results: During dose finding, 5 patients received liposomal irinotecan 85 mg/m2 (deemed not tolerable; dose-limiting toxicity) and 12 received 70 mg/m2 (deemed tolerable; RD for dose-expansion phase in which 13 more patients were included). Analyses included all 25 patients receiving the RD (mean exposure, 13.95 weeks [median 14.86; SD 7.222]). In the platinum-sensitive subgroup (33.3% men; median age 62.0 y) ORR was 53.3% (8/15) and 12-week disease control rate (DCR12wks) was 60% (9/15); in the platinum-resistant subgroup (50% men, median age 58.0 y) both ORR and DCR12wks were 30% (3/10). Overall and progression-free survival (secondary endpoints) are not yet mature. Conclusions: ORR and DCR12wks were numerically higher in platinum-sensitive than in platinum-resistant patients with SCLC who had progressed with platinum-based 1L therapy before receiving 2L liposomal irinotecan 70 mg/m2 in this phase 2 study. RESILIENT part 2, an ongoing, phase 3, randomized controlled trial vs topotecan, will provide further data. Clinical trial information: NCT03088813.

CANOPY-A: A phase III study of canakinumab as adjuvant therapy in patients with surgically resected non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

TPS8570

Background: Overexpression of interleukin (IL)-1β has been described in solid tumors, including lung. IL-1β can promote angiogenesis, tumor invasiveness, and induce tumor-associated immunosuppression through myeloid-derived suppressor cell (MDSC) accumulation in tumors. Pre-clinical data has shown that IL-1β inhibition stably reduces tumor growth, by limiting inflammation and inducing the maturation of MDSCs into M1 macrophages. Canakinumab is a human monoclonal antibody with high affinity and specificity for IL-1β. Recently, it was found that canakinumab was associated with a significant and dose-dependent reduction in incidence and mortality from lung cancer based on CANTOS study. Methods: CANOPY-A is a phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study designed to evaluate efficacy and safety of adjuvant canakinumab versus placebo in patients with surgically resected NSCLC. This trial will enroll adult patients, with completely resected (R0) AJCC/UICC v.8 stages II−IIIA and IIIB (T >5 cm and N2) NSCLC, who have completed standard-of-care adjuvant treatments, including cisplatin-based chemotherapy and mediastinal radiation therapy (if applicable). Prior treatment with neoadjuvant chemotherapy or neoadjuvant radiotherapy is not permitted. Approximately 1500 patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive canakinumab (200 mg Q3W, s.c) or placebo (Q3W, s.c.) for 18 cycles or until disease recurrence, unacceptable toxicity, treatment discontinuation at the discretion of the investigator or patient, death, or loss to follow-up. Randomization will be stratified by AJCC/UICC v.8 stage, tumor histology, and region. The primary objective is disease-free survival, per investigator assessment. Secondary objectives include overall survival (key secondary objective), lung cancer-specific survival, safety, pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of canakinumab, and patient-reported outcomes. Enrollment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT03447769.

Randomized open-label study of M7824 versus pembrolizumab as first-line (1L) treatment in patients with PD-L1 expressing advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

TPS9114

Background: Transforming growth factor β (TGF- β) promotes tumor progression via immune- and non–immune-related processes. M7824 is an innovative first-in-class bifunctional fusion protein composed of 2 extracellular domains of TGF-βRII (a TGF-β “trap”) fused to a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody against PD-L1. Targeting these independent and complementary pathways may restore and enhance antitumor responses. An expansion cohort of the NCT02517398 study of patients with advanced NSCLC (n = 80) treated with M7824 in the second-line setting presented at ESMO 2018 showed an objective response rate of 86% in the subgroup with high PD-L1 tumor expression at the recommended phase 2 dose (1200 mg intravenously [IV] every 2 weeks [Q2W]). Observed data support the hypothesis that M7824 may be superior to other PD-(L)1 inhibitors, including pembrolizumab, for the treatment of NSCLC. Based on the promising antitumor activity and manageable safety profile, this study will evaluate M7824 treatment in patients with advanced NSCLC in the 1L setting. Methods: Here we present a global, randomized trial comparing M7824 vs pembrolizumab in the 1L treatment of patients with metastatic NSCLC with high PD-L1 expression levels. Patients in this study must have a histologically confirmed diagnosis of advanced NSCLC with high PD-L1 expression on tumor cells (defined as either ≥80% by the Dako 73-10 pharmDx kit or ≥50% by the Dako 22C3 pharmDx kit since both assays are expected to select a similar patient population at their respective cut-offs). ECOG performance status must be 0 or 1. Patients must not have received prior systemic treatment for advanced NSCLC. Patients with tumors with actionable mutations (for which targeted therapy is locally approved) are not eligible. Patients will receive 1200 mg Q2W or pembrolizumab 200 mg Q3W as an IV infusion until confirmed disease progression, unacceptable toxicity, or trial withdrawal. Dual primary endpoints are progression-free survival and best overall response; key secondary endpoints include overall survival, duration of response, and safety. Estimated enrollment is 300 patients. Clinical trial information: NCT03631706.