Patient-Reported Health-Related Quality of Life in KEYNOTE-604: Pembrolizumab or Placebo Added to Etoposide and Platinum as First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage SCLC

Introduction

In the phase 3 KEYNOTE-604 study (NCT03066778), pembrolizumab plus etoposide and platinum chemotherapy (EP) significantly (p = 0.0023) improved progression-free survival versus placebo plus EP in previously untreated extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). We present health-related quality of life (HRQoL) results from KEYNOTE-604.

Methods

Patients with stage IV SCLC were randomized 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo every 3 weeks for 35 cycles plus four cycles of EP. Secondary end points included mean change from baseline to week 18 in the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality-of-Life Questionnaire-Core 30 (QLQ-C30) global health status/quality of life (GHS/QoL) scale and time to deterioration in the composite outcome of cough, chest pain, or dyspnea from QLQ-C30 and QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13. Two-sided, nominal p values are reported.

Results

A total of 439 patients completed at least one QLQ-C30 and QLQ-Lung Cancer Module 13 assessment (pembrolizumab + EP, n = 221; placebo + EP, n = 218). GHS/QoL scores improved from baseline to week 18: least squares mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) changes were 8.7 (5.3-12.1) for pembrolizumab plus EP and 4.2 (0.9-7.5) for placebo plus EP. Between-group differences in least squares mean scores were improved for pembrolizumab plus EP (4.4 [95% CI: 0.2-8.7], p = 0.040]). Median time to deterioration for the composite end point was not reached and 8.7 (95% CI: 5.9-not reached) months, respectively (hazard ratio = 0.80 [95% CI: 0.56-1.14], p = 0.208).

Conclusions

First-line pembrolizumab plus EP therapy maintained HRQoL in patients with ES-SCLC and may be associated with greater improvement than placebo plus EP. Together with the efficacy and safety findings in KEYNOTE-604, HRQoL data support the benefit of pembrolizumab in ES-SCLC.

Comparison of tumor-agnostic and tumor-specific clinical oncology trial designs: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Aim: To examine whether tumor-specific and tumor-agnostic oncology trials produce comparable estimates of objective response rate (ORR) in BRAF-altered cancers. Materials & methods: Electronic database searches were performed to identify phase I-III clinical trials testing tyrosine kinase inhibitors from 2000 to 2021. A random-effects model was used to pool ORRs. A total of 22 cohorts from five tumor-agnostic trials and 41 cohorts from 27 tumor-specific trials had published ORRs. Results: There was no significant difference between pooled ORRs from either trial design for multitumor analyses (37 vs 50%; p = 0.05); thyroid cancer (57 vs 33%; p = 0.10); non-small-cell lung cancer (39 vs 53%; p = 0.18); or melanoma (55 vs 51%; p = 0.58). Conclusion: For BRAF-altered advanced cancers, tumor-agnostic trials do not yield substantially different results from tumor-specific trials.

Canadian Consensus Recommendations on the Management of KRAS G12C-Mutated NSCLC

Activating mutations in Kirsten rat sarcoma viral oncogene homologue (KRAS), in particular, a point mutation leading to a glycine-to-cysteine substitution at codon 12 (G12C), are among the most frequent genomic alterations in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Several agents targeting KRAS G12C have recently entered clinical development. Sotorasib, a first-in-class specific small molecule that irreversibly inhibits KRAS G12C, has since obtained Health Canada approval. The emergence of novel KRAS-targeted therapies warrants the development of evidence-based consensus recommendations to help clinicians better understand and contextualize the available data. A Canadian expert panel was convened to define the key clinical questions, review recent evidence, and discuss and agree on recommendations for the treatment of advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC. The panel agreed that testing for KRAS G12C should be performed as part of a comprehensive panel that includes current standard-of-care biomarkers. Sotorasib, the only approved KRAS G12C inhibitor in Canada, is recommended for patients with advanced KRAS G12C-mutated NSCLC who progressed on guideline-recommended first-line standard of care for advanced NSCLC without driver alterations (immune-checkpoint inhibitor(s) [ICIs] +/- chemotherapy). Sotorasib could also be offered as second-line therapy to patients who progressed on ICI monotherapy that are not candidates for a platinum doublet and those that received first-line chemotherapy with a contraindication to ICIs. Preliminary data indicate the activity of KRAS G12C inhibitors in brain metastases; however, the evidence is insufficient to make specific recommendations. Regular liver function monitoring is recommended when patients are prescribed KRAS G12C inhibitors due to risk of hepatotoxicity.

Canadian Consensus Recommendations on the Management of Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Small-cell lung cancer (SCLC) is an aggressive, neuroendocrine tumour with high relapse rates, and significant morbidity and mortality. Apart from advances in radiation therapy, progress in the systemic treatment of SCLC had been stagnant for over three decades despite multiple attempts to develop alternative therapeutic options that could improve responses and survival. Recent promising developments in first-line and subsequent therapeutic approaches prompted a Canadian Expert Panel to convene to review evidence, discuss practice patterns, and reach a consensus on the treatment of extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). The literature search included guidelines, systematic reviews, and randomized controlled trials. Regular meetings were held from September 2022 to March 2023 to discuss the available evidence to propose and agree upon specific recommendations. The panel addressed biomarkers and histological features that distinguish SCLC from non-SCLC and other neuroendocrine tumours. Evidence for initial and subsequent systemic therapies was reviewed with consideration for patient performance status, comorbidities, and the involvement and function of other organs. The resulting consensus recommendations herein will help clarify evidence-based management of ES-SCLC in routine practice, help clinician decision-making, and facilitate the best patient outcomes.

Feasibility of Point-of-Care Genomic Profiling in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Cancer of Unknown Primary

INTRODUCTION

Cancer of unknown primary remains a challenging clinical entity. Despite receiving empiric chemotherapy, median overall survival is approximately 6-12 months. Site-specific therapy based on molecular characterization has been shown to improve outcomes; however, feasibility outside of clinical trials, especially in community centers, is lacking. This study explores the application of rapid next-generation sequencing in defining cancer of unknown primary and to identify therapeutic biomarkers.

METHODS

A retrospective chart review was performed by identifying pathological samples designated cancer of unknown primary. Next-generation sequencing testing was based on an automated workflow utilizing the Genexus integrated sequencer, validated for clinical use. Genomic profiling was further integrated within a routine immunohistochemistry service, with results reported directly by anatomic pathologists.

RESULTS

Between October 2020 and October 2021, 578 solid tumor samples underwent genomic profiling. Among this cohort, 40 were selected based on an initial diagnosis of cancer of unknown primary. The median (range) age at diagnosis was 70 (42-85) and 23 (57%) were female. Genomic data were used to support a site-specific diagnosis in 6 patients (15%). Median turnaround time was 3 business days (IQR: 1-5). Most common alterations identified were KRAS (35%), CDKN2A (15%), TP53 (15%), and ERBB2 (12%). Actionable molecular targeted therapies were identified in 23 (57%) patients, including alterations in BRAF, CDKN2A, ERBB2, FGFR2, IDH1, and KRAS. Immunotherapy-sensitizing mismatch repair deficiency was identified in 1 patient.

CONCLUSION

This study supports the adoption of rapid next-generation sequencing among patients with cancer of unknown primary. We also demonstrate the feasibility of integration of genomic profiling with diagnostic histopathology and immunohistochemistry in a community practice setting. Diagnostic algorithms incorporating genomic profiling to better define cancer of unknown primary should be considered for future study.

CRESTONE: Initial efficacy and safety of seribantumab in solid tumors harboring NRG1 fusions

3006

Background: NRG1 fusions are rare oncogenic drivers found in ̃0.2% of all solid tumors. These fusions elicit ERBB3/HER3 overactivation to drive tumor growth and cancer cell survival. Currently there are no approved targeted therapies for NRG1 fusion-positive tumors. Furthermore, patients (pts) with tumors harboring NRG1 fusions have poor outcomes with standard therapies. Seribantumab is a fully human anti-HER3 IgG2 monoclonal antibody that suppressed tumor growth in NRG1 fusion-driven preclinical models. Here, we present initial clinical data from the CRESTONE study (NCT04383210). Methods: CRESTONE is a Phase 2, global, multicenter, open-label study of seribantumab in adult pts with locally advanced or metastatic solid tumors harboring NRG1 fusions. A dose ranging phase established the RP2D as a 3g once weekly (QW) intravenous dose administered until treatment discontinuation criteria are met. In the expansion phase, cohort 1 will enroll at least 55 pts who had received at least one prior therapy and are naïve to ERBB-targeted therapy. Exploratory cohorts 2 or 3 will enroll pts previously treated with ERBB-targeted therapies and/or tumors harboring additional molecular alterations. The primary endpoint is objective response rate (ORR) by independent central review per RECIST v1.1. Initial data from cohort 1 pts who received seribantumab 3g QW with investigator (INV)-assessed response per RECIST v1.1 are reported. Results: By JAN-13-2022, 12 pts have received seribantumab 3g QW in cohort 1. Median age was 65 years (range 44–76), 67% were female, and median number of prior therapies was 1 (range 1–5). 92% (11/12) of pts had non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC); 5 different NRG1 fusion partners ( ATP1B1, CD74, ITG B1, SDC4, SLC3 A2) were reported by local next-generation sequencing tests. Among 10 pts evaluable for INV-assessed response, the confirmed ORR was 30%, and the disease control rate was 90% (1 complete response, 2 partial responses, 6 stable disease, 1 progressive disease). 58% (7/12) of pts remain on study treatment, including 2 pts with NSCLC who achieved objective responses with an ongoing duration of response of 6 and 8.5 months. Seribantumab 3g QW was well tolerated with no drug discontinuations or dose reductions. Across all cohorts (n = 29), the most frequently (≥20%) reported treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were diarrhea (38%), fatigue (34%), and rash (24%), all were grade 1 or 2. One grade 3 TRAE of vomiting occurred; there were no Grade 4 or 5 TRAEs. Efficacy analysis is ongoing and updated efficacy data from evaluable pts in cohort 1 will be presented. Conclusions: Initial data indicate seribantumab induced durable responses in advanced solid tumors harboring NRG1 fusions and has a favorable safety profile. These data support the continued evaluation of seribantumab in NRG1 fusion-positive solid tumors in the ongoing CRESTONE study. Clinical trial information: NCT04383210.

Randomized phase 2 study evaluating efficacy and safety of inupadenant in combination with chemotherapy in adults with metastatic non–small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) who progressed on immunotherapy

TPS9158

Background: In cancer, the accumulation of adenosine in the tumor microenvironment (TME) mediates immune suppression mainly via the high affinity A2A receptor (A2AR), causing dysregulation of innate and adaptative immune cell subsets and dampening the antitumor immune response. This results in increased tumor cell survival and immune escape (Blay 1997; Merighi 2003; Muller-Haegele 2014). Therefore, inhibiting A2AR could reverse immunosuppression and re-establish immune surveillance in the tumor microenvironment. Inupadenant is an antagonist of the A2AR with potent inhibition of A2AR even at the high concentrations of adenosine present in the tumor microenvironment. Ongoing clinical studies have established inupadenant as a molecule with a favorable safety profile with preliminary evidence of clinical activity in multiple tumor types, including durable PRs in patients who have exhausted standard treatment options (Buisseret 2021). The standard treatment for patients without a driving mutation who progress on first-line IO is a platinum-based doublet chemotherapy regimen. Carboplatin plus Pemetrexed (C+P) is the preferred chemotherapy in nonsquamous mNSCLC. Study A2A-005 will evaluate the efficacy of inupadenant in combination with C+P as a second-line therapy in adult patients with nonsquamous mNSCLC (post-IO). A successful outcome from study A2A-005 will help address a high unmet need for this patient population and could lead to new therapeutic options. Methods: This is a 2-part study. The first part is an open label dose-finding part to determine the safety and recommended Phase 2 dose (RP2D) of inupadenant in combination with C+P (N = 40). In Part 2, 150 patients will be randomized 1:1 to inupadenant or placebo, both in combination with C+P. Tumor response will be determined according to RECIST 1.1 criteria and safety findings will be reviewed by the Safety Review Committee (for Part 1) and the Data Monitoring Committee (for Part 2). Key eligibility criteria include 1) mNSCLC of nonsquamous pathology, 2) have received only 1 line of anti-PD-(L)1 therapy in the metastatic setting, without concomitant chemotherapy, and have progressed (IO/IO combination therapy is allowed), 3) have measurable disease as defined by RECIST v1.1 criteria and 4) Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group status ≤1. Primary endpoints are RP2D (for Part 1) and PFS (for Part 2). Secondary endpoints include change in tumor size, ORR, OS, and adverse events. Correlative aims include assessing blood and tissue biomarkers for association with clinical benefit. The study will be conducted in approximately 11 countries in North America and Europe. Clinical trial information: EudraCT 2021-005487-22.

Intracranial Metastatic Disease: Present Challenges, Future Opportunities

Intracranial metastatic disease (IMD) is a prevalent complication of cancer that significantly limits patient survival and quality of life. Over the past half-century, our understanding of the epidemiology and pathogenesis of IMD has improved and enabled the development of surveillance and treatment algorithms based on prognostic factors and tumor biomolecular characteristics. In addition to advances in surgical resection and radiation therapy, the treatment of IMD has evolved to include monoclonal antibodies and small molecule antagonists of tumor-promoting proteins or endogenous immune checkpoint inhibitors. Moreover, improvements in the sensitivity and specificity of imaging as well as the development of new serological assays to detect brain metastases promise to revolutionize IMD diagnosis. In this review, we will explore current treatment principles in patients with IMD, including the emerging role of targeted and immunotherapy in select primary cancers, and discuss potential areas for further investigation.

Point of Care Molecular Testing: Community-Based Rapid Next-Generation Sequencing to Support Cancer Care

Purpose: Biomarker data are critical to the delivery of precision cancer care. The average turnaround of next-generation sequencing (NGS) reports is over 2 weeks, and in-house availability is typically limited to academic centers. Lengthy turnaround times for biomarkers can adversely affect outcomes. Traditional workflows involve moving specimens through multiple facilities. This study evaluates the feasibility of rapid comprehensive NGS using the Genexus integrated sequencer and a novel streamlined workflow in a community setting. Methods: A retrospective chart review was performed to assess the early experience and performance characteristics of a novel approach to biomarker testing at a large community center. This approach to NGS included an automated workflow utilizing the Genexus integrated sequencer, validated for clinical use. NGS testing was further integrated within a routine immunohistochemistry (IHC) service, utilizing histotechnologists to perform technical aspects of NGS, with results reported directly by anatomic pathologists. Results: Between October 2020 and October 2021, 578 solid tumor samples underwent genomic profiling. Median turnaround time for biomarker results was 3 business days (IQR: 2-5). Four hundred eighty-one (83%) of the cases were resulted in fewer than 5 business days, and 66 (11%) of the cases were resulted simultaneously with diagnosis. Tumor types included lung cancer (310), melanoma (97), and colorectal carcinoma (68), among others. NGS testing detected key driver alterations at expected prevalence rates: lung EGFR (16%), ALK (3%), RET (1%), melanoma BRAF (43%), colorectal RAS/RAF (67%), among others. Conclusion: This is the first study demonstrating clinical implementation of rapid NGS. This supports the feasibility of automated comprehensive NGS performed and interpreted in parallel with diagnostic histopathology and immunohistochemistry. This novel approach to biomarker testing offers considerable advantages to clinical cancer care.

Safety Related to the Timing of Radiotherapy and Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in Patients with Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer: A Single Institutional Experience

Background: The safety impact of radiotherapy (RT) timing relative to immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) for advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is unclear. We investigated if RT within 14 days (Interval 1) and 90 days (Interval 2) of ICI use is associated with toxicities compared to RT outside these intervals. Methods: Advanced NSCLC patients treated with both RT and ICIs were reviewed. Toxicities were graded as per CTCAE v4.0 and attributed to either ICIs or RT by clinicians. Associations between RT timing and Grade ≥2 toxicities were analyzed using logistic regression models adjusted for patient, disease, and treatment factors (α = 0.05). Results: Sixty-four patients were identified. Twenty received RT within Interval 1 and 40 within Interval 2. There were 20 Grade ≥2 toxicities in 18 (28%) patients; pneumonitis (6) and nausea (2) were most prevalent. One treatment-related death (immune encephalitis) was observed. Rates of patients with Grade ≥2 toxicities were 35%/25% in the group with/without RT within Interval 1 and 30%/25% in the group with/without RT within Interval 2. No significant association between RT timing relative to ICI use period and Grade ≥2 toxicities was observed. Conclusion: Albeit limited by the small sample size, the result suggested that pausing ICIs around RT use may not be necessary.

The Evolving Role of Immunotherapy in Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

The management of Stage III non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) is complex and requires multidisciplinary input. Since the publication of the PACIFIC trial (consolidative durvalumab post concurrent chemotherapy and radiation in Stage III disease) which showed improved survival for patients in the immunotherapy arm, there has been much interest in the use of immunotherapy in the Stage III setting. In this review, we explore the biologic and clinical rationale for the use of immunotherapy in Stage III NSCLC, present previously published and upcoming data in the neoadjuvant, adjuvant, and concurrent realms of Stage III management, and discuss unanswered questions and challenges moving forward.

Canadian Consensus Recommendations on the Management of MET-Altered NSCLC

In Canada, the therapeutic management of patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) with rare actionable mutations differs between provinces, territories, and individual centres based on access to molecular testing and funded treatments. These variations, together with the emergence of several novel mesenchymal-epithelial transition (MET) factor-targeted therapies for the treatment of NSCLC, warrant the development of evidence-based consensus recommendations for the use of these agents. A Canadian expert panel was convened to define key clinical questions, review evidence, discuss practice recommendations and reach consensus on the treatment of advanced MET-altered NSCLC. Questions addressed by the panel include: 1. How should the patients most likely to benefit from MET-targeted therapies be identified? 2. What are the preferred first-line and subsequent therapies for patients with MET exon 14 skipping mutations? 3. What are the preferred first-line and subsequent therapies for advanced NSCLC patients with de novo MET amplification? 4. What is the preferred therapy for patients with advanced epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR)-mutated NSCLC with acquired MET amplification progressing on EGFR inhibitors? 5. What are the potential strategies for overcoming resistance to MET inhibitors? Answers to these questions, along with the consensus recommendations herein, will help streamline the management of MET-altered NSCLC in routine practice, assist clinicians in therapeutic decision-making, and help ensure optimal outcomes for NSCLC patients with MET alterations.

Consensus recommendations for optimizing biomarker testing to identify and treat advanced EGFR-mutated non-small-cell lung cancer

The advent of personalized therapy for non-small-cell lung carcinoma (nsclc) has improved patient outcomes. Selection of appropriate targeted therapy for patients with nsclc now involves testing for multiple biomarkers, including EGFR. EGFR mutation status is required to optimally treat patients with nsclc, and thus timely and accurate biomarker testing is necessary. However, in Canada, there are currently no standardized processes or methods in place to ensure consistent testing implementation. That lack creates challenges in ensuring that all appropriate biomarkers are tested for each patient and that the medical oncologist receives the results for making informed treatment decisions in a timely way. An expert multidisciplinary working group was convened to create consensus recommendations about biomarker testing in advanced nsclc in Canada, with a primary focus on EGFR testing. Recognizing that there are biomarkers beyond EGFR that require timely identification, the expert multidisciplinary working group considered EGFR testing in the broader context of integration into complex lung biomarker testing. Primarily, the panel of experts recommends that all patients with nonsquamous nsclc, regardless of stage, should undergo comprehensive reflex biomarker testing at diagnosis with targeted next-generation sequencing. The panel also considered the EGFR testing algorithm and the challenges associated with the pre-analytic, analytic, and post-analytic elements of testing. Strategies for funding testing by reducing silos of single biomarker testing for EGFR and for optimally implementing the recommendations presented here and educating oncology professionals about them are also discussed.

Prolonging Survival: The Role of Immune Checkpoint Inhibitors in the Treatment of Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer

BACKGROUND

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) represents approximately 15% of lung cancers, and approximately 70% are diagnosed as extensive-stage SCLC (ES-SCLC). Although ES-SCLC is highly responsive to chemotherapy, patients typically progress rapidly, and there is an urgent need for new therapies. Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have recently been investigated in SCLC, and this review provides guidance on the use of these agents in ES-SCLC based on phase III evidence.

METHODS

Published and presented literature on phase III data addressing use of ICIs in ES-SCLC was identified using the key search terms "small cell lung cancer" AND "checkpoint inhibitors" (OR respective aliases). Directed searches of eligible studies were periodically performed to ensure capture of the most recent data.

RESULTS

Six phase III trials were identified, with four assessing the benefits of ICIs plus chemotherapy first-line, one evaluating ICIs as first-line therapy maintenance, and one assessing ICI monotherapy after progression on platinum-based chemotherapy. The addition of ipilimumab or tremelimumab to first-line treatment or as first-line maintenance did not improve survival. Two out of three studies combining PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors with first-line platinum-based chemotherapy demonstrated significant long-lasting survival benefits and improved quality of life with no unexpected safety concerns. PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitors as first-line maintenance or in later lines of therapy did not improve survival. Biomarker research is ongoing as well as research into the role of ICIs in combination with radiation therapy in limited-stage SCLC.

CONCLUSION

The addition of atezolizumab or durvalumab to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy for ES-SCLC prolongs survival and improves quality of life.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

Platinum-based chemotherapy has been standard of care for extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) for more than a decade. Six recent phase III trials investigating immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) have clarified the role of these agents in this setting. Although ICIs were assessed first-line, as first-line maintenance, and in later lines of therapy, the additions of atezolizumab or durvalumab to first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were the only interventions that significantly improved overall survival and increased quality of life. These combinations should therefore be considered standard therapy for first-line ES-SCLC. Biomarker research and investigations into the role of ICIs for limited-stage disease are ongoing.

Multicenter Validation Study to Implement Plasma Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor T790M Testing in Clinical Laboratories

PURPOSE

Plasma detection of EGFR T790M mutations is an emerging alternative to tumor rebiopsy in acquired epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor resistance. Validation of analytical sensitivity and clinical utility is required before routine diagnostic use in clinical laboratories.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Sixty-three patients with advanced EGFR-mutant lung cancer at 7 Canadian centers, who were being screened for the ASTRIS trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02474355), participated in this companion study. Plasma T790M mutation was detected using droplet digital polymerase chain reaction, Cobas (Roche Diagnostics, Indianapolis, IN), or next-generation sequencing in 4 laboratories. T790M concordance was assessed between plasma and tumor samples.

RESULTS

Assessment of T790M in tumor biopsy tissue was successful in 81% of patients; 49% had confirmed T790M results (tumor or plasma) for ASTRIS. Plasma testing in this companion study yielded T790M results in 97% of patients; 62% had T790M-positive results, 36% had negative results, and 2% had indeterminate results. Of 38 patients with negative or indeterminate biopsy results, 55% had positive plasma T790M results, increasing the proportion with T790M-positive results to 73%. Sensitivity of plasma T790M testing was 75%. Overall concordance between tissue and plasma was 64%, and concordance among laboratories was 90.3%. Response to osimertinib and duration of therapy were similar irrespective of testing method (overall response rate, 62.5% for tissue, 66.7% for plasma, and 70.6% for both).

CONCLUSION

This multicenter validation study demonstrates that plasma EGFR T790M testing can identify significantly more patients than biopsy alone who may benefit from targeted therapy.

Pembrolizumab or Placebo Plus Etoposide and Platinum as First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage Small-Cell Lung Cancer: Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III KEYNOTE-604 Study

PURPOSE

Pembrolizumab monotherapy has shown antitumor activity in patients with small-cell lung cancer (SCLC). The randomized, double-blind, phase III KEYNOTE-604 study compared pembrolizumab plus etoposide and platinum (EP) with placebo plus EP for patients with previously untreated extensive-stage (ES) SCLC.

METHODS

Eligible patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to pembrolizumab 200 mg once every 3 weeks or saline placebo for up to 35 cycles plus 4 cycles of EP. Primary end points were progression-free survival (PFS; RECIST version 1.1, blinded central review) and overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. Objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response were secondary end points. Prespecified efficacy boundaries were one-sided P = .0048 for PFS and .0128 for OS.

RESULTS

Of the 453 participants, 228 were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus EP and 225 to placebo plus EP. Pembrolizumab plus EP significantly improved PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.75; 95% CI, 0.61 to 0.91; P = .0023). Twelve-month PFS estimates were 13.6% with pembrolizumab plus EP and 3.1% with placebo plus EP. Although pembrolizumab plus EP prolonged OS, the significance threshold was not met (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.64 to 0.98; P = .0164). Twenty-four-month OS estimates were 22.5% and 11.2%, respectively. ORR was 70.6% in the pembrolizumab plus EP group and 61.8% in the placebo plus EP group; the estimated proportion of responders remaining in response at 12 months was 19.3% and 3.3%, respectively. In the pembrolizumab plus EP and placebo plus EP groups, respectively, any-cause adverse events were grade 3-4 in 76.7% and 74.9%, grade 5 in 6.3% and 5.4%, and led to discontinuation of any drug in 14.8% and 6.3%.

CONCLUSION

Pembrolizumab plus EP significantly improved PFS compared with placebo plus EP as first-line therapy for patients with ES-SCLC. No unexpected toxicities were seen with pembrolizumab plus EP. These data support the benefit of pembrolizumab in ES-SCLC.

Development, validation and results from the impact of treatment evolution in non-small cell lung cancer (iTEN) model

OBJECTIVES

Treatment of advanced NSCLC (aNSCLC) is rapidly evolving, as new targeted and immuno-oncology (I-O) treatments become available. The iTEN model was developed to predict the cost and survival benefits of changing aNSCLC treatment patterns from a Canadian healthcare system perspective. This report describes iTEN model development and validation.

MATERIALS & METHODS

A discrete event patient simulation of aNSCLC was developed. A modified Delphi process using Canadian clinical experts informed the development of treatment sequences that included commonly used, Health Canada approved treatments of aNSCLC. Treatment efficacy and the timing of progression and death were estimated from published Kaplan-Meier progression free and overall survival data. Costs (2018 CDN$) included were: drug acquisition and administration, imaging, monitoring, adverse events, physician visits, best supportive care, and end-of-life.

RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

Clinical validity of the iTEN model was assessed by comparing model survival predictions to published real-world evidence (RWE). Four RWE studies that reported the overall survival of patients treated with a broad sampling of common aNSCLC treatment patterns were used for validation. The validation coefficient of determination was R² = 0.95, with the model generally producing estimates that were neither optimistic nor conservative. The model estimated that current Canadian practice patterns yield a median survival of almost 13 months, a five-year survival rate of 3% and a life-time per-treated-patient cost of $110,806. Cost and survival estimates are presented and were found to vary by aNSCLC subtype. In conclusion, the iTEN model is a reliable tool for forecasting the impact on cost and survival of new treatments for aNSCLC.

ASTRIS: a global real-world study of osimertinib in >3000 patients with EGFR T790M positive non-small-cell lung cancer

Aim: Osimertinib is a third-generation, irreversible, oral EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor. We report real-world effectiveness and safety data. Patients & methods: EGFR T790M positive advanced non-small-cell lung cancer adults, who received ≥1 prior EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor, received osimertinib 80 mg daily. Primary effectiveness outcome: overall survival. Secondary effectiveness outcomes included: investigator-assessed clinical response, progression-free survival, time-to-treatment discontinuation. Results: At data cutoff, 3015 patients had enrolled: 57.1% had investigator-assessed response (95% CI: 55.2-58.9). Median progression-free survival: 11.1 months (95% CI: 11.0-12.0) and median time-to-treatment discontinuation: 13.5 months (95% CI: 12.6-13.9). Interstitial lung disease/pneumonitis-like events reported in 28 (1%) patients. Conclusion: Osimertinib demonstrated clinical effectiveness similar to efficacy observed in the clinical trial program with no new safety signals.

Fulfilling the potential of real-world evidence for lung cancer in Canada

The use of real-world evidence (rwe) through real-world data (rwd) is becoming increasingly prevalent in health care around the globe. [...]

A network approach to developing immuno-oncology combinations in Canada

Immune checkpoint inhibitors have revolutionized care for many cancer indications, with considerable effort now being focused on increasing the rate, depth, and duration of patient response. One strategy is to combine immune strategies (for example, ctla-4 and PD-1/L1-directed agents) to harness additive or synergistic efficacy while minimizing toxicity. Despite encouraging results with such combinations in multiple tumour types, numerous clinical challenges remain, including a lack of biomarkers that reliably predict outcome, the emergence of therapeutic resistance, and optimal management of immune-related toxicities. Furthermore, the selection of ideal combinations from the myriad of immune, systemic, and locoregional therapies has yet to be determined. A longitudinal network-based approach could offer advantages in addressing those critical questions, including long-term follow-up of patients beyond individual trials. The molecular cancer registry Personalize My Treatment, managed by the Networks of Centres of Excellence nonprofit organization Exactis Innovation, is uniquely positioned to accelerate Canadian immuno-oncology (io) research efforts throughout its national network of cancer sites. To gain deeper insight into how a pan-Canadian network could advance research in io combinations, Exactis invited preeminent clinical and scientific advisors from across Canada to a roundtable event in November 2017. The present white paper captures the expert advice provided: leverage longitudinal patient data collection; facilitate network collaboration and assay harmonization; synergize with existing initiatives, networks, and biobanks; and develop an io combination trial based on Canadian discoveries.

Perspectives on treatment advances for stage III locally advanced unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer

For more than a decade, there has been no improvement in outcomes for patients with unresectable locally advanced (la) non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc). The standard treatment in that setting is definitive concurrent chemotherapy and radiation (ccrt). Although the intent of treatment is curative, most patients rapidly progress, and their prognosis is poor, with a 5-year overall survival (os) rate in the 15%-25% range. Those patients therefore represent a critical unmet need, warranting expedited approval of, and access to, new treatments that can improve outcomes. The pacific trial, which evaluated durvalumab consolidation therapy after ccrt in unresectable la nsclc, demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in progression-free survival (pfs) and a significant improvement in os. Durvalumab thus fills a critical unmet need in the setting of unresectable la nsclc and provides a new option for patients treated with curative intent. Here, we review the treatment of unresectable la nsclc, with a focus on the effect of the clinical data for durvalumab.

Canadian consensus: oligoprogressive, pseudoprogressive, and oligometastatic non-small-cell lung cancer

Background

Little evidence has been generated for how best to manage patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) presenting with rarer clinical scenarios, including oligometastases, oligoprogression, and pseudoprogression. In each of those scenarios, oncologists have to consider how best to balance efficacy with quality of life, while maximizing the duration of each line of therapy and ensuring that patients are still eligible for later options, including clinical trial enrolment.

Methods

An expert panel was convened to define the clinical questions. Using case-based presentations, consensus practice recommendations for each clinical scenario were generated through focused, evidence-based discussions.

Results

Treatment strategies and best-practice or consensus recommendations are presented, with areas of consensus and areas of uncertainty identified.

Conclusions

In each situation, treatment has to be tailored to suit the individual patient, but with the intent of extending and maximizing the use of each line of treatment, while keeping treatment options in reserve for later lines of therapy. Patient participation in clinical trials examining these issues should be encouraged.

Postprogression Outcomes for Osimertinib versus Standard-of-Care EGFR-TKI in Patients with Previously Untreated EGFR-mutated Advanced Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

PURPOSE

In the phase III FLAURA study, third-generation epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) osimertinib significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus standard-of-care (SoC) EGFR-TKI (gefitinib or erlotinib) in patients with previously untreated EGFR (exon 19 deletion or L858R) mutation-positive advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Interim overall survival (OS) data were encouraging, but not formally statistically significant at current maturity (25%). Here we report exploratory postprogression outcomes.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive osimertinib (80 mg orally, once daily) or SoC EGFR-TKI (gefitinib 250 mg or erlotinib 150 mg, orally, once daily). Treatment beyond disease progression was allowed if the investigator judged ongoing clinical benefit. Patients receiving SoC EGFR-TKI could cross over to receive osimertinib after independently confirmed objective disease progression with documented postprogression T790M-positive mutation status.

RESULTS

At data cutoff (June 12, 2017), 138 of 279 (49%) and 213 of 277 (77%) patients discontinued osimertinib and SoC EGFR-TKI, respectively, of whom 82 (59%) and 129 (61%), respectively, started a subsequent treatment. Median time to discontinuation of any EGFR-TKI or death was 23.0 months [95% confidence interval (CI), 19.5-not calculable (NC)] in the osimertinib arm and 16.0 months (95% CI, 14.8-18.6) in the SoC EGFR-TKI arm. Median second PFS was not reached (95% CI, 23.7-NC) in the osimertinib arm and 20.0 months (95% CI, 18.2-NC) in the SoC EGFR-TKI arm [hazard ratio (HR), 0.58; 95% CI, 0.44-0.78; P = 0.0004].

CONCLUSIONS

All postprogression endpoints showed consistent improvement with osimertinib versus SoC EGFR-TKI, providing further confidence in the interim OS data.

Multi-disciplinary proactive follow-up algorithm for patients with advanced NSCLC receiving afatinib

PURPOSE

Afatinib is a standard first-line therapy for advanced EGFR-positive NSCLC. We implemented a pharmacist-led proactive follow-up algorithm to identify and manage early afatinib-related adverse events (AEs).

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients treated with afatinib after implementation of the algorithm at the Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre (Toronto, ON, Canada) from April 1, 2015 to July 31, 2016. Our in-house algorithm involved consultations in person and proactive pharmacist-led callbacks on days 5, 10, and 17. All AEs were graded and documented in real time and management based on toxicity grade was standardized. This study evaluated the impact of our algorithm on real-world AEs.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Thirty-three patients were identified and reviewed. Median follow-up was 248 days. All patients experienced at least one drug-related AE; 18.2% were grade 3/4. The most common AEs were diarrhea 87.9%, rash 81.8%, stomatitis 57.6%, and paronychia 45.5%. Median dose of afatinib was 40 mg daily; 51.5% of patients had ≥ 1 dose reduction and 6.3% discontinued afatinib due to AEs. Proactive calls by the pharmacist identified 36.5% of all drug-related AEs, 33.3% of grade 3/4 AEs, 58.1% of first drug-related AEs and identified two patients that were non-compliant. Only 3.2% of AEs were identified by an emergency room/urgent clinic visit.

CONCLUSIONS

This proactive multi-disciplinary AE management algorithm resulted in a low rate of urgent assessments and discontinuation due to toxicity while maintaining afatinib at ideal dose, thus providing a useful tool for centers prescribing afatinib.

Abstract 1642: Alectinib in treatment-naïve anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC): Systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA)

Background: The standard of care for treatment-naïve ALK+ mNSCLC patients (pts) is an ALK tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI). Pts treated with crizotinib generally experience disease progression within 1 year, often within the central nervous system (CNS). As such, there is a high unmet need for CNS-active ALK TKIs. Phase III data from 2 ALK TKIs, alectinib and ceritinib, showed improved efficacy vs crizotinib and chemotherapy, respectively; however, no studies have directly compared these TKIs. We report a NMA to compare the efficacy/safety of these therapies.

Methods: A SLR was conducted to identify ALK+ mNSCLC randomized controlled trials (RCTs) in treatment-naïve pts. Efficacy/safety endpoints were extracted and the feasibility of using the data in a NMA was assessed. Data were analyzed using a fixed effect analysis in WinBUGs following NICE guidelines.

Results: 1194 citations were identified, of which 4 RCTs were in treatment-naïve pts (ALEX [NCT02075840], ASCEND-4 [NCT01828099], PROFILE 1014 [NCT01154140] and PROFILE 1029 [NCT01639001]). All were open-label, phase III RCTs and pts were similar in terms of age, ECOG PS, disease stage, sex and smoking status. More pts had baseline CNS metastasis (mets) in ALEX (40%) vs the other trials (26-32%). PROFILE 1029 was conducted in East Asian pts and only included in a sensitivity analysis. Chemotherapy arms differed in that pemetrexed maintenance was included in ASCEND-4 but not in the PROFILE studies. Key efficacy/safety results are shown in the Table. Data from the sensitivity analyses were similar.

Conclusion: Alectinib significantly improved progression-free survival compared with other treatments in the ITT population including in pts with baseline CNS mets. Alectinib showed significantly fewer grade 3-4 AEs than ceritinib. The difference in chemotherapy arms of the 2 trials may have impacted the NMA efficacy results.

Table. NMA results in treatment-naïve ALK+ mNSCLC patientsComparisonEfficacy/Safety Endpoints PFS by IRC* HR (95% CrI)Subgroup CNS Mets at Baseline* PFS by IRC HR (95% CrI)OS* HR (95% CrI)Grade 3 or 4 AEs§OR (95% CrI)Alectinib vs chemotherapy0.23 (0.15-0.34)0.21 (0.10-0.44)0.63 (0.34-1.15)0.81 (0.44-1.52)Alectinib vs crizotinib0.50 (0.36-0.70)0.37 (0.22-0.63)0.76 (0.49-1.20)0.65 (0.41-1.04)Alectinib vs ceritinib0.41 (0.25-0.67)0.31 (0.13-0.71)0.85 (0.42-1.73)0.36 (0.17-0.79)Crizotinib vs chemotherapy0.45 (0.35-0.58)0.57 (0.35-0.93)0.82 (0.54-1.24)1.24 (0.81-1.91)Ceritinib vs chemotherapy0.55 (0.42-0.72)0.70 (0.44-1.11)0.73 (0.50-1.06)2.25 (1.42-3.61)Ceritinib vs crizotinib1.22 (0.84-1.79)1.22 (0.62-2.43)0.90 (0.52-1.57)1.82 (0.96-3.44)Statistically significant differences indicated in bold based on 95% CrI; *Hazard ratio <1 indicates lower hazard (higher likelihood of PFS or OS) compared with control; §Odds ratio <1 indicates lower odds of an event compared with control. AEs, adverse events; CNS, central nervous system; CrI, credible interval; HR, hazard ratio; IRC, independent review committee; Mets, metastases; OR, odds ratio; OS, overall survival; PFS, progression-free survival

Citation Format: Anna Steenrod, Michelle Orme, Katherine S. MacGilchrist, Rachel Rosenthal, Juliane Schaefer, Vlatka Smoljanovic, Emmanuel Mitry, Parneet K. Cheema. Alectinib in treatment-naïve anaplastic lymphoma kinase-positive (ALK+) metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (mNSCLC): Systematic literature review (SLR) and network meta-analysis (NMA) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2018; 2018 Apr 14-18; Chicago, IL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2018;78(13 Suppl):Abstract nr 1642.

Evidence-based best practices for EGFR T790M testing in lung cancer in Canada

Epidermal growth factor receptor (egfr) tyrosine kinase inhibitors (tkis) are recommended as first-line systemic therapy for patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc) having mutations in the EGFR gene. Resistance to tkis eventually occurs in all nsclc patients treated with such drugs. In patients with resistance to tkis caused by the EGFR T790M mutation, the third-generation tki osimertinib is now the standard of care. For optimal patient management, accurate EGFR T790M testing is required. A multidisciplinary working group of pathologists, laboratory medicine specialists, medical oncologists, a respirologist, and a thoracic radiologist from across Canada was convened to discuss best practices for EGFR T790M mutation testing in Canada. The group made recommendations in the areas of the testing algorithm and the pre-analytic, analytic, and post-analytic aspects of clinical testing for both tissue testing and liquid biopsy circulating tumour dna testing. The recommendations aim to improve EGFR T790M testing in Canada and to thereby improve patient care.

ASTRIS: A real world treatment study of osimertinib in patients (pts) with EGFR T790M positive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC)

9036

Background: Osimertinib is an oral, irreversible, central nervous system (CNS) active EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) selective for both EGFR-TKI sensitizing and T790M resistance mutations. We report results from the first predefined interim analysis of the ongoing ASTRIS study (NCT02474355). Methods: Pts received osimertinib 80 mg once daily. Eligible pts had Stage IIIB-IV NSCLC harbouring a T790M mutation determined by local validated molecular test (not restricted by sample type), received prior EGFR-TKI therapy, WHO performance status (PS) 0−2, acceptable organ and bone marrow function and no history of interstitial lung disease (ILD) or QTc prolongation. Asymptomatic, stable CNS metastases were permitted. The primary efficacy outcome was overall survival; other outcomes included investigator-assessed response rate (RR), progression-free survival and time to treatment discontinuation. Safety data are also reported. Results: From study start (18 Sept 2015) to data cut-off (DCO; 3 Nov 2016), 1217 pts received osimertinib from 120 sites with a median follow-up of 4.1 mths ( < 1−14 mths), median age 64 yrs (27–92 yrs), 67% female, 61% White, 37% Asian, 87% WHO PS 0/1, 44% prior chemotherapy, 45% prior radiotherapy. All pts tested positive for T790M, identified from tissue in 682 pts (56%), plasma ctDNA in 433 pts (36%) and from other specimens in 102 pts (8%). At DCO, 317 pts (26%) had discontinued treatment, 900 pts (74%) were ongoing, median duration of exposure 3.8 mths ( < 1–13.2 mths), 168 pts (14%) had disease progression and 156 pts (13%) had died. In pts evaluable for response, the investigator-assessed RR was 64% (569/886; 95% CI 61, 67). Adverse events (AEs) leading to dose modification and treatment discontinuation were reported in 122 (10%) and 54 pts (4%), respectively. Serious AEs were reported in 165 pts (14%) and AEs leading to death in 30 pts (2%). ILD/pneumonitis-like events were reported in 25 pts (2%), and QTc prolongation in 9 pts (1%). Conclusions: ASTRIS, the largest reported clinical study of osimertinib in T790M-positive NSCLC, demonstrates clinical activity similar to that observed in the osimertinib clinical trial program with no new safety signals. Clinical trial information: NCT02474355.

Rate of EGFR mutation testing for patients with nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer with implementation of reflex testing by pathologists

BACKGROUND

Testing for mutation of the EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor) gene is a standard of care for patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small-cell lung cancer (nsclc). To improve timely access to EGFR results, a few centres implemented reflex testing, defined as a request for EGFR testing by the pathologist at the time of a nonsquamous nsclc diagnosis. We evaluated the impact of reflex testing on EGFR testing rates.

METHODS

A retrospective observational review of the Web-based AstraZeneca Canada EGFR Database from 1 April 2010 to 31 March 2014 found centres within Ontario that had requested EGFR testing through the database and that had implemented reflex testing (with at least 2 years' worth of data, including the pre- and post-implementation period).

RESULTS

The 7 included centres had requested EGFR tests for 2214 patients. The proportion of pathologists requesting EGFR tests increased after implementation of reflex testing (53% vs. 4%); conversely, the proportion of medical oncologists requesting tests decreased (46% vs. 95%, p < 0.001). After implementation of reflex testing, the mean number of patients having EGFR testing per centre per month increased significantly [12.6 vs. 4.9 (range: 4.5-14.9), p < 0.001]. Before reflex testing, EGFR testing rates showed a significant monthly increase over time (1.37 more tests per month; 95% confidence interval: 1.19 to 1.55 tests; p < 0.001). That trend could not account for the observed increase with reflex testing, because an immediate increase in EGFR test requests was observed with the introduction of reflex testing (p = 0.003), and the overall trend was sustained throughout the post-reflex testing period (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Reflex EGFR testing for patients with nonsquamous nsclc was successfully implemented at multiple centres and was associated with an increase in EGFR testing.

Impact of Reflex EGFR/ALK Testing on Time to Treatment of Patients With Advanced Nonsquamous Non–Small-Cell Lung Cancer

Purpose:

Optimal first-line systemic therapy for patients with advanced nonsquamous (nonsq) non–small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) requires confirmation of EGFR/ ALK status, which can delay treatment. We evaluated the impact of reflex testing, defined as pathologists initiating EGFR/ ALK testing at the time of diagnosis of nonsq NSCLC, on time to treatment (TTT).

Methods:

We conducted a retrospective review of patients with nonsq NSCLC with medical oncology consultation at Sunnybrook Odette Cancer Centre between March 18, 2010 and April 30, 2014. Data were compared during routine and reflex testing. TTT was defined as the interval between the first medical oncology visit with advanced NSCLC and the initiation of systemic therapy.

Results:

A total of 306 patients were included (n = 232 for routine testing, n = 74 for reflex testing). There was a trend to improvement in median TTT with reflex testing (36 days [interquartile range {IQR}, 16 to 71 days v 26 days [IQR, 8 to 41 days], P = .071). Omitting patients with intentional delays in systemic therapy for low-volume disease, poor performance status, comorbidity management, and/or radiation therapy, median TTT improved (34 days [IQR, 15 to 67 days] v 22 days [IQR, 8 to 42 days], P = .049). Time to optimal first-line systemic therapy according to published guidelines improved (median, 36 days [IQR, 16 to 91 days] v 24 days [IQR, 8 to 43 days], P = .036). There was no impact on receipt of any first-line systemic therapy (55% v 59%, P = .66). The quality of biomarker testing improved, with fewer unsuccessful tests ( EGFR, 14% v 4%, P = .039; and ALK, 17% v 3%, P = .037).

Conclusion:

Reflex testing of EGFR/ ALK improved the time to optimal systemic therapy and the quality of biomarker testing for patients with advanced nonsq NSCLC.

Personalizing health care: feasibility and future implications

Considerable variety in how patients respond to treatments, driven by differences in their geno- and/ or phenotypes, calls for a more tailored approach. This is already happening, and will accelerate with developments in personalized medicine. However, its promise has not always translated into improvements in patient care due to the complexities involved. There are also concerns that advice for tests has been reversed, current tests can be costly, there is fragmentation of funding of care, and companies may seek high prices for new targeted drugs. There is a need to integrate current knowledge from a payer's perspective to provide future guidance. Multiple findings including general considerations; influence of pharmacogenomics on response and toxicity of drug therapies; value of biomarker tests; limitations and costs of tests; and potentially high acquisition costs of new targeted therapies help to give guidance on potential ways forward for all stakeholder groups. Overall, personalized medicine has the potential to revolutionize care. However, current challenges and concerns need to be addressed to enhance its uptake and funding to benefit patients.

Age 40 years and under does not confer superior prognosis in patients with multiple myeloma undergoing upfront autologous stem cell transmplant

Multiple myeloma (MM) rarely occurs in patients 40 years of age and younger. This young age has been reported to correlate with improved survival in patients with MM. The objective of this study is to describe presenting features and outcomes of patients < or =40 years of age with MM who undergo autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) as first-line treatment, and compare overall survival (OS) and progression free survival (PFS) to patients aged 41-65 years. We performed a retrospective institutional review of all patients < or =40 years of age and 41-65 years of age at the time of diagnosis of MM who had undergone upfront ASCT from January 1, 1990, to July 31, 2007. Thirty-eight patients < or =40 years of age and 608 patients aged 41-65 were identified. There was a high rate of plasma cell leukemia (PCL) in young patients at 11% compared to the reported rate of 2%-4%. At diagnosis, there was an increased rate of renal failure in the young cohort compared to patients aged 41-65 years at 25% versus 16% and Bence Jones proteinuria at 81% versus 51%. The rate of complete or partial response was similar between the groups at 79% and 83% in the young and older cohorts, respectively. Median PFS post-ASCT was 22.0 months (95% confidence interval [CI]: 16.1, 28.0), versus 26.9 months (95% CI: 24.0, 29.8) for patients aged 41-65 years (P = .66). Median OS from date of ASCT was also similar to those over 40 years: 68.1 months (95% CI: 39.0, 97.2) versus 80.7 months (95% CI: 68.1, 93.4); P = .90. Treatment-related mortality (TRM) was low at 2.6% and 2.3% in the young and older cohorts, respectively. Despite previous reports that young age is a positive prognostic marker, our study found OS post-ASCT is equivalent to those aged 41-65 years. This study emphasizes the importance of developing strategies to better the outcomes of young patients with MM.