1
|
KEYNOTE-177: Phase III randomized study of pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for microsatellite instability-high advanced colorectal cancer. J Clin Oncol 2021. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2021.39.3_suppl.6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.7] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
6 Background: KEYNOTE-177 (NCT02563002) evaluated the antitumor activity of pembrolizumab (pembro) vs chemotherapy ± bevacizumab or cetuximab (chemo) as first-line therapy for patients with microsatellite-instability high/mismatch repair deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We present results of the final PFS analysis and analysis of PFS2. Methods: Patients with locally-determined MSI-H/dMMR mCRC and ECOG PS 0 or 1 were randomized 1:1 to first-line pembro 200 mg Q3W for up to 2 years or investigator’s choice of mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI Q2W ± bevacizumab or cetuximab (chosen before randomization). Treatment continued until progression, unacceptable toxicity, patient/investigator decision to withdraw, or completion of 35 cycles (pembro only). Patients receiving chemo could crossover to pembro for up to 35 cycles after confirmed PD. Primary end points were PFS (RECIST v1.1, central review) and OS. Secondary end points included ORR (RECIST v1.1, central review) and safety. Exploratory endpoints included duration of response (DOR), PFS2 (time from randomization to progression on next line of therapy or any cause death), and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). Data cutoff was Feb 19, 2020. Results: At data cutoff a total of 307 patients were randomized (153 to pembro, 154 to chemo). Median (range) study follow-up was 32.4 mo (24.0-48.3). Pembro was superior to chemo for PFS (median 16.5 mo vs 8.2 mo; HR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45-0.80; P= 0.0002). The 12- and 24-mo PFS rates were 55.3% and 48.3% with pembro vs 37.3% and 18.6% with chemo. Confirmed ORR was 43.8% vs 33.1%; median (range) DOR was not reached (2.3+ to 41.4+) with pembro vs 10.6 mo (2.8 to 37.5+) with chemo. PFS2 was longer with pembro vs chemo (median not reached vs 23.5 mo [HR 0.63; 95% CI, 0.45-0.88]). OS analysis is ongoing. Grade ≥3 treatment related adverse event (TRAE) rates were 22% vs 66% for pembro vs chemo. There were no grade 5 TRAEs in the pembro arm and 1 grade 5 intestinal perforation in the chemo arm. HRQoL scores were improved with pembro vs chemo. Conclusions: Pembro provided a statistically significant improvement in PFS vs chemo as first-line therapy for patients with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC, with fewer TRAEs observed. Furthermore, pembro provided a clinically meaningful improvement in PFS2 for patients with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT02563002.
Collapse
|
2
|
Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy for microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair deficient metastatic colorectal cancer: The phase 3 KEYNOTE-177 Study. J Clin Oncol 2020. [DOI: 10.1200/jco.2020.38.18_suppl.lba4] [Citation(s) in RCA: 129] [Impact Index Per Article: 32.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/20/2022] Open
Abstract
LBA4 Background: KEYNOTE-177 (NCT02563002) is a phase 3, randomized open-label study evaluating the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab (pembro) versus standard of care chemotherapy ± bevacizumab or cetuximab (chemo) as first-line therapy for patients (pts) with microsatellite-instability high/mismatch repair deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). We present results of the final PFS analysis. Methods: A total of 307 pts with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC as determined locally and ECOG PS 0 or 1 were randomly assigned 1:1 to first-line pembro 200 mg Q3W for up to 2 years or investigator’s choice of mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI Q2W ± bevacizumab or cetuximab (chemo chosen prior to randomization). Treatment continued until PD, unacceptable toxicity, pt/investigator decision to withdraw, or completion of 35 cycles (pembro only). Patients receiving chemo could crossover to pembro for up to 35 cycles after confirmed PD. Primary end points were PFS (RECIST v1.1, central review) and OS. Key secondary end points included ORR (RECIST v1.1, central review), and safety. The data cutoff date for this interim analysis was Feb 19, 2020. The study will continue without changes to evaluate OS. Results: At data cutoff, 153 pts were randomized to pembro and 154 to chemo. Median (range) study follow-up was 28.4 mo (0.2-48.3) with pembro vs 27.2 mo (0.8-46.6) with chemo. Pembro was superior to chemo for PFS (median 16.5 mo vs 8.2 mo; HR 0.60; 95% CI, 0.45-0.80; P=0.0002). The 12- and 24-mo PFS rates were 55.3% and 48.3% with pembro vs 37.3% and 18.6% with chemo. Confirmed ORR was 43.8% vs 33.1%; median (range) duration of response was not reached (2.3+ to 41.4+) with pembro vs 10.6 mo (2.8 to 37.5+) with chemo. Grade 3-5 treatment related adverse event (AE) rates were 22% vs 66% for pembro vs chemo. One pt in the chemo arm died due to a treatment-related AE. Conclusions: Pembro provided a clinically meaningful and statistically significant improvement in PFS versus chemo as first-line therapy for pts with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC, with fewer treatment-related AEs observed and should be the new standard of care for these pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02563002 .
Collapse
|