scholarly journals Efficacy and safety of trifluridine/tipiracil in older and younger patients with metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: subgroup analysis of a randomized phase 3 study (TAGS)

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kohei Shitara ◽  
Toshihiko Doi ◽  
Hisashi Hosaka ◽  
Peter Thuss-Patience ◽  
Armando Santoro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Best Supportive Care ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer ◽  
Safety Outcomes ◽  
Previously Treated Patients ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background Trifluridine and tipiracil (FTD/TPI) demonstrated survival benefit vs placebo and manageable safety in previously treated patients with metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (mGC/GEJC) in the randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 TAGS study. This subgroup analysis of TAGS examined efficacy/safety outcomes by age. Methods In TAGS, patients with mGC/GEJC and ≥ 2 prior therapies were randomized (2:1) to receive FTD/TPI 35 mg/m2 or placebo, plus best supportive care. A preplanned subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes in patients aged < 65, ≥ 65, and ≥ 75 years. Results Among 507 randomized patients (n = 337 FTD/TPI; n = 170 placebo), 55%, 45%, and 14% were aged < 65, ≥ 65, and ≥ 75 years, respectively. Overall survival hazard ratios for FTD/TPI vs placebo were 0.67 (95% CI 0.51–0.89), 0.73 (95% CI 0.52–1.02), and 0.67 (95% CI 0.33–1.37) in patients aged < 65, ≥ 65, and ≥ 75 years, respectively. Regardless of age, patients receiving FTD/TPI experienced improved progression-free survival and stayed longer on treatment than those receiving placebo. Among FTD/TPI-treated patients, frequencies of any-cause grade ≥ 3 adverse events (AEs) were similar across age subgroups (80% each), although grade ≥ 3 neutropenia was more frequent in older patients [40% (≥ 65 and ≥ 75 years); 29% (< 65 years)]; AE-related discontinuation rates did not increase with age [14% (< 65 years), 12% (≥ 65 years), and 12% (≥ 75 years)]. Conclusions The results of this subgroup analysis show the efficacy and tolerability of FTD/TPI treatment regardless of age in patients with mGC/GEJC who had received 2 or more prior treatments.

scholarly journals Trifluridine/tipiracil in patients with metastatic gastroesophageal junction cancer: a subgroup analysis from the phase 3 TAGS study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wasat Mansoor ◽  
Hendrik-Tobias Arkenau ◽  
Maria Alsina ◽  
Kohei Shitara ◽  
Peter Thuss-Patience ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Tumor ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Best Supportive Care ◽  
Tumor Type ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer ◽  
Disease Site ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Primary Tumor Type

Abstract Background Patients with advanced gastroesophageal junction cancer (GEJC) have poor survival outcomes, and GEJC-specific data from trials evaluating agents in gastric cancers (GCs) as a whole are lacking. Trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) was approved for previously treated metastatic GC or GEJC (mGC/mGEJC) based on results of the phase 3 TAGS trial. Subgroup analyses by primary tumor type (GC or GEJC) in TAGS are reported here. Methods Pa tients with mGC/mGEJC treated with  ≥ 2 prior chemotherapy regimens were randomized (2:1) to receive FTD/TPI or placebo, plus best supportive care. A pre-planned sub-analysis was performed to evaluate efficacy and safety outcomes by primary tumor type (GEJC or GC). Results Of 507 randomized patients, 145 (29%) had GEJC and 360 (71%) had GC as the primary disease site. Baseline characteristics were generally similar between the GEJC and GC subgroups, except that more patients in the GEJC subgroup had received  ≥ 3 prior regimens (72 vs. 59% in the GC subgroup). Survival benefit with FTD/TPI was observed in both subgroups. The overall survival hazard ratio for FTD/TPI vs placebo was 0.75 (95% CI 0.50–1.11) and 0.67 (95% CI 0.52–0.87) in the GEJC and GC subgroups, respectively. Grade ≥ 3 adverse events of any cause were reported in 75 (77%) and 192 (81%) FTD/TPI-treated patients in the GEJC and GC subgroups, respectively. No new safety concerns were noted with FTD/TPI. Conclusion As in patients with GC, FTD/TPI showed an efficacy benefit in patients with GEJC in the TAGS trial, along with demonstrating a manageable safety profile.

Efficacy and tolerability of bevacizumab (BEV) plus capecitabine and cisplatin (XP) in Chinese patients (pts) with locally advanced or metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer (AGC): Results from the AVATAR study.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 73-73 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin Shen ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
Jian-Ming Xu ◽  
Hong-Ming Pan ◽  
Guanghai Dai ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Chinese Patients ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Grade 3

73 Background: In the AVAGAST study, chemotherapy (fluoropyrimidine and cisplatin) + BEV did not significantly improve overall survival (OS) vs. chemotherapy + placebo. Geographic differences in efficacy were observed, but only 12 Chinese pts were included. AVATAR, a study similar in design to AVAGAST, is a randomized double-blind study conducted exclusively in China in pts with AGC. Methods: Pts aged >18 years with gastric adenocarcinoma were randomized 1:1 to XP + BEV 7.5 mg/kg or placebo + XP. The primary objective was OS; secondary objectives included progression-free survival (PFS) and safety. Results: Baseline characteristics of the 202 pts were well balanced. The primary efficacy endpoint of improved OS in the BEV arm was not met (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.79–1.56; p=0.5567; see table ). BEV + XP was well tolerated. Grade 3–5 adverse events (AEs) and serious AEs were 60% and 19% for BEV and 68% vs. 21% for placebo, respectively. Grade 3–5 AEs of special interest with BEV occurred in 8% of BEV pts and 15% of placebo pts; the difference was mainly due to grade 3–5 haemorrhage (BEV 4%, placebo 12%). Conclusions: Addition of BEV to XP in Chinese pts with AGC did not significantly improve outcomes in AVATAR. The results from AVATAR are consistent with the findings seen in the Asian sub-population of the previous AVAGAST study. [Table: see text]

Everolimus versus placebo in Japanese patients with advanced pancreatic neuroendocrine tumors (pNET): Japanese subgroup analysis of RADIANT-3.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 289-289 ◽  
Author(s):  
T. Ito ◽  
T. Okusaka ◽  
M. Ikeda ◽  
T. Tajima ◽  
A. Kasuga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Subgroup Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Japanese Patients ◽  
Placebo Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Significant Prolongation ◽  
Grade 3

289 Background: Everolimus demonstrated a statistically and clinically significant improvement in PFS over placebo in a multi-national, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial in patients with advanced low- or intermediate-grade pNET with disease progression within the prior 12 months (RADIANT-3) (Ann Oncol [2010] 21[suppl 6]: NP doi:10.1093/annonc/mdq340). Forty patients were enrolled from Japanese sites and randomized (n=23: everolimus; n=17: placebo) in that study. The purpose of this report is to investigate the efficacy and safety in the Japanese subgroup. Methods: Subgroup analysis for the Japanese patients was performed comparing the efficacy and safety between everolimus 10mg/d orally plus best supportive care (BSC) and matching placebo plus BSC. The primary efficacy endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). The safety was evaluated based on the incidence of adverse events (AEs). Results: Treatment with everolimus resulted in a significant prolongation by 16.62 months in median PFS (19.45 months for everolimus, 2.83 months for placebo), with 81% reduction in the hazard ratio of progression/death (HR 0.19 [95% CI: 0.08, 0.48]; one-sided unstratified log-rank test: p<.001). The most common AE was stomatitis (73.9% everolimus vs 23.5% placebo); mostly grade 1/2. Grade 3/4 AEs occurred in 69.5% of the everolimus arm and 29.4% of the placebo arm, and amongst the most frequent included (% in everolimus vs % in placebo): neutropenia (17.4% vs 3%); anemia (8.7% vs 0%); pneumonitis (8.7% vs 0%); leukopenia (8.7% vs 0%). The remainder of grade 3/4 AEs was less than 3%. Median duration of exposure to everolimus was 57 weeks vs 47 weeks on placebo. Treatment discontinuation for AEs was 17% in the everolimus arm vs 0% in the placebo arm. Conclusions: Everolimus demonstrated a clinically meaningful improvement in PFS over placebo in Japanese patients. Everolimus was well tolerated in Japanese patients, and no new safety concerns were noted. This result suggests that everolimus can be a standard treatment for Japanese patients with advanced pNET. [Table: see text]

Ramucirumab treatment in patients with gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma: Secondary analysis of efficacy and safety results of 4 dosing regimens in the phase II trial I4T-MC-JVDB.

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 117-117
Author(s):  
Jaffer A. Ajani ◽  
Anghel Adrian Udrea ◽  
Tomasz Sarosiek ◽  
Michael Schenker ◽  
Carys Morgan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Standard Dose ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Secondary Analysis ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Standard Regimen ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Grade 3

117 Background: Ramucirumab (RAM) is approved for treatment of advanced gastric cancer or gastroesophageal junction adenocarcinoma with disease progression after prior platinum and/or fluoropyrimidine chemotherapy at 8 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W). Previous phase 3 trials indicated that efficacy of RAM correlated with exposure. While the primary objectives of the open-label RAM monotherapy JVDB study were pharmacokinetics and safety, a secondary analysis was conducted on efficacy and safety of the 3 higher exposure regimens vs. the standard regimen. Methods: Patients ( n = 164) were randomized 1:1:1:1 to 4 treatment arms: 8 mg/kg Q2W (Arm 1), 12 mg/kg Q2W (Arm 2), 6 mg/kg every week (Arm 3), and 8 mg/kg Days 1 and 8 (D1D8) every 3 weeks (Q3W) (Arm 4). Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were graded by NCI CTCAE v4.0. Tumor response was assessed by RECIST 1.1. Results: Median (months) progression-free survival (PFS) of the 3 arms and overall survival (OS) of 2 arms was increased compared to the standard regimen (Table). Best overall response was partial response (Arm 2, n = 4; Arm 3, n = 2). The majority of patients experienced ≥1 TEAE (81.4%); 39.1% had ≥1 Grade ≥3 event and 26.7% had ≥1 serious event. The most frequent Grade ≥3 events were fatigue (5.6%), abdominal pain (5.05%), hypertension (5.0%), anemia (4.3%), and vomiting (3.7%). Conclusions: Although the study was not powered for statistical comparisons, some trends toward improved efficacy vs. the standard regimen were observed; the greatest median PFS months and OS improvement was 1 month (Arm 2 vs. Arm 1; PFS = 2.50 vs. 1.45; OS = 6.74 vs. 5.68). Despite higher RAM exposures with the experimental regimens, the safety profile is similar to the standard dose regimen, and no unexpected safety findings were observed. Clinical trial information: NCT02443883. [Table: see text]

First-line (1L) nivolumab (NIVO) plus chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo in advanced gastric cancer/gastroesophageal junction cancer/esophageal adenocarcinoma (GC/GEJC/EAC): Expanded efficacy and safety data from CheckMate 649.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4002-4002
Author(s):  
Markus H. Moehler ◽  
Kohei Shitara ◽  
Marcelo Garrido ◽  
Pamela Salman ◽  
Lin Shen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Her2 Positive ◽  
Acceptable Safety Profile ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer ◽  
Positive Score ◽  
Combined Positive Score ◽  
Grade 3

4002 Background: CheckMate 649 is the largest randomized, global phase 3 study of 1L programmed death (PD)-1 inhibitor–based therapy in GC/GEJC/EAC. 1L NIVO + chemo demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) vs chemo, with progression-free survival (PFS) benefit and an acceptable safety profile in pts whose tumors expressed PD-ligand (L)1 at combined positive score (CPS) ≥ 5 and ≥ 1, and in all randomized pts (Moehler et al. Ann Oncol 2020). We report additional data for all randomized pts. Methods: Eligible pts had previously untreated, unresectable advanced or metastatic GC/GEJC/EAC. Known HER2-positive pts were excluded. Pts were randomized to receive NIVO (360 mg Q3W or 240 mg Q2W) + chemo (XELOX Q3W or FOLFOX Q2W), NIVO + ipilimumab, or chemo. Dual primary endpoints for NIVO + chemo vs chemo were OS and PFS by blinded central review in PD-L1 CPS ≥ 5 pts. Hierarchically tested secondary endpoints were OS in PD-L1 CPS ≥ 1 and all randomized pts. Results: At 12-month minimum follow-up for 1581 randomized pts, NIVO + chemo had a statistically significant OS benefit vs chemo (HR 0.80 [99.3% CI 0.68–0.94; P = 0.0002]) in all randomized pts; PFS benefit was also seen (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.68–0.87]). OS benefit was observed in multiple prespecified subgroups, consistent with the primary population. Grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) were reported in 59% (NIVO + chemo) and 44% (chemo) of pts. TRAEs with potential immunologic etiology (select TRAEs; sTRAEs) are shown in the table. Pts in the NIVO + chemo arm had decreased risk of symptom deterioration on treatment vs those in the chemo arm (HR 0.77 [95% CI 0.63–0.95; P = 0.0129]). Tolerability as measured by the FACT-Ga GP5 item was similar in both treatment groups. Conclusions: The addition of NIVO to chemo demonstrated improved OS and PFS benefit in all randomized pts, along with an acceptable safety profile and maintained tolerability as well as QoL, providing further support for NIVO + chemo as a standard 1L treatment for advanced GC/GEJC/EAC. Clinical trial information: NCT02872116. [Table: see text]

The impact of prior therapies on outcomes with trifluridine/tipiracil (FTD/TPI) in the phase III TAGS trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 247-247
Author(s):  
Kohei Shitara ◽  
Ben George ◽  
Julien Taieb ◽  
Raghav Sundar ◽  
Marwan Fakih ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Prior Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer ◽  
Third Line ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
The Impact

247 Background: It is unclear whether prior treatment with ramucirumab (RAM) or RAM plus paclitaxel (PAC), standard second-line treatments for metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (mGC/GEJC), can influence outcomes with third-line chemotherapy in this patient (pt) population (pop). In the phase 3 TAGS trial, FTD/TPI showed a survival benefit vs placebo (PBO) in pts with mGC/GEJC who had received ≥2 prior chemotherapy regimens. Post hoc analyses were performed to assess the impact of prior RAM, PAC or RAM+PAC treatment on the efficacy and safety of FTD/TPI in TAGS. Methods: Pts in the TAGS trial were categorized into 5 subgroups based on prior treatment received as follows: A) RAM (alone or combined with other agents), B) no RAM, C) PAC (but no RAM), D) RAM+PAC (sequentially or in combination) and E) neither PAC nor RAM. While subgroups A and B were prespecified, all other subgroups were identified post hoc. Efficacy (overall survival [OS] and progression-free survival [PFS]) and safety were assessed in these subgroups. Results: In the overall pop (N=507), 33% had received prior RAM (alone/combined); 30% prior RAM+PAC; 27% prior PAC but no RAM; and 40% had received neither PAC nor RAM. As only 3% of all pts received prior RAM but no PAC, that subgroup was not considered in this analysis. FTD/TPI treatment was consistently associated with benefits in OS and PFS vs placebo across all pt subgroups (Table). Among pts randomized to FTD/TPI, OS benefit was similar between pts who received RAM+PAC vs those who received neither (HR, 1.15; 95% CI, 0.84–1.58) and between pts who received PAC (but no RAM) vs those who received neither (HR, 0.91; 95% CI, 0.66–1.25). The FTD/TPI safety profile was consistent across all subgroups, with similar overall incidences of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs). Minor variations in hematologic toxicities were noted (Table). Conclusions: In the phase 3 TAGS trial, FTD/TPI treatment in the third or later line provided efficacy benefits vs PBO and demonstrated a consistent safety profile in pts with mGC/GEJC regardless of prior treatments. Clinical trial information: NCT02500043. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document