scholarly journals PS01.07 Registrational Phase 2 Trial of Sotorasib in KRAS p.G12C Mutant NSCLC: First Disclosure of the Codebreak 100 Primary Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. S61
Author(s):  
B. Li ◽  
F. Skoulidis ◽  
G. Falchook ◽  
A. Sacher ◽  
V. Velcheti ◽  
...  
2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7544-7544
Author(s):  
Charles Herbaux ◽  
Herve Ghesquieres ◽  
Reda Bouabdallah ◽  
Stephanie Guidez ◽  
Emmanuel Gyan ◽  
...  

7544 Background: R/R iNHL treatment remains challenging. Atezolizumab (ATE) and obinutuzumab (OBI) are monoclonal antibodies acting respectively to inhibit T-lymphocyte exhaustion or by inducing lymphoma cells cytotoxicity, whereas venetoclax (VEN) is a small molecule inhibiting BCL-2. Combining tumor-targeted therapies with agents that enhance anti-tumor immunity represents an attractive treatment paradigm. This LYSA sponsored multicenter phase 2 trial (NCT03276468) evaluated ATE, OBI and VEN combination in R/R B-cell lymphomas. Herein, we present primary efficacy and safety data from the iNHL cohort including Follicular Lymphoma (FL) and Marginal Zone Lymphomas (MZL). Methods: Patients ≥18 years with biopsy-confirmed R/R FL and MZL who failed at least one line of therapy were eligible. OBI was given IV at 1 g on day (D) 1, 8 and 15 of cycle (C) 1 and on D1 from C2 to C8 every 3 weeks. ATE was given IV, 1.2 g every 3 weeks, started at D2 of C1, then administered at D2 of each cycle for 24 cycles. VEN was given orally at 800 mg/D at full dose, starting on D8C1 for 24 cycles. The primary endpoint was the Overall Response Rate (ORR) evaluated by Lugano criteria at the end of induction (EOI) after 8 cycles of ATE, OBI and VEN (M6) or at premature treatment discontinuation. Results: At the time of the primary analysis (08 Jan 2021), 78 patients were enrolled. FL cohort (n = 58): the median follow-up was 14.5 months. Main baseline characteristics were: Ann Arbor Stage III/IV, 85.7%; FLIPI HR, 47.3%; > 2 prior lines of therapy, 32.1%; and exposed to ASCT, 30.4%. The ORR on PET scan at EOI was measured at 53.6% [41.8%-65.1%], including 30.4% of CMR. 37 patients (63%) received the full induction treatment. MZL cohort (n = 20; 13 nMZL, 5 eMZL, 2 sMZL): the median follow-up was 11.9 months. Main baseline characteristics were: Ann Arbor Stage IV, 100%; bone marrow infiltration, 38.9%; ≥ 2 extra-nodal sites, 50%; and > 2 prior lines of therapy, 22.2%. The ORR on CT scan at EOI was measured at 66.76% [44.6%-84.4%], including 16.7% of CR and 50.0% PR. 11 patients (55%) received the full induction treatment. At time of the present analysis, responses in the 2 cohorts seem durable with only 21,4% of responders who have reported relapse/progression. Out of the 78 pts, a total of 55 (70.5%) pts experienced grade 3–4 adverse event (AE) and 1 patient experienced an AE that led to discontinuation of any drug. Main AE of grade 3 or more were hematologic cytopenias, with only one febrile neutropenia (1.3%). Three pts experienced immune-related AE (1 grade 2 myositis and 2 grade 3 colitis), no tumor lysis syndrome was observed. Conclusions: ATE, OBI and VEN triplet appears to be well tolerated, with no unexpected toxicity brought by the combination. The ORR at EOI seems to be comparable to other innovative regiments in this setting, with durable responses to date. Clinical trial information: NCT03276468.


2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (2_suppl) ◽  
pp. 560-560
Author(s):  
Thomas Cosgriff ◽  
Lin Yang ◽  
Anna Alyasova ◽  
Dingwei Ye ◽  
Andrey Karpenko ◽  
...  

560 Background: The phase 2 RECORD-4 study assessed EVE in pts with mRCC who progressed after 1 prior anti-VEGF or cytokine (J Clin Oncol 2015;abstr 4518). At primary analysis, median progression-free survival (PFS, primary end point) in the overall population was 7.8 months (95% CI, 5.7-11.0). Here we present results of the final updated primary PFS and final overall survival (OS) analysis. Methods: RECORD-4 enrolled 134 pts with clear cell mRCC into 1 of 3 cohorts based on prior first-line therapy: sunitinib (cohort 1, n=58), other anti-VEGF (cohort 2, n=62: 23 sorafenib, 16 bevacizumab, 13 pazopanib, 10 other), or cytokines (cohort 3, n=14). Pts received EVE 10 mg/d until progression of disease (PD; RECIST, v1.0) or intolerance. Database lock for final analysis was June 26, 2015. Results: Demographics were balanced among cohorts; overall most pts were men (68%) and most had good/intermediate MSKCC prognosis (90%); median age was 59 yrs. Median duration of exposure was 5.8 mo. At the time of final analysis, study discontinuation was primarily due to disease progression (61%). In the overall population, median PFS (95% CI) was 7.4 (5.6-10.5) mo and median OS (95% CI) was 23.8 (17.0-not evaluable [NE]) mo (Table). Overall rate of grade 3 or 4 adverse events (AEs) was 56%. There were 13 on-treatment deaths; primary causes were disease progression, multi-organ failure, and respiratory failure (2.3% each). Conclusions: RECORD-4 final OS analysis supports EVE as a second-line option after sunitinib and other first-line therapies. EVE safety profile was consistent with previous experience. Clinical trial information: NCT01491672. [Table: see text]


2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9075-9075 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Planchard ◽  
Benjamin Besse ◽  
Tae Min Kim ◽  
Elisabeth A. Quoix ◽  
Pierre Jean Souquet ◽  
...  

9075 Background: BRAF V600E mutations occur in 1% to 2% of lung adenocarcinomas and act as oncogenic drivers. Initial cohorts of the BRF113928 (NCT01336634) trial evaluated efficacy and safety of D monotherapy (cohort A; n = 78) or D + T (cohort B; n = 57) in pts with previously treated BRAFV600E–mutant metastatic NSCLC. At primary analysis, overall response rates (ORRs) were 33.3% and 63.2% in pts who received D or D + T, respectively. Furthermore, durable response (median duration of response [DOR], 9.0 mo) was observed in D + T pts. Here, we present an updated survival analysis based on additional follow-up. Methods: In this phase 2 trial, 2 cohorts (A and B) of pts with previously treated metastatic BRAFV600E–mutant NSCLC were enrolled sequentially. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed ORR. Secondary efficacy endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), DOR, and overall survival (OS). D and T were dosed orally at the established phase 2 dose of D 150 mg twice daily and T 2 mg once daily. Results: This updated analysis had a median follow-up of 16.2 mo, which represented an additional 10 mo of follow-up. Median OS was 12.7 mo (95% CI, 7.3-16.3) with 57 deaths reported for pts treated with D monotherapy and 18.2 mo (95% CI, 14.3-not estimable [NE]) with 33 deaths reported for pts treated with D + T. Detailed efficacy results are presented in the table. Investigator-assessed ORR, DOR, and PFS were supported by independent review committee assessments. No new safety signals were observed for D + T. Conclusions: This update of the BRF113928 study confirms that durable responses and encouraging survival were achieved with combination D + T in pts with BRAFV600E–mutant NSCLC. Clinical trial information: NCT01336634. [Table: see text]


2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (S2) ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Herbaux ◽  
J. M. Schiano de Colella ◽  
C. Thieblemont ◽  
S. Guidez ◽  
L. Ysebaert ◽  
...  

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Latha Damle ◽  
Hrishikesh Damle ◽  
Bharath BR

Due to the huge demand for health care facilities, there is a need for safe therapeutic intervention which can reduce the need for extensive health care support. In that regard, the current study was aimed at performing Phase 1 clinical trial to determine the safety of plant formulation in 24 healthy volunteers and Phase 2 trials in 100 COVID-19 patients to determine the tolerability and impact on the level of COVID 19 specific inflammatory markers. The outcomes of the Phase 1study have suggested the safe usage of plant formulation in humans and encouraged to conduct Phase 2 clinical trial. In the Phase 2 trial, the plant formulation was evaluated in 100 COVID-19 patients along with the standard of care. In Phase 1 single dose of 500 mg plant formulation capsule was used as an intervention, while 1gm thrice a day of plant formulation for 14 days was the testing dose for Phase 2. During the Phase 1 trial, no adverse event was observed and all organ systems were normal in function. During the Phase 2 trial, 100 patients underwent randomization, 50 were assigned to receive plant formulation, and 50 to receive placebo. Three patients in the placebo and two patients in the plant formulation group had dropped out from the study. Hence, the primary analysis population included 95 patients (48 allocated to plant formulation and 47 to placebo). The COVID 19 specific inflammatory markers improved faster and became normal in the plant formulation treatment group. In conclusion, the plant formulation (ATRICOV 452) has been found to be safe in phases 1 and 2.


Pneumologie ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 70 (10) ◽  
Author(s):  
K Olivier ◽  
D Griffith ◽  
K Winthrop ◽  
B Brown-Elliott ◽  
G Eagle ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase 2 ◽  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document