Quality of life (QOL) with sunitinib versus interferon-alfa (IFN-α) as first-line therapy in patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): Final results

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 6529-6529
Author(s):  
D. Cella ◽  
M. D. Michaelson ◽  
J. C. Cappelleri ◽  
A. G. Bushmakin ◽  
C. Charbonneau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Well Being ◽  
The United States ◽  
The European Union ◽  
First Line ◽  
Symptom Index ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Eq Vas

6529 Background: In an international, randomized phase 3 trial (Figlin et al, ASCO. 2008), sunitinib showed superior progression-free survival (the primary endpoint) and objective response rate over IFN-α (11 vs. 5 mo and 47% vs. 12%, respectively; p < 0.000001) as first-line mRCC therapy, with a median overall survival of more than 2 years. Here, we report the final health-related QOL results from this trial. Methods: 750 treatment-naïve mRCC patients were randomized 1:1 to receive sunitinib 50 mg orally once-daily in recurring cycles of 4 weeks on drug and 2 weeks off or IFN-α 9 MU subcutaneously thrice-weekly. QOL was measured by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G), which has 4 subscales, the FACT-Kidney Symptom Index-15 item (FKSI-15), which includes a Disease-Related Symptoms (FKSI-DRS) subscale, and the EQ-5D questionnaire's utility index (EQ-5D Index) and visual analog scale (EQ-VAS). The primary QOL endpoint was FKSI-DRS. Higher scores indicated better outcomes. Patients completed questionnaires on days 1 and 28 of each cycle. Data were analyzed for the intent-to-treat population using mixed-effects models (MM), supplemented with pattern-mixture models (PMM). We also compared QOL of patients in the United States (US) with patients in the European Union (EU; France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain and United Kingdom). Results: Patients on sunitinib reported better FKSI-15 and FKSI-DRS scores than those on IFN-α, with a significant difference in the overall means across cycles (4.06 and 2.36, respectively; p < 0.0001; MM). Similarly, differences in means for FACT-G (and all subscales), EQ-5D Index, and EQ-VAS all significantly favored sunitinib (p < 0.05). Based on pre-set, required minimum score differences, between-treatment differences in the mean scores were clinically meaningful for FKSI-15, FKSI-DRS, FACT-G, and the FACT-G functional well-being subscale. Between-treatment differences were similar for both the US and EU populations. Across all analyses, results from PMM were similar to those from MM. Conclusions: Sunitinib provides superior QOL over IFN-α, in addition to superior efficacy, as first-line mRCC therapy. [Table: see text]

Efficacy and safety of lenvatinib in the real-world treatment of hepatocellular carcinoma: Results from a Canadian multicenter database (HCC CHORD).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 275-275
Author(s):  
Carla Pires Amaro ◽  
Michael J Allen ◽  
Jennifer J. Knox ◽  
Erica S Tsang ◽  
Howard John Lim ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Real World ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Drug Discontinuation ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
First Line ◽  
The Real ◽  
First Line Therapy

275 Background: The REFLECT trial establishedlenvatinib (LEN) as a first-line treatment option for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). Compared to sorafenib (S), LEN has a higher objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS) with a slightly different toxicity profile. The aim of this study was to gather data regarding the efficacy and safety of LEN when used in the real-world treatment of HCC. To our knowledge, this is the first study to examine LEN use in HCC patients treated outside of Asia. Methods: HCC patients treated with LEN from 10 cancer centers in the Canadian provinces of British Columbia, Alberta, Ontario and Nova Scotia between July 2018 to July 2020 were included. Overall survival (OS), PFS, disease control rate (DCR) and ORR were retrospectively analyzed and compared across first- and second-to-fourth line use of LEN. ORR was determined radiographically according to the treating physician´s opinion in clinical notes and not RECIST 1.1 or mRECIST. Toxicities were also examined. Results: A total of 220 patients were included in this analysis. Median age was 67 years, 80% were men and 25.5% East Asian. The most frequent causes of liver disease were hepatitis C (37%) and B (26%). 62% of patients received any localized treatment before LEN, of those 26% had TACE, 15% TARE and 7.7% had liver transplant. Before starting LEN 29% of patients were ECOG 0 and 59% were ECOG 1. Most patients were Child-Pugh A (81%) and BCLC stage C (75.5%). Main portal vein invasion was present in 14% of the patients. Median follow-up was 4.5 months. A total of 173 patients (79%) received LEN as first line therapy and 47 patients (21%) were treated in second-to-fourth line. Of patients receiving LEN in first line, 22 (13%) started treatment with S, but switched to LEN before progression due to poor tolerance of S. ORR, DCR, PFS and OS are shown in the table. Toxicities occurred in 86% of patients and led to dose reductions in 76 (35%) patients and drug discontinuation in 53 (24%) patients. The most common side effects were fatigue (59%), hypertension (41%), decreased appetite (25%) and diarrhea (22%). Conclusions: Outcomes of HCC patients treated in Canada with LEN in the first line are comparable to those demonstrated in the REFLECT trial, despite the inclusion of Child-Pugh B and ECOG >1 patients. LEN use in second or later lines also showed similar outcomes, although more conclusions are difficult to draw due to the small numbers. LEN appears to be effective and safe in real world practice outside of Asia in first- and second-to-fourth line treatment of HCC. [Table: see text]

Comparison of the Therapeutic Efficacy of the Early and the Delayed Use of Vinorelbine-Based Regimens for Patients with Advanced Breast Cancer

Chemotherapy ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 71-79 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ying Wang ◽  
Jieqiong Liu ◽  
Weijuan Jia ◽  
Shunrong Li ◽  
Nanyan Rao ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Advanced Breast Cancer ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Breast ◽  
Second Line ◽  
First Line ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Early Use

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of vinorelbine-based regimens as first-, second- and more-line therapies in advanced breast cancer (ABC) and to analyze the best timing of vinorelbine treatment. Methods: A total of 71 ABC patients were retrospectively reviewed. Of these, 35 patients were treated with vinorelbine-based regimens as first-line chemotherapy, and 36 patients were treated with vinorelbine-based regimens as second-line or more-line therapy. The primary end point of the study was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: No difference was found in baseline characteristics between the two groups (p > 0.1 for all comparisons). There was a significant difference in the objective response rate (ORR; p = 0.006) and clinical benefit rate (CBR; p = 0.013) between the first-line group and the second- or more-line groups. In the vinorelbine first-line group, the ORR was 68.6% (24 patients), and in the second-line or more-line groups the ORR was 36.1% (13 patients). A significant difference in PFS between the first-line group and the second-line or more-line groups was also observed (p = 0.030). The median PFS in the overall population was 6.3 ± 1.32 months (95% CI 3.69-8.90). The median PFS was 11.1 ± 3.76 months (95% CI 3.73-18.47) in the first-line group compared with 5.2 ± 1.35 months (95% CI 2.54-7.85) in the second-line or more-line groups. In patients treated with vinorelbine-trastuzumab combination as the first-line therapy, a complete response was observed in 1 patient (12.5%) and partial response in 5 patients (62.5%), giving an ORR of 75.0%. Progressive disease was observed in 1 patient (12.5%), and stable disease in 1 patient (12.5%), leading to a CBR of 87.5%. The median PFS was 13.8 ± 2.75 months (95% CI 8.42-19.18), and median OS was 37.0 ± 11.6 months (95% CI 14.18-59.82). No significant difference was found in overall survival (OS) between the groups (p = 0.612). Conclusion: For ABC patients, no significant difference in median OS was found between the early use and delayed use of vinorelbine-based regimens, but the short-term efficacy and PFS of vinorelbine-based regimens were significantly better in the early use group than in the delayed use group.

Bevacizumab (BEV) plus capecitabine as maintenance therapy after initial treatment with BEV plus XELOX in previously untreated patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Mature data from STOP and GO, a phase III, randomized, multicenter study.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3565-3565 ◽  
Author(s):  
Suayib Yalcin ◽  
Ruchan Uslu ◽  
Faysal Dane ◽  
Ugur Yilmaz ◽  
Nurullah Zengin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Drop Out ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Significance Level ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade 3

3565 Background: Colorectal cancer is one of the most frequent malignancies, second after breast cancer in women and third after lung cancer and prostate cancer in men. The aim of this study was to evaluate and compare the progression-free survival (PFS) between two arms: Arm A is a combination of BEV + XELOX; Arm B is a combination of BEV + XELOX for 6 cycles followed by maintenance BEV + capecitabine as first-line therapy in mCRC. Methods: BEV (7.5 mg/kg) + XELOX (capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 bid d1–14 + oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 d1 q3w) were administered until progression (Arm A) or 6 cycles of BEV + XELOX followed by BEV + capecitabine were administered until progression (Arm B). PFS was the primary endpoint; secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. A sample size of 118 pts was required to detect with 80% power an increase of 1.5 months in median PFS between two arms with a standard deviation of 3.9 months and significance level of 0.05 (10% drop-out rate). Results: A total of 123 pts were randomized. Demographic characteristics were balanced between the arms. Median treatment period was 7.5 (range 0.5–13.9) and 8.1 (range 0.1–20.7) months in Arms A and B, respectively. There was a statistically significant difference in median PFS between arms, although there was no significant difference in ORR and OS (see table). Tolerability was acceptable in both arms with the following grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs): Arm A 48.4%; Arm B 34.4% (p=0.116). Grade 3/4 diarrhoea occurred in 9.7% vs. 3.3%, weakness in 8.1% vs. 8.2%, hand-foot syndrome in 3.2% vs. 1.6%, and neuropathy in 4.8% vs. 3.3% of pts in Arms A and B, respectively. Conclusions: These findings suggest that maintenance therapy with BEV + capecitabine following induction with 6 cycles of BEV + XELOX may be superior to continuous BEV + XELOX until progression inpts with previously untreated mCRC. [Table: see text]

Final analysis of the phase 2 APEC study: Overall survival (OS) data and biomarker subanalyses for first-line FOLFOX or FOLFIRI with cetuximab (cet) once every 2 weeks in patients (pts) with KRAS or RAS (KRAS and NRAS, exons 2-4) wild-type (wt) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 566-566
Author(s):  
Ann-Lii Cheng ◽  
Gerardo H. Cornelio ◽  
Lin Shen ◽  
Timothy Jay Price ◽  
Tsai-Sheng Yang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Asia Pacific ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ras Mutation ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Status

566 Background: The Asia-Pacific, multicenter, nonrandomized, phase II APEC study previously reported that first-line therapy for pts with KRAS ex 2 wt mCRC consisting of C once every 2 weeks combined with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI achieved efficacy and safety profiles comparable to those reported in analogous pivotal studies involving weekly C. This final analysis presents OS data from the KRAS wt intent-to-treat (ITT) population, as well as subgroup efficacy analyses stratified by BRAF, PIKC3A, and all RAS mutation status. Methods: Eligible pts received C once every 2 weeks (day 1 of each cycle, 500 mg/m2) with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI (investigator’s choice). Study treatment continued until disease progression, dose-limiting toxicity or consent withdrawal. The primary endpoint was best confirmed overall response as assessed by RECIST 1.0; progression-free survival (PFS) and OS were secondary endpoints. In the evaluable populations, the status of BRAF, PIK3CA, and all RAS mutations was assessed retrospectively by pyrosequencing. Results: 42 months after the last patient was enrolled, median OS in the KRAS wt population was 26.8 months (Table). There were no unexpected safety findings. Additional biomarker results—including objective response rate (ORR), PFS, and OS subgroup analyses stratified on BRAF, PIKC3A, and all RAS mutation status—will be presented. Conclusions: The observed median OS of 26.8 months in the KRAS wt population is comparable to that reported in prior pivotal studies involving weekly C plus FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in the first line. These results suggest that C plus FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in a once-every-2-weeks regimen is active and tolerable as first-line therapy in this Asia-Pacific study population and a convenient alternative to weekly administration. Clinical trial information: NCT00778830. [Table: see text]

Phase 1/2 study of safety/efficacy using trabectedin, ipilimumab, and nivolumab as first-line treatment of advanced soft tissue sarcoma (STS).

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (5_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS46-TPS46 ◽  
Author(s):  
Erlinda Maria Gordon ◽  
Victoria S. Chua-Alcala ◽  
Katherine Kim ◽  
William W. Tseng ◽  
Doris M Quon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Phase 1 ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Maximum Tolerated Dose ◽  
Categorical Variables ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Number Of Patients

TPS46 Background: Sarcoma cells are most immunogenic at the onset of cancer when the immune system can recognize and destroy them. Hence, immune checkpoint inhibitors would be most effective when given as first line therapy. Objectives: (1) To investigate the maximum tolerated dose of trabectedin, an alkylating agent, when given sequentially with ipilimumab, a CTLA4 inhibitor, and nivolumab, a PD-1 inhibitor, in advanced STS, (2) To investigate the objective response rate (ORR), progression free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) , and (3) To correlate PFS with PD-L1 and other biomarker expression in patients’ tumors. Methods: Forty patients ≥18 years of age with advanced STS will be enrolled. This is a phase 1/2 study using a defined dose of ipilimumab (1 mg/kg i.v. q 12 weeks), nivolumab (3 mg/kg i.v. q 2 weeks), and escalating doses of trabectedin (1.0, 1.3, 1.5 mg/m2 i.v. q 3 weeks). I. Dose Escalation Phase 1 (previously treated patients): The study will employ the standard “cohort of three” design. The maximum tolerated dose is defined as the highest safely tolerated dose, where not more than one patient experienced DLT, with the next higher dose level having at least two patients who experienced DLT. II. Expansion Phase 2 (previously untreated patients): An additional 22-28 patients will receive trabectedin at the MTD and defined doses of ipilimumab and nivolumab to assess overall safety and potential efficacy in a greater number of patients. Patients may continue treatment until significant disease progression or unacceptable toxicity occurs. Statistical Considerations: NIH CTCAE v4.03 and RECIST v1.1 will be used. Categorical variables will be summarized by the n and percent in each category. Point estimates for efficacy endpoint incidences will be accompanied by a 2-sided 95% exact binomial CI. Time to event endpoints will be summarized descriptively using the KM method. The analyses of all study objectives will be descriptive and hypothesis generating, for planning Phase 2/3 studies. Clinical trial information: NCT 03138161.

Response-Independent Survival Benefit in Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Comparative Analysis of N9741 and AVF2107

2008 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 183-189 ◽  
Author(s):  
Axel Grothey ◽  
Eric E. Hedrick ◽  
Robert D. Mass ◽  
Somnath Sarkar ◽  
Sam Suzuki ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Survival Benefit ◽  
Tumor Response ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii Study

PurposeIn the phase III study AVF2107g, bevacizumab (BV) demonstrated a survival benefit when added to irinotecan, fluorouracil, and leucovorin (IFL) in first-line metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). In a parallel phase III study, Intergroup N9741, oxaliplatin plus fluorouracil and leucovorin (FOLFOX) also demonstrated a survival benefit compared with IFL. As these two superior therapies have differing mechanisms of action, we explored whether the improved survival associated with the superior therapy was dependent on tumor response.Patients and MethodsFor these retrospective, exploratory analyses, patients were defined as responders or nonresponders by whether complete or partial response was achieved with first-line therapy.ResultsCompared with IFL alone, BV plus IFL and FOLFOX each demonstrated statistically significant improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) regardless of objective tumor response. BV-treated nonresponders had a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.63 (P = .0001) for PFS and 0.76 (P = .0188) for OS compared with IFL-treated nonresponders. FOLFOX-treated nonresponders had an HR of 0.75 (P = .0029) for PFS and 0.74 (P = .0030) for OS compared with IFL-treated nonresponders.ConclusionIn both AVF2107g and N9741, objective response did not predict the magnitude of PFS or OS benefit from the superior therapy; nonresponders, despite a poorer prognosis than responders, achieved extended PFS and OS from BV plus IFL or FOLFOX compared with IFL. On the basis of these data, tumor response in metastatic colorectal cancer is not a necessary factor for a therapy to provide benefit to an individual patient.

scholarly journals The Impact of Tumor Mutation Burden on the Effect of Frontline Trastuzumab Plus Chemotherapy in Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Positive Advanced Gastric Cancers

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hye Ryeon Kim ◽  
Soomin Ahn ◽  
Hyunji Jo ◽  
Hongsik Kim ◽  
Joohyun Hong ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
First Line ◽  
Her2 Positive ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
The Status ◽  
Tumor Mutational Burden ◽  
The Impact

BackgroundTrastuzumab is a HER2-trargeted humanized monoclonal antibody that has been studied as a first-line treatment for patients with HER2-positive advanced gastric cancer (AGC). The effect of anti-HER2 therapy according to tumor mutational burden (TMB) in HER2-positive AGC remains unclear.MethodsWe performed next-generation sequencing (NGS), including TMB analysis, in 31 HER2-positive AGC patients with trastuzumab plus chemotherapy as first-line therapy for recurrent (n=8) or metastatic (n=23) tumors. The TruSight Oncology 500 Assay from Illumina (San Diego, CA, USA) was used to evaluate TMB.ResultsAmong 31 patients, 30 had tumors with immunohistochemistry (IHC) 3+, and one was IHC 2+ and silver in situ hybridization (SISH) positive. The median age was 57.0 years old (range, 35-76), and the majority had tumors with low TMB (87.1%, n=27/31). Only four (12.9%) had tumors with high TMB. Of these four, three achieved complete response (CR) or partial response (PR) to treatment, and the remaining patient was not evaluable for tumor response. Objective response rate (ORR) to trastuzumab plus chemotherapy showed a favorable trend in patients with high TMB (75.0%, n=3/4) compared to patients with low TMB (59.3%, n=16/27) (P=0.546). The median progression-free survival (PFS) was not reached in the TMB-high group but was 8.0 months (95% CI, 7.6-8.5) in the TMB-low group (P=0.019)ConclusionThe status of TMB could be a novel biomarker in predicting the efficacy of trastuzumab plus chemotherapy in HER2-positive AGCs.

Objective response rate and progression-free survival as surrogate endpoints for overall survival and the impact of crossover and unbalanced post-progression treatments: A systematic review and meta-analysis in first-line therapy of advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9049-9049
Author(s):  
Boris Pfeiffer ◽  
Mahmoud Hashim ◽  
Monica Duran ◽  
Maarten Postma ◽  
Bart Heeg
Keyword(s):  
Response Rate ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Absolute Difference ◽  
Surrogate Endpoints ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
The Impact

9049 Background: Correlations between overall survival (OS) and objective response rate (ORR) or progression-free survival (PFS) are poor. We aimed to evaluate the impact of crossover and unbalanced subsequent treatments on ORR and PFS as surrogate endpoints for OS in patients with advanced NSCLC receiving first-line therapy. Methods: A systematic literature review of randomized clinical trials of systemic treatment for patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC receiving first-line therapy was performed. Weighted (by trial size) linear regression models were fitted with the absolute difference in ORR or median PFS as an independent variable and the absolute difference in median OS as a dependent variable. The analysis was repeated in predefined subsets based on crossover and balance of post-progression therapies. Surrogate threshold effect (STE) was estimated using prediction intervals. Results: 317 trials (78,644 patients) fulfilled the eligibility criteria. In all treatment arms, the mean ORR, median PFS, and median OS were 28.2% (standard deviation (SD) = 12.4%), 5.1 months (SD = 2.1), and 10.4 months (SD = 2.5), respectively. ORR and PFS had weak (R = 0.351; 95% CI: 0.251-0.443) and (R = 0.397; 95% CI: 0.267-0.512) associations with OS, respectively. However, within phase III trials that did not allow crossover and reported balanced post-progression treatments, both ORR and PFS had stronger associations with OS (ORR and OS: R = 0.601, 95% CI: 0.399-0.747; PFS and OS: R = 0.695, 95% CI: 0.446-0.844). STE estimation indicated that trials that show statistically significant treatment effect size of ≥43% ORR or ≥3.2 median PFS months can be expected to show significant OS benefit with sufficient certainty. Conclusions: Surrogacy of ORR and PFS for OS might be better estimated in trials that do not allow crossover and report balanced post-progression treatments. Presented STE calculation can be used to estimate the expected effect on OS when either ORR or PFS are used as primary endpoints.

Camrelizumab combined with capecitabine and oxaliplatin followed by camrelizumab and apatinib as first-line therapy for advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer: Updated results from a multicenter, open label phase II trial.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4031-4031 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lin Shen ◽  
Zhi Peng ◽  
Yan-Qiao Zhang ◽  
Jia Wei ◽  
Feng Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastroesophageal Junction ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Sequential Therapy ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Open Label Phase

4031 Background: Capecitabine plus oxaliplatin (CAPOX) is one of the standard first-line treatments for advanced or metastatic gastric cancer. Camrelizumab (SHR-1210, an anti–PD-1 antibody) shows promising anti-tumor activity in patients (pts) with advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (G/GEJ) cancer. Camrelizumab combined with CAPOX for untreated G/GEJ cancer was assessed as a part of an ongoing multicenter, open-label phase 2 trial (cohort 1), and encouraging preliminary results were reported. Here, we present the updated safety and efficacy data. Methods: In this cohort, systemic treatment naïve pts with HER2– advanced or metastatic G/GEJ adenocarcinoma were given camrelizumab 200 mg on Day 1, capecitabine 1000 mg/m2 bid on Days 1–14 and oxaliplatin 130 mg/m2 on Day 1 of each 21-day-cycle for 4 to 6 cycles followed by camrelizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus apatinib 375 mg qd until disease progression or intolerable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate. Results: At data cutoff (Jan 20, 2019), 43 of the 48 enrolled pts were evaluable. Partial response was observed in 28 pts (65%), and 19 (44%) were confirmed. Stable disease in 14 pts and progressive disease in 10 pts were reported. Median estimates for duration of response and progression-free survival were not reached. Grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 9 pts (21%), included neutropenia, diarrhea, rash and elevated ALT, whereas none of the TRAEs was fatal. Ten pts without progression after 4–6 cycles of camrelizumab and CAPOX combination therapy all received camrelizumab plus apatinib as sequential therapy, and no new safety signals were observed. Conclusions: The updated results confirmed that camrelizumab plus CAPOX followed by camrelizumab plus apatinib was well tolerated with noteworthy responses as first-line therapy in advanced or metastatic G/GEJ cancer pts. Expansion of this cohort in a phase 3 study are under way. Clinical trial information: NCT03472365.

Influence of antibiotic therapy (ATB) on oncological outcomes of metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (mNSCLC) patients treated with chemo-immunotherapy (CIT).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3080-3080
Author(s):  
James Clark ◽  
Biagio Ricciuti ◽  
Anita Bolina ◽  
Deepti Venkatraman ◽  
Thomas Newsom-Davis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Status ◽  
Evaluation Criteria ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
The United States ◽  
Response Evaluation ◽  
First Line ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Line Therapy ◽  
Multivariable Analyses

3080 Background: ATB exposure is proven to worsen response and survival in immunotherapy recipients. However, its influence on outcomes from CIT is currently undefined. Methods: We conducted a retrospective, multi-centre observational study including 77 mNSCLC patients who received pembrolizumab, pemetrexed and carboplatin CIT as first-line therapy for mNSCLC, between December 1, 2018 and January 1, 2020 in 3 academic referral centres in Europe and in the United States. We documented ATB exposure in the 30 days prior to CIT commencement (pATB) or concurrently (cATB) until CIT cessation. Outcome measures included overall (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) calculated from commencement of CIT, and overall response rates (ORR) defined by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors (v1.1). Results: We enrolled 77 patients, 41 of whom were female (n = 53%) with adenocarcinoma (n = 73, 95%), performance status (PS) 0-1 (n = 69, 90%) PD-L1 Tumour Proportion Score < 50 (n = 57, 74%). Median OS was 16.4 months (95%CI 8.4-24.4), median PFS was 6.7 months (95%CI 5.7-7.6). ORR was 48% including 1 complete (1%) and 36 partial responses (47%). Eleven patients (14%) received pATB, with penicillin/cephalosporins (p/c, n = 7, 63%) for <7 days (n = 10, 90%). Thirty-five patients (45%) received cATB with p/c (n = 11, 40%) for <7 days (n = 28, 80%). Most common indication for ATB was peri-procedure prophylaxis in pATB (n = 7, 63%) and suspected febrile neutropenia in cATB (n = 14, 40%). pATB (p = 0.004) but not cATB (p = 0.85) predicted for worse OS (19.6 vs 6.5 months, Hazard Ratio [HR] 2.9 95%CI 1.3-6.3). Neither pATB nor cATB predicted for PFS or ORR (p > 0.05). Multivariable analyses confirmed pATB (HR 2.3 95%CI 1.1-5.5, p = 0.05) to predict for OS independent of PD-L1 status, PS and cATB. pATB+/- groups were balanced with regards to age, gender, PS nor PD-L1 status (p > 0.05). Conclusions: Whilst cATB does not compromise outcome from CIT, this study reproduces the detrimental effects observed for pATB exposure in immunotherapy recipients. Mechanistic verification of the immune-biologic foundations underlying this association is urgently warranted.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document