Updated survival from a randomized phase III trial (MPACT) of nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone for patients (pts) with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas.

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 178-178 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Goldstein ◽  
Robert Hassan El Maraghi ◽  
Pascal Hammel ◽  
Volker Heinemann ◽  
Volker Kunzmann ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Survival Analysis ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Intent To Treat ◽  
Adenocarcinoma Of The Pancreas ◽  
Post Hoc

178^ Background: In the phase III MPACT trial, nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) + gemcitabine (G) was tolerable and demonstrated superiority to G alone for all efficacy endpoints in pts with metastatic pancreatic cancer (MPC). nab-P + G vs G alone met the study’s primary endpoint by demonstrating a significant improvement in overall survival (OS; median 8.5 vs 6.7 months; HR 0.72; 95% CI, 0.617 - 0.835; P < 0.001) and the secondary endpoints of progression-free survival (PFS; median 5.5 vs 3.7 months; HR 0.69; 95% CI, 0.581 - 0.821; P < 0.001) and overall response rate (ORR; 23% vs 7%; P < 0.001). The 1-year survival rates for nab-P + G vs G alone were 35% vs 22%. The OS data reported above were based on a database cutoff of September 17, 2012, at which time 80% of pts had died. Here, we report an updated OS analysis (post hoc) from MPACT. Methods: 861 pts with MPC and a Karnofsky performance status (KPS) ≥ 70 were randomized at 151 community and academic centers 1:1 to receive nab-P 125 mg/m2 + G 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle or G alone 1000 mg/m2weekly for 7 weeks followed by 1 week of rest (cycle 1) and then days 1, 8, and 15 of a 28-day cycle (cycle ≥ 2). The data for this survival analysis were collected through April 1, 2013. Results: As of the updated data cutoff, 380/431 (88%) pts in the nab-P + G arm and 394/430 (92%) pts in the G alone arm had died. OS was superior for nab-P + G vs G alone in the intent-to-treat population, and the longer follow-up allowed an estimate of the 3-year survival rates (Table). The treatment effect was consistent across all pt subgroups examined. Conclusions: This updated survival analysis revealed a sustained difference in OS over time between the 2 arms. MPACT is the first phase III study in MPC to report 3-year survival rates. These data confirm and extend the previous report of the primary endpoint and support the superior efficacy of nab-P + G over G alone. These results may encourage efforts to build upon this well tolerated backbone to further extend survival. Clinical trial information: NCT00844649. [Table: see text]

Phase III study of nab-paclitaxel (nab-P) plus gemcitabine (Gem) versus Gem alone in patients (pts) with metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma (mPC): Subgroup analysis of Canadian pts from the MPACT trial.

2015 ◽  
Vol 33 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 439-439
Author(s):  
Mustapha Ali Tehfe ◽  
Scot D. Dowden ◽  
Hagen F. Kennecke ◽  
Robert Hassan El-Maraghi ◽  
Bernard Lesperance ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Pancreatic Head ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Intent To Treat

439 Background: Weekly nab-P + Gem is a new option for first-line treatment (Tx) of mPC. In the MPACT trial, nab-P/Gem demonstrated superior overall survival (OS; primary endpoint) vs Gem alone as first-line Tx of mPC (Table). Here we report a subgroup analyses evaluating the efficacy and safety outcomes with nab-P + Gem vs Gem alone from the Canadian cohort of the MPACT trial. Methods: Previously untreated pts (N = 861) with mPC were randomized 1:1 (stratified by Karnofsky Performance Status [KPS], region, and the presence of liver metastases) to receive nab-P 125 mg/m2 + Gem 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle or Gem 1000 mg/m2 weekly for 7 weeks followed by 1 week of rest (cycle 1) and then days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day cycle (cycle ≥ 2). Results: 63 pts from Canada enrolled in the MPACT trial. Baseline pt characteristics were well balanced. Median age was 61 years and KPS was similar for both groups and comparable to the intent-to-treat (ITT) populations. Primary lesion in the pancreatic head was more common among pts in the nab-P + Gem vs Gem arm (55% vs 30%); use of biliary stent was similar (33% nab-P + Gem; 27% Gem). Median OS and progression-free survival (PFS) were longer with nab-P + Gem vs Gem (Table). Median Tx duration was 4.2 mo with nab-P + Gem vs 3.2 mo with Gem. Use of subsequent therapy was 30% in the nab-P + Gem arm vs 43% in the Gem arm. The median relative dose intensity for Gem was similar in each arm (81% nab-P + Gem vs 85% Gem). The most common grade ≥ 3 AEs for nab-P + Gem vs Gem were neutropenia (22% vs 10%), fatigue (34% vs 33%), and neuropathy (25% vs 0%). Conclusions: Canadian pts participating in MPACT were similar to the ITT population and nab-P + Gem was well tolerated and showed improved median OS, PFS, and ORR vs Gem alone, although not statistically significant (likely due to the small number of pts). Clinical trial information: NCT00844649. [Table: see text]

Randomized phase III study of weekly nab-paclitaxel plus gemcitabine versus gemcitabine alone in patients with metastatic adenocarcinoma of the pancreas (MPACT).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA148-LBA148 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel D. Von Hoff ◽  
Thomas J. Ervin ◽  
Francis P. Arena ◽  
E. Gabriela Chiorean ◽  
Jeffrey R. Infante ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lung Metastases ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Adenocarcinoma Of The Pancreas

LBA148 Background: nab-Paclitaxel (nab-P, 130 nm albumin-bound paclitaxel) provides tumor selective localization via transcytosis across the endothelium, potential tumor uptake via macropinocytosis, and improved pharmacokinetics vs cremophor-paclitaxel. In vitro, nab-P increased tumoral gemcitabine (G) levels, and in a phase I/II study in metastatic pancreatic cancer (mPC) nab-P + G showed promising activity. Methods: Patients (pts) with mPC were randomized to nab-P 125 mg/m2, followed by G 1000 mg/m2 on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks or G 1000 mg/m2 weekly for 7 weeks (cycle 1), then on days 1, 8, and 15 every 4 weeks (≥ cycle 2). For the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS), 608 events from 842 patients provided a power of 0.9 to detect a HR of 0.769 (2-side α = 0.049). Results: 861 pts received therapy. Baseline pt characteristics were well balanced. Median age was 63 years, Karnofsky performance status was 90-100 in 60% and ≤80 in 40% of pts, 43% had head of pancreas lesions, 84% had liver and 39% had lung metastases, and 52% of pts had CA19-9 ≥59 x ULN. Treatment duration was 4 vs 3 months in nab-P + G vs G. The relative protocol G dose was 75% vs 85% in nab-P + G vs G; nab-P dose was 81%. OS, progression-free survival (PFS), time to treatment failure (TTF), and overall response rate (ORR) were significantly improved in the nab-P + G arm (Table). Most common grade ≥3 AEs were neutropenia (38% vs 27%), fatigue (17% vs 7%), and neuropathy (17% vs 1%) in the nab-P + G vs G arms. Grade ≥3 neuropathy improved to grade ≤1 in 29 days. Febrile neutropenia was reported in 3% (nab-P + G) vs 1% (G) pts. Conclusions: In this multinational, multiinstitutional study, nab-P + G was well tolerated and superior to G with statistically significant and clinically meaningful results in all endpoints and across subgroups. Clinical trial information: NCT00844649. [Table: see text]

Cetuximab in combination with cisplatin or carboplatin and 5-fluorouracil (5-FU) in the first-line treatment of patients with recurrent and/or metastatic squamous cell carcinoma of the head and neck (R&M SCCHN) (EXTREME)

2006 ◽  
Vol 24 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5537-5537 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. B. Vermorken ◽  
R. Mesia ◽  
M. E. Vega-Villegas ◽  
E. Remenar ◽  
R. Hitt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Prognostic Significance ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Safety Analysis ◽  
Data Safety Monitoring Board ◽  
Phase Iii

5537 Background: The epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) is expressed in nearly all SCCHN and carries a strong prognostic significance, providing the rationale for using EGFR-targeted agents, such as cetuximab, in this indication. This study assesses the efficacy and safety of cetuximab in combination with chemotherapy commonly used in the treatment of R&M SCCHN. Methods: Patients (pts) were enrolled into this phase III trial from December 2004 to December 2005 and randomized either to Group A: cetuximab (first dose 400 mg/m2 then 250 mg/m2 weekly) plus a maximum of 6 three-weekly cycles of cisplatin (100 mg/m2 IV on day 1) or carboplatin (AUC 5, day 1) and 5-FU (1000 mg/m2/day continuous infusion for the first 4 days of each cycle) or to Group B: cisplatin or carboplatin with 5-FU as before. Cetuximab was administered until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Primary endpoint is overall survival time; secondary endpoints are progression-free-survival, response rate, disease control rate, safety, and Quality of Life. It was planned to randomize a total number of 420 pts in order to detect a difference in improvement in overall survival of 2.5 months. Results: At the end of the recruitment,440 pts have been randomized, to date 320 pts are under treatment, 21 have withdrawn from the study and 99 have completed the study. The Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) has performed an independent preplanned safety analysis from the first 140 pts, 138 pts of whom were treated. Patients were followed for a minimum of 6 weeks: M/F122/16, median age57 years [range, 38–79],median Karnofsky performance status (KPS) 80 [range, 70–100]. In this safety analysis, there were 14 deaths, none of which were treatment related. The most frequent drug related grade 3–4 toxicity was mainly represented by neutropenia, thrombocytopenia and anemia. Conclusions: The DSMB evaluated baseline and safety data, found no reason to stop the trial and recommended continuation of the study. [Table: see text]

Randomized phase III trial of regorafenib in patients (pts) with metastatic and/or unresectable gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) progressing despite prior treatment with at least imatinib (IM) and sunitinib (SU): GRID trial.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA10008-LBA10008 ◽  
Author(s):  
George D. Demetri ◽  
Peter Reichardt ◽  
Yoon-Koo Kang ◽  
Jean-Yves Blay ◽  
Heikki Joensuu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Multikinase Inhibitor

LBA10008 Background: Oral multikinase inhibitor regorafenib (REG) demonstrated substantial activity in a phase II trial in pts with GIST after failure of both IM and SU (J Clin Oncol. 2011; 29:606s; abstr 10007). This phase III, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial evaluated the efficacy and safety of REG for this unmet clinical need. Methods: Eligible pts had metastatic and/or unresectable GIST, objective failure of both prior IM and SU (progressive disease [PD] on, or intolerance to, IM and PD on SU), ≥1 measurable lesion, ECOG performance status 0 or 1. Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive best supportive care plus either REG 160 mg po once daily (3 wks on/1 wk off) or placebo (PL). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) (modified RECIST 1.1, independent central review). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR, defined as rate of partial response [PR] plus stable disease [SD] lasting for ≥12 wks), response rate and duration, safety and correlative genotype analyses. At time of PD, pts were eligible for unblinding and crossover to open-label REG. Results: Between Jan and Aug of 2011, 234 pts were screened; 199 were randomized (REG: 133, PL: 66). Pts were stratified at randomization according to number of prior systemic therapies and geographical region. Baseline characteristics were balanced between the two arms. The primary endpoint was met: median PFS was 4.8 months for REG vs. 0.9 months for PL. Hazard ratio for PFS was 0.27 (95% CI, 0.18-0.39), p<0.0001. PFS rates at 3 and 6 months were 60% and 38% for REG vs. 11% and 0% for PL. DCR was 53% (REG) vs. 9% (PL).The HR for OS was 0.77 (p=0.20) with 85% PL pts having crossed over to REG. The most common > grade 3 treatment-emergent AEs in the REG arm during double-blind study were hypertension (28%), hand-foot skin reaction (21%), and diarrhea (8%). Conclusions: This randomized trial demonstrated that REG significantly improved PFS and DCR in pts with advanced GIST after failure of at least prior IM and SU. REG was well tolerated, with AEs as expected for this class and manageable with dose modifications.

Randomized phase II study of pharmacodynamic separation (PDS) of pemetrexed (Pem) and erlotinib (Erl) versus pem alone in patients (pts) with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8097-8097 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tianhong Li ◽  
Bilal Piperdi ◽  
William Vincent Walsh ◽  
Mimi Kim ◽  
Rasim Gucalp ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Dose Schedule ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Smoking History ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
P Value ◽  
Randomized Phase Ii

8097 Background: Preclinical and phase I studies showed that PDS optimizes cytotoxicity of concurrent EGFR inhibitors and chemotherapy. We conducted a randomized phase II trial to assess relative efficacy of Pem alone (Arm A) versus Pem +Erl on a PDS dose-schedule (Arm B) as 2nd-line therapy in pts with advanced NSCLC (NCT00950365). Methods: Eligible pts were randomized 2:1 (Arm B: A), stratified by sex, smoking history, and performance status (0/1 vs 2). Accrual was restricted to non-squamous histology in 2009. Treatment: Arm A – Pem 500 mg/m2IV on day 1; Arm B – Pem + Erl 150 mg po QD on days 2-17. 1 cycle = 3 weeks. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). 50 pts in Arm B were needed to detect an increase in median PFS from ~3 to 4.5 months. Results: 83 pts were entered. Age: 63 yo. Female: 42 (53%). Smoking ≥15PY: 58 (72%). Nonsquamous: 78 (99%). The primary endpoint of the study was met: Efficacy results from 79 eligible pts showed 1.6-fold longer PFS in Arm B (4.6 m) compared to Arm A (2.8 m). Although the study was not designed to directly compare two arms, p value was 0.052. Toxicity: G3/4 Hem (A/B): 8(30%)/12(23%); Neutropenia with infection (A/B): 0/3(6%). G3/4 Non-Hem (A/B): skin rash: 0/3(6%); diarrhea: 0/2(4%); joint pain: 1(4%)/6(11.5%). Treatment related death (A/B): 0/1. Interstitial lung disease (A/B): 0/1. Conclusions: PDS of Pem and Erl is well tolerated and has promising clinical activity in 2nd-line non-squamous NSCLC. Ongoing correlative studies aim to identify a subgroup of patients who might benefit most from this treatment, which will guide the design of a confirmatory phase III study. (UL1 RR024146, P30CA093373, Lilly, Astellas) Clinical trial information: NCT00950365. [Table: see text]

Carfilzomib (K) in relapsed and refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM): Frailty subgroup analysis from phase III ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8028-8028 ◽  
Author(s):  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Ruben Niesvizky ◽  
Katja Weisel ◽  
Sara Bringhen ◽  
P. Joy Ho ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Frailty Status ◽  
Improved Outcomes ◽  
Comorbidity Index ◽  
Post Hoc ◽  
Frailty Score

8028 Background: K-based regimens improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in RRMM patients (pts) in ASPIRE (K [27 mg/m2]-lenalidomide-dexamethasone [KRd] vs Rd) and ENDEAVOR (K [56 mg/m2]-dexamethasone [Kd56] vs bortezomib-dexamethasone [Vd]), regardless of age. Frailty scores have been developed based on age, comorbidities, and functional status (Palumbo Blood 2015;125:2068–74; Facon Blood 2015;126:4239). We assessed post hoc pt outcomes by frailty status. Methods: PFS, OS, and safety were assessed by treatment arm and frailty score (based on age, medical history-derived Charlson Comorbidity Index, and ECOG performance status); frailty scores: 0 = fit, 1 = intermediate (int), and ≥2 = frail. Results: Pt frailty status was balanced between treatment arms in ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR. Median PFS and OS were longer with K-based regimens vs controls in ASPIRE and ENDEAVOR across frailty subgroups (Table). Rates of treatment-emergent adverse events are summarized in the Table. Conclusions: Kd56 and KRd consistently improved outcomes vs Vd and Rd, respectively, in all frailty subgroups as defined by the algorithm above. These findings support the favorable benefit-risk profile of KRd and Kd56 regardless of frailty score. Clinical trial information: NCT01080391 and NCT01568866. [Table: see text]

Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing the Survival of Patients With Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma Treated With Nolatrexed or Doxorubicin

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (21) ◽  
pp. 3069-3075 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert G. Gish ◽  
Camillo Porta ◽  
Lucian Lazar ◽  
Paul Ruff ◽  
Ronald Feld ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Study Objective

PurposeThe study objective was to compare the overall survival (OS) of patients with unresectable or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) treated with nolatrexed (NOL) or doxorubicin (DOX).Patients and MethodsPatients from North America, Europe, and South Africa (N = 445) with HCC were randomly assigned to receive NOL or DOX. Eligible patients had Karnofsky performance status (KPS) ≥ 60%, Cancer of the Liver Italian Program (CLIP) score ≤ 3, and adequate organ function. Primary end point was OS. Secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rates, and safety. The treatment groups were well-balanced with regards to age, sex, ethnic origin, and underlying liver disease. Randomization was stratified according to KPS and CLIP score.ResultsAt the time of the final analysis, 377 patients had died. Median OS was 22.3 weeks for NOL and 32.3 weeks for DOX (P = .0068). The hazard ratio was 0.753 in favor of DOX. Objective response rate (complete response [CR] plus partial response [PR]) was 1.4% for NOL and 4.0% for DOX. Median PFS was 12 weeks for NOL and 10 weeks for DOX (P = .7091). Median time to treatment failure was 8.4 weeks for NOL and 9.1 weeks for DOX (P = .0969). Grade 3 and 4 stomatitis, vomiting, diarrhea, and thrombocytopenia were more common in the NOL arm. Alopecia was more common in the DOX arm. More patients were withdrawn from study for toxicity in the NOL arm than in the DOX arm.ConclusionNOL showed minimal activity in this phase III trial. Further exploration at this dose and schedule in HCC is not warranted.

Bevacizumab (Bv) single-agent maintenance following Bv-based chemotherapy in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Results from an exploratory analysis of the AVAiL study

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e19001-e19001
Author(s):  
J. Mezger ◽  
J. von Pawel ◽  
M. Reck
Keyword(s):  
Maintenance Therapy ◽  
Disease Progression ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Maintenance Phase ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Significant Survival ◽  
Risk Of Progression ◽  
Post Hoc

e19001 Background: The significant survival benefits observed with Bv plus chemotherapy in pivotal NSCLC trials were generated using treatment to progression. Given that little data on the use of single-agent Bv as maintenance therapy are currently available, we report here the results of an analysis focused on the maintenance phase of the AVAiL study. Methods: AVAiL, a randomized, international, placebo-controlled phase III trial, evaluated Bv plus cisplatin-gemcitabine (CG) in pts with previously untreated advanced, non-squamous NSCLC, with performance status 0/1. 1,043 pts (age 20–83) were randomized to C 80mg/m2 and G 1,250mg/m2 q3w for up to 6 cycles plus either Bv 7.5mg/kg q3w (Bv 7.5; n=345), Bv 15mg/kg q3w (Bv 15; n=351) or placebo (Pl; n=347). Bv/Pl was administered until disease progression. This retrospective analysis focused on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) of the 376 patients who received blinded Bv (n=174 and n=162 for Bv 7.5 and 15) or Pl monotherapy (n=41) after completing 6 cycles of CG + Bv or CG + Pl (as specified in the protocol; most patients received 6 cycles). PFS was measured from last day of last cycle of CG + Bv/Pl to disease progression or death. Results: In the overall population, Bv reduced the risk of progression or death by 25% vs Pl (PFS primary endpoint (HR=0.75 [0.64–0.87] and 0.85 [0.73–1] for Bv 7.5 and Bv 15, respectively). When analyzing the outcome of the post chemotherapy maintenance phase, the use of Bv as single agent yielded median PFS of 3.2 months (95%CI [3–5]) for Pl, 4.6 months (95%CI [4–6]) for Bv 7.5 and 4.6 months (95%CI [4–5]) for Bv 15.The OS results for this maintenance analysis are consistent with those from the overall population in which the PFS findings were not associated with an OS benefit. Conclusions: This post-hoc analysis, focused on the maintenance phase of AVAiL, suggests that Bv used as single-agent maintenance therapy appears to confer clinical benefit beyond the chemotherapy phase. This finding warrants further exploration in future studies. [Table: see text]

MM-003: A phase III, multicenter, randomized, open-label study of pomalidomide (POM) plus low-dose dexamethasone (LoDEX) versus high-dose dexamethasone (HiDEX) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM).

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8510-8510 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jesùs F. San-Miguel ◽  
Katja C. Weisel ◽  
Philippe Moreau ◽  
Martha Lacy ◽  
Kevin W. Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Data Monitoring Committee ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Open Label ◽  
High Dose Dexamethasone ◽  
Intent To Treat

8510 Background: RRMM patients (pts) who have exhausted treatment (Tx) with bortezomib (BORT) and lenalidomide (LEN) or thalidomide have a poor prognosis with short overall survival (OS). HiDEX is a well-established standard Tx in RRMM. POM has demonstrated clinical efficacy in pts refractory to LEN and BORT. MM-003 compared POM + LoDEX vs. HiDEX in RRMM pts who failed LEN and BORT and who progressed on their last Tx. Methods: Pts must have been refractory to last prior Tx (progressive disease [PD] during Tx or within 60 days) and failed LEN and BORT after ≥ 2 consecutive cycles of each (alone or in combination). Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive 28-day cycles of POM 4 mg D1–21 + DEX 40 mg (20 mg for pts aged > 75 y) weekly or DEX 40 mg (20 mg for pts aged > 75 y) D1–4, 9–12, and 17–20. Tx continued until PD or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included OS, overall response rate (ORR; ≥ partial response), and safety. Analyses were based on intent to treat. Results: 455 pts were randomized to POM + LoDEX (n = 302) or HiDEX (n = 153). The median number of prior Tx was 5 (range 1-17). 72% were refractory to LEN and BORT. Median follow-up was 4 months. POM + LoDEX significantly extended median PFS (3.6 vs. 1.8 months, HR = 0.45, P < .001) and OS (not reached vs. 7.8 months, HR = 0.53, P < .001) vs. HiDEX. The OS benefit was observed despite 29% of HiDEX pts receiving POM after PD. The trial met the primary endpoint of PFS, crossed the upper boundary for OS superiority, and the Data Monitoring Committee recommended crossover from HiDEX to POM ± DEX. With updated data, the ORR was 21% for POM + LoDEX vs. 3% for HiDEX (P < .001) and 24% vs 3% for pts randomized ≥ 6 months post-enrollment (P < .001). The most frequent grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) for POM + LoDEX vs. HiDEX were neutropenia (42% vs. 15%), anemia (27% vs. 29%), and infection (24% vs. 23%). Discontinuation due to AEs was infrequent (7% vs. 6%). Updated data will be presented. Conclusions: POM + LoDEX significantly extended PFS and OS vs. HiDEX in pts who failed LEN and BORT. POM + LoDEX should become a standard of care in RRMM pts who have exhausted Tx with LEN and BORT. Clinical trial information: NCT01311687.

PDIGREE: An adaptive phase III trial of PD-inhibitor nivolumab and ipilimumab (IPI-NIVO) with VEGF TKI cabozantinib (CABO) in metastatic untreated renal cell cancer (Alliance A031704).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS366-TPS366
Author(s):  
Tian Zhang ◽  
Karla V. Ballman ◽  
Atish Dipankar Choudhury ◽  
Ronald C. Chen ◽  
Colleen Watt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Karnofsky Performance Status ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Combination Immunotherapy ◽  
Vegf Inhibitors ◽  
Optimal Sequence ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Progression Of Disease

TPS366 Background: First-line treatment of mRCC has rapidly changed to include IPI-NIVO or CABO, with clinical benefit of each based on the Checkmate 214 and CABOSUN (A031203) trials. Combination immunotherapy with VEGF therapies has shown benefit over sunitinib in the JAVELIN 101 and KEYNOTE 426 trials. It is yet unclear which patients (pts) benefit most from combination immunotherapy-VEGF inhibitors, and the optimal sequence of drugs. Methods: In an adaptive, randomized, multicenter phase III trial (Alliance A031704, PDIGREE), pts start treatment with induction IPI 1 mg/kg and NIVO 3 mg/kg intravenously (IV) once every 3 weeks. Key inclusion criteria include clear cell mRCC, International Metastatic RCC Database Consortium (IMDC) intermediate or poor risk, Karnofsky performance status >70, and no prior treatments for mRCC. Based on 3-month radiographic assessment (after completing IPI-NIVO combination), pts with complete responses (CR) undergo maintenance NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks; pts with progression of disease (PD) switch to CABO 60 mg oral daily; pts with non-CR/non-PD are randomized to NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks versus NIVO 480 mg IV every 4 weeks with CABO 40 mg oral daily. Randomization is stratified by IMDC risk criteria and presence of bone metastases. The primary endpoint of the study is overall survival (OS). We hypothesize that 3-year OS will improve to 70% for NIVO-CABO compared to 60% for NIVO alone; to achieve 85% power with a two-sided alpha of 0.05 and exponential distribution, 696 patients will be randomized. Accounting for 30% patients with either CR or PD, and 5% dropout from toxicity, up to 1046 pts will be enrolled. Key secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, 12-month CR rate, overall response rate based on RECIST 1.1 and iRECIST criteria, and toxicity profiles. Quality of life will be assessed based on the FKSI-19, PROMIS-fatigue, and EQ5D-5L questionnaires. Biomarkers associated with CR, tissue-based and plasma-based biomarkers will be assessed. Updated enrollment through January 2021 will be presented. Clinical trial information: NCT03793166 .

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document