LOTUS (NCT02162719): A double-blind placebo (PBO)-controlled randomized phase II trial of first-line ipatasertib (IPAT) + paclitaxel (P) for metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1009-1009 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rebecca Alexandra Dent ◽  
Sung-Bae Kim ◽  
Seock-Ah Im ◽  
Marc Espie ◽  
Sibel Blau ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Akt Inhibitor ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Median Cumulative Dose

1009 Background: The oral Akt inhibitor IPAT is being evaluated in cancers with a high prevalence of PI3K/Akt pathway activation, including TNBC. Methods: Eligible patients (pts) had measurable inoperable locally advanced/metastatic TNBC previously untreated with systemic therapy. Pts were stratified by prior (neo)adjuvant therapy, chemotherapy-free interval and tumor PTEN status, and randomized 1:1 to P 80 mg/m2 (d1, 8 & 15) with either IPAT 400 mg or PBO (d1–21) q28d until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Co-primary endpoints were progression-free survival (PFS) in the ITT population and pts with PTEN-low tumors by IHC. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), duration of response (DoR) and overall survival in the ITT and IHC PTEN-low populations, efficacy in pts with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered tumors by next-generation sequencing (NGS), and safety. Results: Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between arms. Efficacy is shown below. The most common grade ≥3 AEs (grouped terms) were diarrhea (23% IPAT+P vs 0% PBO+P; no grade 4 or colitis in either arm), neutropenia (18% vs 8%), asthenia (5% vs 6%), peripheral neuropathy (5% vs 5%) and pneumonia (5% vs 0%). More pts receiving IPAT+P than PBO+P had an AE leading to dose reduction of IPAT/PBO (21% vs 6%) or P (38% vs 11%) but median cumulative dose intensity was similar (IPAT/PBO: 99% vs 100%; P: 100% vs 100%). AEs led to IPAT/PBO discontinuation in 13% vs 11% of pts, respectively; 2 pts (3%) discontinued IPAT for grade 3 diarrhea. Conclusions: Adding IPAT to P for TNBC modestly improved PFS in the ITT pts. The effect was more pronounced in the prespecified subgroup with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN alterations, warranting further evaluation of IPAT in these pts. AEs were manageable. Clinical trial information: NCT02162719. [Table: see text]

Olaparib plus paclitaxel in patients with recurrent or metastatic gastric cancer: A randomized, double-blind phase II study.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4013-4013 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yung-Jue Bang ◽  
Seock-Ah Im ◽  
Keun-Wook Lee ◽  
Jae Yong Cho ◽  
Eun-Kee Song ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Parp Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Metastatic Gastric Cancer ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Protein Levels ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Atm Protein ◽  
Grade 3

4013 Background: Our multicenter study compared the efficacy of the oral PARP inhibitor olaparib plus paclitaxel (O/P) vs paclitaxel alone (P) as second-line therapy in pts with recurrent/metastatic gastric cancer (GC) (NCT01063517). As initial preclinical data suggested that responsiveness of GC cell lines to olaparib was associated with low ATM protein levels, our study was enriched for pts with low ATM tumors (ATM–) by IHC (50% randomized vs 14% screening prevalence). Methods: Eligible pts were randomized 1:1 (stratified by ATM status) to receiveolaparib 100 mg bid (tablet form) plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2 iv on days 1, 8, 15 per 28-day cycle) or placebo plus paclitaxel until progression or investigator decision. After combination therapy, pts could take olaparib 200 mg bid monotherapy or placebo until progression. Co-primary endpoints: progression-free survival (PFS; RECIST v1.1) in all pts and ATM– pts. Secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), safety. Results: 123/124 randomized pts were treated (O/P=61; P=62). Baseline characteristics were generally well balanced. Use of post-progression therapy was similar in both arms (O/P=48.4%; P=43.5%) as was median paclitaxel duration (O/P=17 wks; P=16 wks); 18 pts received monotherapy (O/P=11; P=7). More pts in the O/P than P arm had delays (79 vs 63%) and reductions (41 vs 27%) in paclitaxel dosing. The most common grade ≥3 AEs in the O/P and P arms were neutropenia (56 vs 39%) and anemia (11 vs 11%). Conclusions: Olaparib plus paclitaxel was well tolerated and led to a statistically significant improvement in OS, but not PFS, vs paclitaxel alone in both all pts and ATM– pts, with a larger benefit in ATM– pts. Clinical trial information: NCT01063517. [Table: see text]

Updated efficacy and tolerability of durvalumab in locally advanced or metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4525-4525 ◽  
Author(s):  
Noah M. Hahn ◽  
Thomas Powles ◽  
Christophe Massard ◽  
Hendrik-Tobias Arkenau ◽  
Terence W. Friedlander ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase 1 ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Kidney Injury ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Anticancer Therapy ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

4525 Background: Anti-PD-L1 immunotherapy shows promising clinical activity in UC. We report a planned update of the safety and efficacy of durvalumab in patients (pts) with locally advanced/metastatic UC from a multicenter, phase 1/2 open-label study. Methods: Pts received durvalumab 10 mg/kg every 2 weeks (Q2W) up to 12 months (mo) or until unacceptable toxicity, progression, or starting another anticancer therapy. Primary endpoints were safety and confirmed objective response rate (ORR) by blinded independent central review (RECIST v1.1). Duration of response (DoR), progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were key secondary endpoints. Tumor PD-L1 expression was assessed by Ventana SP263 assay (PD-L1 high = ≥25% PD-L1 expression on tumor or immune cells). Results: As of Oct 24, 2016 (data cutoff [DCO]), 191 pts had received treatment. Median follow-up was 5.78 mo (range, 0.4–25.9). All pts had Stage 4 disease and 99.5% had prior anticancer therapy (95.3% post-platinum). As of DCO, ORR was 17.8% (34/191), including 7 CRs, with responses observed regardless of PD-L1 status (Table). Responses occurred early (median time to response, 1.41 mo) and were durable (median DoR not reached [NR]). Median PFS and OS were 1.5 mo (95% CI, 1.4, 1.9) and 18.2 mo (95% CI, 8.1, not estimable [NE]), respectively; the 1-year OS rate was 55.0% (95% CI, 43.9%, 64.7%). Grade 3/4 treatment-related AEs occurred in 6.8% of pts; grade 3/4 immune-mediated (im)AEs occurred in 4 pts; 2 pts discontinued due to imAEs (acute kidney injury and autoimmune hepatitis). Conclusions: Durvalumab 10 mg/kg Q2W shows favorable clinical activity and an excellent safety profile in locally advanced/metastatic UC pts. Table. Antitumor activity in UC pts, including second-line or greater (≥2L) post-platinum pts Clinical trial information: NCT01693562. [Table: see text]

Mature overall survival (OS) results from the LUME-Meso study of nintedanib (N) + pemetrexed/cisplatin (PEM/CIS) vs placebo (P) + PEM/CIS in chemo-naïve patients (pts) with malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8506-8506 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna K. Nowak ◽  
Federica Grosso ◽  
Nicola Steele ◽  
Silvia Novello ◽  
Sanjay Popat ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Randomized Study ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Abl Kinases ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Ecog Ps ◽  
To Receive

8506 Background: LUME-Meso is a Phase (Ph) II/III, double-blind, randomized study. N targets MPM by inhibiting VEGFR 1–3, PDGFR α/β, FGFR 1–3, Src and Abl kinases. Primary analysis of the Ph II data demonstrated improved progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR]=0.56; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.34–0.91; p=0.017). Mature Ph 2 OS and updated PFS results are reported here. Methods: Pts with unresectable MPM (ECOG PS 0–1) were stratified by histology (epithelioid/biphasic) and randomized 1:1 to receive ≤6 cycles PEM (500 mg/m2)/CIS (75 mg/m2) Day 1 + N or P (200 mg bid, Days 2–21), followed by N or P monotherapy until progression or toxicity. The primary endpoint was PFS. The primary OS analysis and updated PFS analysis were performed as predefined. Results: 87 pts were randomly assigned (N=44, P=43). OS benefit favored N over P treatment (HR=0.77; 95% CI 0.46–1.29; p=0.319; 62 [71%] OS events) and was greatest in epithelioid pts (HR=0.70; 95% CI 0.40–1.21; p=0.197) with a median (m) OS gain of 5.4 months (mOS [95% CI]: 20.6 [16.2–28.8] N vs 15.2 [12.2–23.6] P). Updated PFS results (HR=0.54; 95% CI 0.33–0.87; p=0.010) also showed greatest benefit for epithelioid pts (HR=0.49; 95% CI 0.30–0.82; p=0.006) with a mPFS gain of 4.0 months (mPFS [95% CI]: 9.7 [7.2–12.4] N vs 5.7 [5.5–7.0] P). Improved forced vital capacity, objective response rates and duration of response were also observed with N treatment. Drug-related adverse events (AEs) in N- vs P-treated pts were 97.7% vs 97.6%. Grade ≥3 AEs of note included neutropenia (27.3% vs 4.9%), ALT (11.4% vs 0) and GGT (6.8% vs 0) elevations, and diarrhea (6.8% vs 0). AEs led to trial discontinuation in only 3 (6.8%) N vs 7 (17.1%) P pts. Conclusions: Mature Ph II OS data show that adding N to standard 1st-line treatment gives a strong signal towards improved OS. Updated PFS confirmed the primary analysis; AEs were manageable. The greatest clinical benefit was observed in pts with epithelioid histology. Median survival of 20.6 months in epithelioid pts treated with N is unprecedented in advanced MPM trials. Ph III is actively recruiting in this pt population. Clinical trial information: NCT01907100.

Anlotinib in chemotherapy-refractory metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC): A randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase II trial.

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 95-95 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jing Huang ◽  
Juxiang Xiao ◽  
Wentao Fang ◽  
Ping Lu ◽  
Qingxia Fan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Vegfr Inhibitor ◽  
Loss Of Appetite

95 Background: The treatment option for ESCC patients (pts) progressing after chemotherapy is still uncertain. Anlotinib is a multi-target tyrosine kinase inhibitor involved in tumor angiogenesis and growth, such as vascular endothelia growth factor receptor (VEGFR) 2/3, etc. Methods: Eligible pts were advanced ESCC who had progressed after platinum or taxane containing chemotherapy. Between January 6, 2016 and May 22, 2018, a total of 165 pts from 13 centers in China were randomly assigned (in a 2:1 ratio) to anlotinib arm (n=110), and placebo arm (n=55). Pts were given anlotinib (12 mg/day) or placebo orally from day 1 to day 14 in a 21-day cycle until disease progression or had unacceptable toxic effects. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: Median PFS was 3.0 months with anlotinib and 1.4 months with placebo (HR 0.5, 95% CI, 0.3-0.7; P<0.0001). Complete response occured in 2 pts with anlotinib and 0 pt with placebo. The objective response rates were 7% in the anlotinib group and 4% in the placebo group (P=0.498), and the disease control rates (DCR) were 64% and 18%, respectively (P<0.0001). In anlotinib arm, median duration of response was 5.8 months (range, 3.1-19.7+). Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAE) were reported in 36.7% and 11.0% of the two group pts, and grade 5 TRAE were 2.8% and 0%, respectively. The most common grade 3/4 TRAE (>5%) in anlotinib arm were hypertension (15.6%) and loss of appetite (5.5%). Median overall survival were similar between the groups (6.1 months vs 7.2 months; HR 1.2, 95%CI 0.8-1.8, P=0.4261). The ratio of pts received post study treatments was 41.2% (40/97) in anlotinib arm and 72.7% (40/55) in placebo arm (P=0.0002), including chemotherapy (23.7% vs 54.6%), PD-1 inhibitors (4.1% vs 11.0%), and Apatinib, a VEGFR inhibitor, (10.3% vs 20.0%), etc. Conclusions: In pretreated advanced ESCC pts, anlotinib significantly improved PFS and DCR compared with placebo, with a manageable safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT02649361.

An international, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III trial (EXAM) of cabozantinib (XL184) in medullary thyroid carcinoma (MTC) patients (pts) with documented RECIST progression at baseline.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5508-5508 ◽  
Author(s):  
Patrick Schoffski ◽  
Rossella Elisei ◽  
Stefan Müller ◽  
Marcia S. Brose ◽  
Manisha H. Shah ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Efficacy Measure ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Grade 3

5508 Background: MTC arises from parafollicular cells of the thyroid gland, accounts for 5-8% of thyroid cancers and represents an unmet medical need. Cabozantinib (cabo) is an oral inhibitor of MET, VEGFR2, and RET. We conducted a phase III study of cabo vs placebo (P) in pts with progressive, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic MTC. Methods: Eligible pts were required to have documented RECIST progression within 14 months of screening. The primary efficacy measure was progression-free survival (PFS) as assessed by an independent review facility (IRF) using RECIST. Secondary efficacy measures included objective response rate (ORR) and overall survival (OS). The study has 90% power to detect a 75% increase in PFS and 80% power to detect a 50% increase in OS. Tumor assessments occurred every 12 weeks. Crossover between treatment arms was not allowed. Results: Between Sept 2008 and Feb 2011, 330 pts (median age 55 yrs; 67% male; 96% measureable disease; RET mutation status: pos 48%; neg 12%; unknown 39%; prior TKI exposure: yes 21%, no 78%, unknown 2%) were randomized 2:1 to cabo (140 mg free base [175 mg salt form] qd; n=219) or P (n=111). The planned primary PFS analysis included events through the date of the 138th event. As of 15June2011, 44.7% of pts on cabo and 13.5% on P were still receiving study treatment. Statistically significant PFS prolongation of 7.2 mo was observed; median PFS for cabo was 11.2 mo vs 4.0 mo for P (HR 0.28, 95% CI 0.19-0.40, p<0.0001). PFS results favored the cabo group across subset analyses including RET status and prior TKI use. ORR was 28% for cabo vs 0% for P (p<0.0001). An interim analysis of OS (44% of the 217 required events) did not show a difference between cabo and P. The most frequent grade ≥3 adverse events (cabo vs P) were diarrhea (15.9 vs 1.8%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia (12.6 vs 0%), fatigue (9.3 vs 2.8%), hypocalcemia (9.3 vs 0%), and hypertension (7.9 vs 0%). Conclusions: This phase III study met its primary objective of demonstrating substantial PFS prolongation with cabo vs. P in a patient population with MTC and documented progressive disease in need of therapeutic intervention.

scholarly journals KEYNOTE-022 part 3: a randomized, double-blind, phase 2 study of pembrolizumab, dabrafenib, and trametinib in BRAF-mutant melanoma

2020 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. e001806
Author(s):  
Pier Francesco Ferrucci ◽  
Anna Maria Di Giacomo ◽  
Michele Del Vecchio ◽  
Victoria Atkinson ◽  
Henrik Schmidt ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Melanoma ◽  
Phase 2 ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

BackgroundIn the KEYNOTE-022 study, pembrolizumab with dabrafenib and trametinib (triplet) improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo with dabrafenib and trametinib (doublet) without reaching statistical significance. Mature results on PFS, duration of response (DOR), and overall survival (OS) are reported.MethodsThe double-blind, phase 2 part of KEYNOTE-022 enrolled patients with previously untreated BRAFV600E/K-mutated advanced melanoma from 22 sites in seven countries. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to intravenous pembrolizumab (200 mg every 3 weeks) or placebo plus dabrafenib (150 mg orally two times per day) and trametinib (2 mg orally one time a day). Primary endpoint was PFS. Secondary endpoints were objective response rate, DOR, and OS. Efficacy was assessed in the intention-to-treat population, and safety was assessed in all patients who received at least one dose of study drug. This analysis was not specified in the protocol.ResultsBetween November 30, 2015 and April 24, 2017, 120 patients were randomly assigned to triplet (n=60) or doublet (n=60) therapy. With 36.6 months of follow-up, median PFS was 16.9 months (95% CI 11.3 to 27.9) with triplet and 10.7 months (95% CI 7.2 to 16.8) with doublet (HR 0.53; 95% CI 0.34 to 0.83). With triplet and doublet, respectively, PFS at 24 months was 41.0% (95% CI 27.4% to 54.2%) and 16.3% (95% CI 8.1% to 27.1%); median DOR was 25.1 months (95% CI 14.1 to not reached) and 12.1 months (95% CI 6.0 to 15.7), respectively. Median OS was not reached with triplet and was 26.3 months with doublet (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.38 to 1.06). With triplet and doublet, respectively, OS at 24 months was 63.0% (95% CI 49.4% to 73.9%) and 51.7% (95% CI 38.4% to 63.4%). Grade 3–5 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 35 patients (58%, including one death) receiving triplet and 15 patients (25%) receiving doublet.ConclusionIn BRAFV600E/K-mutant advanced melanoma, pembrolizumab plus dabrafenib and trametinib substantially improved PFS, DOR, and OS with a higher incidence of TRAEs. Interpretation of these results is limited by the post hoc nature of the analysis.

Cediranib Plus FOLFOX/CAPOX Versus Placebo Plus FOLFOX/CAPOX in Patients With Previously Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Study (HORIZON II)

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (29) ◽  
pp. 3596-3603 ◽  
Author(s):  
Paulo M. Hoff ◽  
Andreas Hochhaus ◽  
Bernhard C. Pestalozzi ◽  
Niall C. Tebbutt ◽  
Jin Li ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Dose Intensity ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
End Points ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Duration Of Response

PurposeCediranib is a highly potent inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) signaling with activity against all three VEGF receptors. HORIZON II [Cediranib (AZD2171, RECENTIN) in Addition to Chemotherapy Versus Placebo Plus Chemotherapy in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer] assessed infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and oxaliplatin/capecitabine and oxaliplatin (FOLFOX/CAPOX) with or without cediranib in patients with previously untreated metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).Patients and MethodsEligible patients were initially randomly assigned 1:1:1 to receive cediranib (20 or 30 mg per day) or placebo plus FOLFOX/CAPOX. In an early analysis of this and two other cediranib studies (HORIZON I [Cediranib Plus FOLFOX6 Versus Bevacizumab Plus FOLFOX6 in Patients With Previously Treated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer] and HORIZON III [Cediranib Plus FOLFOX6 Versus Bevacizumab Plus FOLFOX6 in Patients With Untreated Metastatic Colorectal Cancer]), the 20-mg dose met the predefined criteria for continuation. Subsequent patients were randomly assigned 2:1 to the cediranib 20 mg or placebo arms. Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were coprimary end points.ResultsIn all, 860 patients received cediranib 20 mg (n = 502) or placebo (n = 358). The addition of cediranib to FOLFOX/CAPOX resulted in PFS prolongation (hazard ratio [HR], 0.84; 95% CI, 0.73 to 0.98; P = .0121; median PFS, 8.6 months for cediranib v 8.3 months for placebo) but had no impact on OS (HR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.79 to 1.12; P = .5707; median OS, 19.7 months for cediranib v 18.9 months for placebo). There were no significant differences in the secondary end points of objective response rate, duration of response, or liver resection rate. Median chemotherapy dose-intensity was decreased by approximately 10% in patients treated with cediranib. Adverse events (AEs) associated with cediranib were manageable.ConclusionAddition of cediranib 20 mg to FOLFOX/CAPOX resulted in a modest PFS prolongation, but no significant difference in OS. The cediranib AE profile was consistent with those from previous studies. Because of the lack of improvement in OS, cediranib plus an oxaliplatin-based regimen cannot be recommended as a treatment for patients with mCRC.

Endometriumkarzinom: Kombination aus Lenvatinib und Pembrolizumab zeigt Wirksamkeit unabhängig vom Mikrosatellitenstatus

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-2
Author(s):  
Sarah Matz
Keyword(s):  
Endometrial Carcinoma ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Efficacy Analysis ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Previously Treated Patients ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Prior Systemic Therapy ◽  
Grade 3

<b>Purpose:</b> Patients with advanced endometrial carcinoma have limited treatment options. We report final primary efficacy analysis results for a patient cohort with advanced endometrial carcinoma receiving lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab in an ongoing phase Ib/II study of selected solid tumors. <b>Methods:</b> Patients took lenvatinib 20 mg once daily orally plus pembrolizumab 200 mg intravenously once every 3 weeks, in 3-week cycles. The primary end point was objective response rate (ORR) at 24 weeks (ORRWk24); secondary efficacy end points included duration of response (DOR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS). Tumor assessments were evaluated by investigators per immune-related RECIST. <b>Results:</b> At data cutoff, 108 patients with previously treated endometrial carcinoma were enrolled, with a median follow-up of 18.7 months. The ORRWk24 was 38.0% (95% CI, 28.8% to 47.8%). Among subgroups, the ORRWk24 (95% CI) was 63.6% (30.8% to 89.1%) in patients with microsatellite instability (MSI)-high tumors (n = 11) and 36.2% (26.5% to 46.7%) in patients with microsatellite-stable tumors (n = 94). For previously treated patients, regardless of tumor MSI status, the median DOR was 21.2 months (95% CI, 7.6 months to not estimable), median PFS was 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.3 to 8.7 months), and median OS was 16.7 months (15.0 months to not estimable). Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 83/124 (66.9%) patients. <b>Conclusion:</b> Lenvatinib plus pembrolizumab showed promising antitumor activity in patients with advanced endometrial carcinoma who have experienced disease progression after prior systemic therapy, regardless of tumor MSI status. The combination therapy had a manageable toxicity profile. <b>Trial registration:</b> ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02501096.

Assessment of sacituzumab govitecan (SG) versus treatment of physician’s choice (TPC) cohort by agent in the phase 3 ASCENT study of patients (pts) with metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 1077-1077
Author(s):  
Joyce O'Shaughnessy ◽  
Kevin Punie ◽  
Mafalda Oliveira ◽  
Filipa Lynce ◽  
Sara M. Tolaney ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Single Agent ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Antibody Drug Conjugate ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Chemotherapy Agent ◽  
Recist 1.1 ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Grade 3

1077 Background: In pts with pretreated mTNBC, standard-of-care chemotherapy is associated with low objective response rates (ORRs) and short median progression-free survival (PFS). SG is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an anti–Trop-2 antibody coupled to the cytotoxic SN-38 payload via a proprietary, hydrolyzable linker. SG received accelerated FDA approval for treatment of pts with mTNBC who have received ≥2 prior therapies for metastatic disease. The confirmatory phase 3 ASCENT study (NCT02574455) in pts with relapsed/refractory mTNBC demonstrated a significant survival benefit of SG over TPC (median PFS: 5.6 vs 1.7 mo, HR 0.41, P< 0.0001; median overall survival [OS]: 12.1 vs 6.7 mo, HR 0.48, P< 0.0001) with a tolerable safety profile. Here we summarize efficacy results for SG vs each TPC agent in ASCENT to examine how each TPC agent performed individually. Methods: Pts had mTNBC refractory to or progressing after ≥2 prior standard chemotherapy regimens. Pts were randomized 1:1 to receive SG (10 mg/kg intravenously on days 1 and 8, every 21 days) or single-agent TPC (eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, or gemcitabine). Primary endpoint was PFS per RECIST 1.1 by independent review in brain metastases-negative (BMNeg) pts. Secondary endpoints were ORR per RECIST 1.1, duration of response, OS, and safety. Outcomes for each of the agents in the TPC arm were analyzed and compared with SG. Results: Of 529 pts enrolled, 468 were BMNeg. Among pts in the TPC cohort (n = 233), eribulin was the most commonly chosen chemotherapy (n = 126), followed by vinorelbine (n = 47), capecitabine (n = 31), and gemcitabine (n = 29). Treatment with eribulin, vinorelbine, capecitabine, and gemcitabine resulted in shorter median PFS vs SG (2.1, 1.6, 1.6, and 2.7 vs 5.6 mo, respectively); similar results were observed for median OS (6.9, 5.9, 5.2, and 8.4 vs 12.1 mo), ORR (5%, 4%, 6%, and 3% vs 35%), and clinical benefit rate (CBR; 8%, 6%, 10%, and 14% vs 45%). Key grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) with TPC overall vs SG included neutropenia (33% vs 51%), leukopenia (5% vs 10%), fatigue (5% vs 3%), and anemia (5% vs 8%). Key grade ≥3 TRAEs with eribulin vs SG included neutropenia (30% vs 51%), leukopenia (5% vs 10%), fatigue (5% vs 3%), anemia (2% vs 8%), and peripheral neuropathy (2% vs none), respectively. The safety profiles of vinorelbine, capecitabine, and gemcitabine combined were consistent with that of TPC overall and with eribulin. One treatment-related death was reported for the TPC arm (eribulin) and none with SG. Conclusions: The efficacy benefit observed with SG vs TPC in pts with mTNBC was retained when evaluating each TPC chemotherapy agent individually. These results confirm that SG should be considered as a new standard of care in pts with pretreated mTNBC. Clinical trial information: NCT02574455 .

Investigate the efficacy of immunotherapy for treatment of pancreatic adenocarcinoma (PDAC) with mismatch repair deficiency (dMMR).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 415-415
Author(s):  
Arish Noor ◽  
Luis E. Aguirre ◽  
Kirsten Blue ◽  
Trenton Avriett ◽  
Estrella M. Carballido ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Disease ◽  
Checkpoint Inhibitors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Median Number ◽  
Cancer Center ◽  
Duration Of Response

415 Background: Immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI) have been approved in solid tumors with dMMR. However, only limited data are available for PDAC with dMMR given the rarity of dMMR in PDAC. We evaluated efficacy of ICIs in PDAC with dMMR. Methods: Retrospective clinical and pathologic data were collected for patients (pts) with pancreatic adenocarcinoma from May 2017 to June 2020 at Moffitt cancer center. Results: We identified 10 pts with dMMR PDAC. The median age was 64.5 years (range: 42-86) and 4 pts were male. 4 pts had resectable disease, 3 had locally advanced and 3 had metastatic disease at initial diagnosis. MSH6 deficiency (def) was found in 2 cases, PMS2 def in 2, MLH/PMS2 def in 5, and MSH2/MSH6 in 1. 7 pts were treated with ICIs. 3 pts had locally advanced and 4 had metastatic disease when they started ICIs. 5 received Pembrolizumab (pem), 1 received ipilimumab/ nivolumab (ipi/nivo), and 1 received pem then ipi/nivo after progressive disease (PD) on pem. The median number of prior lines of chemotherapy was 1 (range 0-2). 6 pts were evaluable, and 1 had rapid disease progression after 1 dose of pem. Among 6 evaluable pts, 3 had an objective response (1: complete response and 2: partial response), and 2 had stable disease (SD). Median progression-free survival was 8.2 mo, and median overall survival was not reached with median follow-up (FU) of 6.8 mo. The median duration of response was not reached with a median FU of 22.6 mo. The pt with CR remained disease-free for up to 22 months. The pt whose treatment was switched to ipi/nivo after PD on pem achieved SD > 4mo on ipi/nivo. While on immunotherapy, one patient with ipi/nivo developed immunotherapy associated rash requiring systemic steroids, and another on pem developed hypothyroidism requiring levothyroxine. Conclusions: This series suggest ICIs can provide durable clinical efficacy in pts with dMMR PDAC.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document