STREAM: A randomized discontinuation, blinded, placebo-controlled phase II study of sorafenib (S) treatment of chemonaïve patients (pts) with metastatic uveal melanoma (MUM).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9511-9511 ◽  
Author(s):  
Max E. Scheulen ◽  
Eckhart Kaempgen ◽  
Ulrich Keilholz ◽  
Lucie Heinzerling ◽  
Sebastian Ochsenreither ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Multikinase Inhibitor ◽  
Entire Study ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Mri Features ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Apparent Diffusion ◽  
Grade 3

9511 Background: There is no established systemic treatment for pts with MUM. The STREAM study evaluated the efficacy of the oral multikinase inhibitor S in chemonaïve pts with MUM with the primary endpoint progression-free survival (PFS). Methods: During the initial 56d run-in period all pts received oral S 400 mg bid with concomitant monitoring by magnetic resonance imaging including diffusion weighted imaging (DWI-MRI). Pts with partial remission (PR) on d56 according to RECIST 1.1 were further treated with open-label S and monitored, pts with progressive disease (PD) were taken off study, and pts with stable disease (SD) were randomly assigned to blinded S or placebo (P) and were further monitored every 8 wks and unblinded in case of PD. Pts on S were taken off study and pts on P were offered S with further monitoring. Results: Altogether, 118 (79.2%) of 149 pts entering the run-in period were evaluable for response on d56. Two pts had PR (1.7%), 78 pts had SD (66.1%) and 38 pts had PD (32.2%), respectively. Median PFS from randomization was significantly longer with S (5.5 mths) than P (1.9 mths, HR = 0.527, p = 0.0079). S was readministered to 23 pts with PD under P (59.0%) with a median PFS of 2.0 mths (range 1.2-15.7 mths). Overall survival (OS) was not different between the S group (median 14.8 mths, range 3.7-38.3 mths) and the P group (median 14.4, range 3.3-37.3 mths). During the entire study there were 43 NCI-CTCAE grade 3 and 9 grade 4 adverse events requiring dose reduction of S to 200 mg bid or treatment discontinuation, respectively. No pt died from toxicity. The evaluation of the apparent diffusion coefficient (ADC) ratio derived from DWI-MRI in 47 pts of the run-in period showed a significant difference between pts with SD and pts with PD (p < 0.05). Conclusions: The primary endpoint of STREAM was reached. S is clinically active and tolerable in first-line treatment of pts with MUM with an increase of median PFS from 1.9 mths for P to 5.5 mths for S (p = 0.0079). The median OS of 14.8 mths compares favorably with previous findings in pts with MUM. Besides morphological MRI features, ADC ratio may be used as an additional functional response criterion. Clinical trial information: NCT01377025.

Significant antitumor activity for low-dose ipilimumab (IPI) with pembrolizumab (PEMBRO) immediately following progression on PD1 Ab in melanoma (MEL) in a phase II trial.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 10004-10004 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daniel Olson ◽  
Jason J. Luke ◽  
Andrew Stewart Poklepovic ◽  
Madhuri Bajaj ◽  
Emily Higgs ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Antitumor Activity ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Length Of Treatment ◽  
Grade 3

10004 Background: Combination PD1 + CTLA4 antibodies (Abs) shows greater response rate (RR) versus PD1 Ab alone in MEL, but RR after initial PD1 Ab progression awaits robust investigation. CTLA4 Ab alone after PD1 Ab progression has a historical RR of 13%. We report final results of the first prospective clinical trial evaluating IPI 1mg/kg + PEMBRO immediately following progression on PD1 Ab (NCT02743819). Methods: Patients (pts) with advanced MEL, no prior CTLA4 Ab for metastatic disease, and who had progressed on PD1 Ab as immediately prior therapy (or non-CTLA4 Ab combination) were eligible. Pts received PEMBRO 200 mg + IPI 1 mg/kg Q3W for 4 doses, then PEMBRO alone for up to two years. The primary endpoint was RR by irRECIST. After 35 pts, the study met its primary endpoint with 10/22 evaluable pts achieving a response. The trial was expanded to enroll a total of 70 pts in open-label accrual to further describe the RR for this regimen in an exploratory fashion. The data analysis cutoff was January 30, 2020. Results: 67/70 accrued patients were evaluable for treatment response. Prior treatments included 60 on PD1 Ab alone and 10 on PD1 Ab-based combinations. Of these, 10 pts had progressed in the adjuvant setting. Median length of treatment on prior PD1 Ab was 4.8 months. Response assessments included 4 CR, 17 PR and 16 SD for a RR of 31% (21/67) in evaluable pts, and 30% (21/70) in all enrolled pts. 4 pts with a PR and 6 with SD had unconfirmed responses making the irRECIST response rate 25% (17/67) and 24% (17/70) among evaluable and enrolled pts, respectively. Median progression free survival (PFS) was 4.7 mo (95% CI: 2.8-8.3) and PFS at six months was 45% (95% CI: 33%-57%). 15/70 (21%) pts experienced ≥ grade 3-4 drug-related AEs, the most common being diarrhea, rash and transaminase elevation. PD-L1 positive vs negative status from historical tumor specimens did not associate with RR. Conclusions: This is the largest prospective study of IPI 1mg/kg + PEMBRO, demonstrating significant antitumor activity and tolerability in MEL post-PD1 Ab. Clinical trial information: NCT02743819.

scholarly journals Glembatumumab vedotin for patients with metastatic, gpNMB overexpressing, triple-negative breast cancer (“METRIC”): a randomized multicenter study

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Linda T. Vahdat ◽  
Peter Schmid ◽  
Andres Forero-Torres ◽  
Kimberly Blackwell ◽  
Melinda L. Telli ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Triple Negative Breast Cancer ◽  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Triple Negative ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Antibody Drug Conjugate ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Grade 3

AbstractThe METRIC study (NCT#0199733) explored a novel antibody–drug conjugate, glembatumumab vedotin (GV), targeting gpNMB that is overexpressed in ~40% of patients with triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) and associated with poor prognosis. The study was a randomized, open-label, phase 2b study that evaluated progression-free survival (PFS) of GV compared with capecitabine in gpNMB-overexpressing TNBC. Patients who had previously received anthracycline and taxane-based therapy were randomized 2:1 to receive, GV (1.88 mg/kg IV q21 days) or capecitabine (2500 mg/m2 PO daily d1–14 q21 days). The primary endpoint was RECIST 1.1 PFS per independent, blinded central review. In all, 327 patients were randomized to GV (213 treated) or capecitabine (92 treated). Median PFS was 2.9 months for GV vs. 2.8 months for capecitabine. The most common grade ≥3 toxicities for GV were neutropenia, rash, and leukopenia, and for capecitabine were fatigue, diarrhea, and palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia. The study did not meet the primary endpoint of improved PFS over capecitabine or demonstrate a relative risk/benefit improvement over capecitabine.

scholarly journals Evaluation of efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab combined with or without docetaxel in patients with advanced NSCLC

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yang Wang ◽  
Jun Nie ◽  
Ling Dai ◽  
Weiheng Hu ◽  
Jie Zhang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Advanced Nsclc ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Doublet Chemotherapy ◽  
Platinum Doublet

Abstract Background The combination of PD-1/PD-L1 inhibitor and chemotherapy has been clinically confirmed to be beneficial as the first-line treatment of patients with advanced NSCLC. This study aimed to assess the effect of nivolumab + docetaxel versus nivolumab monotherapy in patients with NSCLC after the failure of platinum doublet chemotherapy. Materials and methods The efficacy and toxicity of nivolumab + docetaxel combination therapy versus nivolumab monotherapy were compared in this retrospective study. Primary endpoint of the study was progression-free survival (PFS), and the secondary endpoints were objective response rate (ORR), overall survival (OS), and toxicity. Results Between November 2017 and December 2019, 77 patients were included in this study, with 58 patients in the nivolumab group and 19 in the nivolumab + docetaxel group. The median follow-up was 18 months, and the PFS was 8 months for patients receiving nivolumab + docetaxel and 2 months for those receiving nivolumab alone (p = 0.001), respectively. Nivolumab + docetaxel showed superior OS compared with nivolumab, with the median OS unreached versus 7 months (p = 0.011). Among patients without EGFR/ALK variation, compared to nivolumab monotherapy, nivolumab + docetaxel showed better PFS (p = 0.04) and OS (p  = 0.05). There was no significant difference in grade 3–4 adverse events (AEs) between the two groups (p = 0.253). Conclusions The combination of nivolumab and docetaxel demonstrated a meaningful improvement in progression-free survival and overall survival compared to nivolumab monotherapy, in patients with NSCLC after the failure of platinum doublet chemotherapy, irrespective of EGFR/ALK variation status.

Biweekly Raltitrexed in Combination with Irinotecan (RIR) as Second-Line Therapy for Patients with Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: A Non-Randomized, Open-Label Phase II Trial.

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ke Cheng ◽  
Yu-Wen Zhou ◽  
Ye Chen ◽  
Zhi-Ping Li ◽  
Meng Qiu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Adverse Events ◽  
Overall Response Rate ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Second Line Therapy ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Common Grade ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background Irinotecan-based doublet chemotherapy strategy was standard second-line backbone treatment for patients with oxaliplatin‑refractory metastatic colorectal cancer(mCRC). The aim of this study was to evaluate tolerability and efficacy of raltitrexed combined with irinotecan biweekly administered as the second-line therapy for mCRC patients.Methods The study was a single-center, non-randomized, open-label phase II trial. Patients with mCRC after failure with first-line treatment of oxaliplatin and fluoropyrimidine or its derivatives were enrolled. Irinotecan (180 mg/m2) and raltitrexed (2.5 mg/m2) were given intravenously on day 1. Cycles were repeated every 2 weeks. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival, and the secondary endpoints included overall response rate, disease control rate, overall survival and treatment related adverse events. Results Between December 2012 and October 2016, 35 patients were enrolled. 33 and 35 patients were assessed for response and safety, respectively. The overall response rate (ORR) was 8.6 %, and the disease control rate (DCR) was 71.4%. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 4.5 months (95% CI 3.8–5.2). The median overall survival was 12.0 months (95% CI 8.5–15.5). Four patients received conversion therapy to no evidence of disease (NED), and 2 patients were still alive with beyond 24 months survival. The most common grade 3/4 hematological adverse events were leukopenia (8.6%), neutropenia (5.7%). The most common grade 3/4 nonhematological adverse events were anorexia (14.3%), vomiting (14.3%), nausea (11.4%) and fatigue (8.6%). Two patients discontinued the protocol treatment because of treatment-related gastrointestinal adverse events. No one died from treatment-related events. The incidence and severity of toxicity was irrelevant to UGT1A1 status.Conclusions The combination of irinotecan with raltitrexed is an active, convenient and acceptable toxic regimen for second-line treatment for mCRC patients, which needs further study as a chemotherapy backbone to be combined with targeted agents in mCRC.Trial registration No. ChiCTR-ONC-12002767. The study was registered with the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry at 29 Octorber 2012, http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx.

scholarly journals EPID-07. HEMATOLOGICAL ADVERSE EVENTS IN GLIOBLASTOMA PATIENTS TREATED WITH TEMOZOLOMIDE

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_6) ◽  
pp. vi75-vi76
Author(s):  
Catherine Garcia ◽  
Zin Myint ◽  
Rani Jayswal ◽  
Allison Butts ◽  
Heidi Weiss ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Protective Factor ◽  
Significant Proportion ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
History Of ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Severe Grade

Abstract BACKGROUND Temozolomide (TMZ) is the cornerstone for glioblastoma (GBM) treatment. A significant proportion of patients develops hematologic toxicities with limited investigations on outcomes and risk factors for their development. METHODS Our study combines data from the two largest group trials, RTOG 0525 and RTOG 0825, to analyze serious hematologic adverse events (HAE) associated with TMZ therapy for GBM. We analyzed frequency and outcomes of HAE during chemoradiation. RESULTS 1154 patients were evaluated with a median age of 57 years. Over 79% of patients developed HAE during the entire course of GBM treatment. During chemoradiation the most common HAE during chemoradiation was lymphopenia (41.5%), followed by thrombocytopenia (39.0%), and anemia (35.3%). Of these, 34.1% were severe (Grade 3 or 4) and 65.9% were mild (grade 1 or 2). During maintenance the most common HAE was leukopenia (50.7%), followed by neutropenia (50.4%), and lymphopenia (45.3%). MGMT methylation was not associated with HAEs. A history of HAEs during chemoradiation was a protective factor for developing HAEs during maintenance. MGMT methylated and age younger than 50 were protective factors for mortality. Patients that presented HAEs anytime during treatment had a longer overall survival and progression free survival. There was no significant difference in survival between mild or severe HAEs. CONCLUSION HAE are common during chemoradiation with TMZ for GBM, but are more commonly grade 1 or 2 per CTCAE. HAE during GBM treatment is associated with decreased progression free survival and overall survival.

Axitinib or bevacizumab (bev) plus FOLFOX or FOLFIRI as second-line therapy in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 478-478 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. C. Bendell ◽  
C. Tournigand ◽  
M. Bednarczyk ◽  
A. Swieboda-Sadlej ◽  
I. Chung ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Primary Endpoint ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Second Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Vegf Inhibitors ◽  
Multiple Tumor ◽  
Dosing Regimens ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Line Chemotherapy

478 Background: Axitinib (AG-013736,AG), an oral selective inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) receptors 1, 2, and 3, shows activity in multiple tumor types including those refractory to front-line chemotherapy. Methods: This multicenter, open-label, randomized phase II trial compared AG and bev in combination with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI in second-line mCRC. Pts previously treated with irinotecan were randomized to mFOLFOX6 plus AG 5 mg BID or bev 5 mg/kg q2wk; pts who received oxaliplatin were randomized to FOLFIRI with AG or bev at the same doses, with stratification by performance status and prior bev therapy. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS). Results: 171 pts were randomized from March 2008 to July 2009. There were no significant differences in PFS or median overall survival (mOS) between the AG and bev arms with FOLFOX or FOLFIRI. However, there was a trend towards reduced mOS in the FOLFIRI arms with AG compared to bev, and a trend towards improved mOS with AG+FOLFOX vs bev+FOLFOX. There were more treatment discontinuations (DCs) and a higher incidence of grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) in the AG arms (diarrhea, asthenia, fatigue; Table). Conclusions: This study did not meet the primary endpoint, showing similar PFS with AG compared to bev when added to second-line chemotherapy. A potential factor in these results was earlier DCs in the AG versus bev arms, likely secondary to increased AEs. While VEGF inhibitors may have a role in second-line treatment of mCRC, at current dosing regimens AG-based chemotherapy shows no improvement in outcome compared to bev. [Table: see text] [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.

Stage-Adapted Treatment of HIV-Associated Hodgkin Lymphoma: Results of a Prospective Multicenter Study

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (33) ◽  
pp. 4117-4123 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marcus Hentrich ◽  
Marcel Berger ◽  
Christoph Wyen ◽  
Jan Siehl ◽  
Jürgen K. Rockstroh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hodgkin Lymphoma ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Advanced Stage ◽  
Entire Study ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Combined Antiretroviral Therapy ◽  
Study Population ◽  
Involved Field ◽  
Related Mortality

Purpose Although the outcome of patients with HIV-related Hodgkin lymphoma (HIV-HL) has markedly improved since the introduction of combined antiretroviral therapy, standard therapy is still poorly defined. This prospective study investigates a stage- and risk-adapted treatment strategy in patients with HIV-HL. Patients and Methods Patients with early favorable HIV-HL received two to four cycles of doxorubicin, bleomycin, vinblastine, and dacarbazine (ABVD) followed by 30 Gy of involved-field (IF) radiation. In patients with early unfavorable HIV-HL, four cycles of bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, and prednisone (BEACOPP baseline) or four cycles of ABVD + 30 Gy of IF radiation were administered. Six to eight cycles of BEACOPP baseline were given in patients with advanced-stage HIV-HL. In patients with advanced HIV infection, BEACOPP was replaced with ABVD. Results Of 108 patients (including eight female patients) included in the study, 23 (21%) had early favorable HL, 14 (13%) had early unfavorable HL, and 71 (66%) had advanced-stage HL. The median CD4 count at HL diagnosis was 240/μL. The complete remission rates for patients with early favorable, early unfavorable, and advanced-stage HL were 96%, 100%, and 86%, respectively. The 2-year progression-free survival of the entire study population was 91.7%. Eleven patients (11%) have died, and treatment-related mortality was 5.6%. The 2-year overall survival rate was 90.7% with no significant difference between early favorable (95.7%), early unfavorable (100%), and advanced-stage HL (86.8%). Conclusion In patients with HIV-HL, stage- and risk-adapted treatment is feasible and effective. The prognosis for patients with HIV-HL may approach that of HIV-negative patients with HL.

scholarly journals Randomized Double-Blind Phase II Study of Regorafenib in Patients With Metastatic Osteosarcoma

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (16) ◽  
pp. 1424-1431 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lara E. Davis ◽  
Vanessa Bolejack ◽  
Christopher W. Ryan ◽  
Kristen N. Ganjoo ◽  
Elizabeth T. Loggers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase Ii ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Multikinase Inhibitor ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
End Point ◽  
Metastatic Osteosarcoma ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Line Of Therapy

PURPOSE SARC024 is a phase II clinical trial of the multikinase inhibitor regorafenib in specific sarcoma subtypes, including advanced osteosarcoma. We hypothesized that regorafenib would improve progression-free survival (PFS) in patients with sarcoma and report the results of the osteosarcoma cohort. PATIENTS AND METHODS This trial enrolled patients with progressive metastatic osteosarcoma with measurable disease by RECIST who had received at least one prior line of therapy. Patients were randomly assigned at a ratio of one to one to regorafenib or placebo. Crossover was allowed at time of disease progression. PFS was the primary end point of the study, which was powered to detect a difference of at least 3 months in median PFS. RESULTS Forty-two patients from 12 centers were enrolled between September 2014 and May 2018. Median age was 37 years (range, 18 to 76 years). Patients had received an average of 2.3 prior therapy regimens. Ten patients receiving placebo crossed over to active drug at time of progression. Study enrollment was stopped early, after a data safety monitoring committee review. Median PFS was significantly improved with regorafenib versus placebo: 3.6 months (95% CI, 2.0 to 7.6 months) versus 1.7 months (95% CI, 1.2 to 1.8 months), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.21 to 0.85; P = .017). In the context of the crossover design, there was no statistically significant difference in overall survival. Fourteen (64%) of 22 patients initially randomly assigned to regorafenib experienced grade 3 to 4 events attributed to treatment, including one grade 4 colonic perforation. CONCLUSION The study met its primary end point, demonstrating activity of regorafenib in patients with progressive metastatic osteosarcoma. No new safety signals were observed. Regorafenib should be considered a treatment option for patients with relapsed metastatic osteosarcoma.

Olaparib plus paclitaxel plus carboplatin (P/C) followed by olaparib maintenance treatment in patients (pts) with platinum-sensitive recurrent serous ovarian cancer (PSR SOC): A randomized, open-label phase II study.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5001-5001 ◽  
Author(s):  
Amit M. Oza ◽  
David Cibula ◽  
Ana Oaknin ◽  
Christopher John Poole ◽  
Ron H.J. Mathijssen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Maintenance Treatment ◽  
Parp Inhibitor ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Platinum Sensitive ◽  
Open Label Phase ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Grade 3

5001 Background: The oral PARP inhibitor olaparib has shown antitumor activity in pts with SOC. Our multicenter study compared the efficacy of (Arm A) olaparib capsules plus P/C for 6 cycles then maintenance olaparib monotherapy vs (Arm B) P/C alone for 6 cycles and no further therapy in pts with PSR SOC (NCT01081951). Methods: Pts received 6 x 21-day(d) cycles of olaparib (200 mg bid, d1–10/21) + P (175 mg/m2 iv, d1) + C (AUC4 iv, d1), then olaparib monotherapy as maintenance (400 mg bid, continuous) (Arm A), or 6 x 21d cycles of P (175 mg/m2 iv, d1) + C (AUC6 iv, d1) then no further therapy (Arm B), until progression. Randomization (1:1) was stratified by number of platinum treatments and platinum-free interval. Primary endpoint: progression-free survival (PFS) by central review (RECIST 1.1). Secondary endpoints: overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR), safety. Archival tissue was collected where available for analysis of biomarker correlation. Results: Of 162 pts randomized (n=81 per arm), 156 received treatment (Arm A, n=81; Arm B, n=75) and 121 began the maintenance/no further therapy phase (Arm A, n=66; Arm B, n=55). Olaparib + P/C (AUC4) followed by maintenance olaparib showed a significant improvement in PFS vs P/C (AUC6) alone (HR = 0.51, 95% CI 0.34, 0.77; P=0.0012; median = 12.2 vs 9.6 months). OS data are immature (total events: 14%). ORR was similar for Arm A and Arm B (64 vs 58%). Most common AEs during the combination phase were alopecia (74 vs 59%), nausea (69 vs 57%) and fatigue (64 vs 57%) for Arm A vs Arm B, respectively. Pts with grade ≥3 AEs (65 vs 57%), serious AEs (SAEs: 15 vs 21%) and AEs leading to treatment discontinuation (19 vs 16%) were similar for Arm A vs Arm B. Most common AEs during maintenance/no further therapy were nausea (50 vs 6%) and vomiting (29 vs 7%). 29 vs 16% of pts had grade ≥3 AEs, 9 vs 7% had SAEs and 8% vs N/A discontinued due to AEs in the olaparib vs no treatment arms, respectively. There were no fatal AEs. Conclusions: In pts with PSR SOC, olaparib plus P/C (AUC4) followed by olaparib 400 mg bid monotherapy maintenance treatment resulted in a significant improvement in PFS vs P/C (AUC6) alone.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document