VISION: An international, prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase III study of 177Lu-PSMA-617 in the treatment of patients with progressive PSMA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS259-TPS259 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Oliver Sartor ◽  
Michael J. Morris ◽  
Richard Messman ◽  
Bernd J. Krause
Keyword(s):  
Positron Emission Tomography Imaging ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Therapeutic Drug ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Positron Emission

TPS259 Background: The novel therapeutic drug 177Lu-PSMA-617 is a prostate-specific membrane antigen (PSMA) targeting agent that is used to deliver radionuclide therapy for the treatment of patients with mCRPC. Based on preclinical data that demonstrated high PSMA binding affinity and internalization, prolonged tumor uptake, rapid kidney clearance, and high tumor-to-background ratio, 177Lu-PSMA-617 proceeded into clinical development. Preliminary clinical data indicates that 177Lu-PSMA-617 may demonstrate clinical benefit in patients with mCRPC in a setting where patients had no clear standard of care. VISION (NCT03511664) is a phase 3 study designed to assess the efficacy of 177Lu-PSMA-617 in patients with PSMA-positive mCRPC. Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive best standard of care with or without 177Lu-PSMA-617. Eligibility criteria were: PSMA expressing tumor assessed by PSMA positron emission tomography imaging; prior exposure to a taxane and a novel androgen axis inhibitor (NAAI). The primary objective of this study is to compare the two alternative endpoints of progression-free survival (rPFS) and overall survival (OS). Stratification factors include lactate dehydrogenase, liver metastasis, ECOG PS, and use of an NAAI at time of randomization. On active treatment, median OS is assumed to be 13.7 months with a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.7306, and rPFS is assumed to be 6 months with an HR of 0.67. Enrollment began in June 2018 and the target of 814 patients has been reached. Clinical trial information: NCT03511664.

VISION: An international, prospective, open-label, multicenter, randomized phase 3 study of 177Lu-PSMA-617 in the treatment of patients with progressive PSMA-positive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS5099-TPS5099 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Oliver Sartor ◽  
Michael J. Morris ◽  
Bernd J Krause
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Alternative Hypothesis ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Therapeutic Drug ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Phase 3 ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Castration Resistant

TPS5099 Background: The novel therapeutic drug 177Lu-PSMA-617 is a prostate specific membrane antigen (PSMA) targeting agent to deliver radionuclide therapy for the treatment of pts with metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer. Based on preclinical data that demonstrated high PSMA binding affinity & compound internalization, prolonged tumor uptake, rapid kidney clearance, & high tumor-to-background ratio, 177Lu-PSMA-617 proceeded into clinical development. Preliminary clinical evidence indicates 177Lu-PSMA-617 may demonstrate clinical benefit in pts with mCRPC in a setting where pts had no recommended standard of care. This Phase 3 study will assess the efficacy of 177Lu-PSMA-617 in patients with progressive PSMA-positive mCRPC by measuring overall survival (OS) and radiographic progression free survival (rPFS) in a randomized, prospective, open-label trial. Methods: The primary objective of this study is to compare the 2 alternative endpoints of rPFS & OS in pts with progressive PSMA-positive mCRPC who receive 177Lu-PSMA-617 in addition to best supportive/standard of care vs pts treated with best supportive/best standard of care alone. Eligibility criteria are: PSMA expressing tumor; prior exposure to a taxane and novel androgen axis drug. Pts will be randomized in a 2:1 ratio in favor of the investigational arm with stratification factors of LDH, liver disease, ECOG score, and use of NAAD at time of randomization as a standard of care. Under the alternative hypothesis, median OS on active is assumed to be 13.7 mo for a HR of 0.7306 and rPFS on the active is assumed to be 6 mo for a HR of 0.67. Planned enrollment for this study is 750 patients. Enrollment began in June 2018 and continues; the IDMC last reviewed the trial for safety in January 2019 and suggested that the trial continue as planned. Clinical trial information: NCT03511664.

First-line use of cabazitaxel in chemotherapy-naive patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC): A three-arm study in comparison with docetaxel.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4696-TPS4696
Author(s):  
Stephane Oudard ◽  
Lisa Sengelov ◽  
Paul N. Mainwaring ◽  
Antoine Thiery- Vuillemin ◽  
Christine Theodore ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
First Line ◽  
Current Standard ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Measurable Disease ◽  
Ecog Ps

TPS4696^ Background: Docetaxel (D) in combination with prednisone (P) as first-line (1L) chemotherapy in patients (pts) with mCRPC is the current standard of care. However, treatment is not curative and D-resistant disease typically develops. Cabazitaxel (Cbz) is a novel taxane active in D-sensitive and -resistant tumor models. Clinical activity of Cbz plus P (CbzP) was demonstrated in the Phase III TROPIC study in mCRPC pts previously treated with a D-containing regimen; CbzP showed a significant overall survival (OS) benefit vs mitoxantrone plus prednisone (median OS 15.1 vs 12.7 months; HR 0.70; P < 0.0001). Therefore, it is of interest to determine if CbzP provides an OS advantage vs DP in 1L mCRPC pts. Methods: The phase III FIRSTANA study (NCT01308567) is a randomized, open-label, multinational trial in 1L mCRPC pts, designed to compare the efficacy of Cbz 25 mg/m² IV Q3W (Arm A) and Cbz 20 mg/m² IV Q3W (Arm B) vs D 75 mg/m2 IV Q3W (Arm C). P 10 mg PO QD is to be given concomitantly. Pts are stratified by ECOG PS (0–1 vs 2), measurable disease (yes/no) and region (depending on availability of Cbz as 2L). Pts with ECOG PS ≤ 2, histologically/cytologically confirmed metastatic prostate adenocarcinoma, with no prior chemotherapy and with disease progression following medical or surgical castration are eligible. The primary endpoint is OS. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival (PFS) (PCWG2 criteria), radiologic PFS, tumor response in measurable disease (RECIST 1.1), PSA response and PSA PFS, pain response and pain PFS, time to occurrence of any skeletal-related events, safety profile and health-related quality of life. Cbz pharmacokinetics and pharmacogenomics will be assessed in pt subgroups. Pts will be treated until progression, unacceptable toxicity or pt request. Planned enrollment is 1,170 pts; study size was calculated to achieve 90% power for OS. Study start was in May 2011; at January 2012, 219 pts were enrolled. The first DMC meeting recommended continuing the study without change.

AcceleRET Lung: A phase III study of first-line pralsetinib in patients (pts) with RET-fusion+ advanced/metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS9633-TPS9633 ◽  
Author(s):  
Benjamin Besse ◽  
Enriqueta Felip ◽  
Corinne Clifford ◽  
Melinda Louie-Gao ◽  
Jennifer Green ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Phase 1 ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Survival Duration ◽  
First Line ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Multiple Tumor ◽  
Platinum Based Chemotherapy

TPS9633 Background: RET gene fusions have been identified as oncogenic drivers in multiple tumor types, including 1-2% of NSCLC, but no selective RET inhibitors are approved for use. The investigational RET inhibitor, pralsetinib, potently and selectively targets oncogenic RET alterations, including those that confer resistance to multikinase inhibitors. In the registration-enabling phase 1/2 study (ARROW; NCT03037385), pts with RET-fusion+ NSCLC treated with 400 mg once daily (QD) of pralsetinib (N = 80) after platinum-based chemotherapy achieved an overall response rate (ORR) of 61% (95% CI 50, 72; 2 responses pending confirmation) per independent central review. In addition, a promising ORR of 73% (all centrally confirmed responses) was attained in the treatment naïve cohort (N = 26). Most treatment-related adverse events were grade 1-2 across the entire safety population treated at 400 mg QD (N = 354). AcceleRET Lung, an international, open-label, randomized, phase 3 study, will evaluate the efficacy and safety of pralsetinib versus standard of care (SOC) for first-line treatment of advanced/metastatic RET fusion+ NSCLC (NCT04222972). Methods: Approximately 250 pts with metastatic RET-fusion+ NSCLC will be randomized 1:1 to oral pralsetinib (400 mg QD) or SOC (non-squamous histology: platinum/pemetrexed ± pembrolizumab followed by maintenance pemetrexed ± pembrolizumab; squamous histology: platinum/gemcitabine). Stratification factors include intended use of pembrolizumab, history of brain metastases, and ECOG PS. Key eligibility criteria include no prior systemic treatment for metastatic disease; RET-fusion+ tumor by local or central assessment; no additional actionable oncogenic drivers; no prior selective RET inhibitor; measurable disease per RECIST v1.1. Pts randomized to SOC will be permitted to cross-over to receive pralsetinib upon disease progression. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (blinded independent central review; RECIST v1.1). Secondary endpoints include ORR, overall survival, duration of response, disease control rate, clinical benefit rate, time to intracranial progression, intracranial ORR, safety/tolerability and quality of life evaluations. Recruitment has begun with sites (active or planned) in North America, Europe and Asia. Clinical trial information: NCT04222972 .

scholarly journals P14.124 EORTC 1709/CCTG CE.8: A phase III trial of marizomib in combination with standard temozolomide-based radiochemotherapy versus standard temozolomide-based radiochemotherapy alone in patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (Supplement_3) ◽  
pp. iii98-iii98 ◽  
Author(s):  
P Roth ◽  
J Reijneveld ◽  
T Gorlia ◽  
F Dhermain ◽  
F De Vos ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Status ◽  
Treatment Strategies ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Recurrent Glioblastoma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Newly Diagnosed Glioblastoma

Abstract BACKGROUND The standard of care for patients with newly diagnosed glioblastoma includes maximal debulking surgery followed by radiotherapy (RT), and concomitant as well as maintenance therapy with the alkylating agent, temozolomide (TMZ). However, the prognosis remains poor and novel treatment strategies are urgently needed. Targeting the proteasome has been considered a promising anti-cancer approach for several years. Marizomib is a novel, irreversible and pan-proteasome inhibitor, which crosses the blood-brain barrier and has been assessed in phase I trials in patients with newly diagnosed or recurrent glioblastoma. MATERIAL AND METHODS EORTC 1709/CCTG CE.8 is a randomized, controlled, open label phase III superiority trial. Patients with histologically confirmed newly diagnosed glioblastoma and a performance status >70 are eligible. Patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive standard of care (TMZ/RT→TMZ) alone or TMZ/RT→TMZ plus marizomib. The study aims at enrolling 750 patients. Stratification factors include study site, age, performance status and extent of resection. The primary objective of this trial is to compare overall survival in patients receiving marizomib in addition to standard of care with those receiving standard treatment only. The testing strategy specifies the determination of this objective in the intent-to-treat population as well as the subgroup of patients with MGMT-unmethylated tumors. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, safety, neurocognitive function and quality of life. A translational research program has been set up. The study will be activated at approximately 50 EORTC sites across Europe, 25 sites in Canada and additional sites in the US. Patient recruitment started in June 2018 and as of April 29, 2019, a total of 164 patients have been randomized. An update on the enrolment status will be provided at the EANO meeting. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03345095

SELECT: Randomized phase III study of docetaxel (D) or pemetrexed (P) with or without cetuximab (C) in recurrent or progressive non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after platinum-based therapy.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7502-7502 ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward S. Kim ◽  
Marcus A. Neubauer ◽  
Allen Lee Cohn ◽  
Lee Steven Schwartzberg ◽  
Lawrence E. Garbo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Growth Factor Receptor ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Staining Intensity ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Secondary Endpoints

7502 Background: SELECT investigated whether the addition of C to standard chemotherapy improved progression-free survival (PFS) in patients (pts) with recurrent or progressive NSCLC after failure of platinum-based therapy. Methods: SELECT was a multicenter, open label, randomized phase III trial. Per investigator choice, pts received either P (500 mg/m2) or D (75 mg/m2) on day 1 and then were randomized within each group to chemotherapy plus C (400/250 mg/m2) (initial/weekly) or chemotherapy alone. Therapy was given for up to six 3-week cycles; pts randomized to C continued weekly monotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective was PFS for PC vs. P as determined by an Independent Review Committee (IRC). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate (ORR) and duration of response (DOR) by IRC, and safety. Preplanned subgroup analyses for epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) staining intensity by immunohistochemistry and histology were performed. Results for PC vs. P only are presented. Results: Between Jan 2005 and Feb 2010, 938 total pts were randomized. Baseline demographics were comparable between PC (n=301) and P (n=304): median age 64 years; male 60%; Caucasian 88%; KPS 80-100/60-70 84%/16%; squamous/non-squamous 24%/76%. Median PFS (months) PC: 2.89 and P: 2.76 (hazard ratio [HR] =1.03 [95% confidence interval (CI)=0.87-1.21]; p=0.76). Median OS (months) PC: 6.93 and P: 7.79 (HR=1.01 [95% CI=0.86-1.20]; p=0.86). ORR PC: 6.6% and P: 4.3% (odds ratio =1.59 [95% CI=0.78-3.26]; p=0.20). Median DOR (months) PC: 4.17 and P: 6.93 (HR=1.58 [95% CI=0.74-3.36]; p=0.24). There were no statistical differences in efficacy based on histology or EGFR staining intensity. More drug-related AEs/SAEs were observed in the PC arm, with differences mainly attributable to skin toxicities, GI (diarrhea/stomatitis), and hypomagnesemia. Conclusions: The addition of C to P did not improve efficacy in this pt population. Further biomarker analyses are planned. The safety profiles for C and P were consistent with existing data and no new safety signals were observed.

CA184-156: A randomized, multicenter, double-blind, phase III trial comparing the efficacy of ipilimumab (Ipi) plus etoposide/platinum (EP) versus EP in subjects with newly diagnosed extensive-stage disease small cell lung cancer (ED-SCLC).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS7113-TPS7113 ◽  
Author(s):  
David R. Spigel ◽  
Christoph Zielinski ◽  
Sabine Maier ◽  
Veerle de Pril ◽  
Justin P. Fairchild ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Immune Response ◽  
Human Monoclonal Antibody ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Response Patterns ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Blinded Study

TPS7113 Background: EP (4-6 cycles) is standard of care 1st-line therapy for metastatic SCLC, and no multinational studies have reported any improvement beyond that reported for EP. Evidence of an ongoing immune response to SCLC tumors suggests that immunotherapy that enhances this immune response to SCLC may enhance the clinical benefit of EP. Ipi, a fully human monoclonal antibody which blocks CTLA-4, augments antitumor immune responses. Because some responses to Ipi may differ from those observed with cytotoxic therapies, immune-related response criteria (irRC) were derived from WHO criteria to better capture response patterns observed with Ipi. A randomized Phase 2 study of Ipi with paclitaxel/carboplatin (PC) in pts with ED-SCLC showed significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS), as measured by irRC, over PC alone in pts receiving Ipi and PC in a phased regimen (Ipi started after 2 cycles of PC). Furthermore, addition of Ipi did not exacerbate PC toxicity, and immune-related adverse events were managed using protocol-specific guidelines. This multicenter phase III study in pts with ED-SCLC (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT01450761) will determine whether adding Ipi to EP increases OS vs EP alone. Methods: EP consists of 4 cycles of etoposide (100 mg/m2, IV on Days 1-3 every 3 weeks [Q3W]) and cisplatin (75 mg/m2, IV) or carboplatin (AUC=5, IV) once Q3W. Pts will be randomized to receive 4 doses of Ipi (10 mg/kg, IV) in Arm A or placebo in Arm B, Q3W during induction, starting after 2 cycles of EP (phased schedule). Eligible pts will then receive blinded study drug (Ipi in Arm A; placebo in Arm B) Q12W until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary objective is to compare OS. Secondary objectives are to compare OS in those who receive blinded study drug, compare PFS between study arms, and to estimate best overall response rate and duration of response. First-line ED-SCLC pts with ECOG performance ≤1 will be included. Pts with symptomatic CNS metastases or a history of autoimmune disease will be excluded. The study will randomize 1100 pts at a 1:1 ratio.

Comparison of two doses of cabazitaxel plus prednisone in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with a docetaxel (D)-containing regimen.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS4692-TPS4692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mario A. Eisenberger ◽  
Anne-Claire Hardy-Bessard ◽  
Loic Mourey ◽  
Paul N. Mainwaring ◽  
Daniel Ford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Hematologic Toxicity ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Measurable Disease ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
Ecog Ps

TPS4692^ Background: The phase III TROPIC study (NCT00417079) reported a significant improvement in overall survival (OS) for cabazitaxel (Cbz) + prednisone (P;CbzP) (25 mg/m2 IV Q3W/10 mg PO QD) vs mitoxantrone (M) + P (MP) (median OS 15.1 vs 12.7 mos; HR 0.70; P < 0.0001) in pts with mCRPC (also known as hormone-refractory prostate cancer) previously treated with a D-containing regimen. CbzP is approved by the FDA, EMA and other health authorities for the treatment of pts with mCRPC that has progressed after a D-containing regimen. Cbz toxicity is consistent with other taxanes; compared with M, more hematologic toxicities are reported (primarily Grade 3–4 neutropenia). Phase I/II studies identified 20 and 25 mg/m2 as recommended doses; 25 mg/m2 was selected for the phase III TROPIC study. As pooled data show Grade 3–4 neutropenia incidence is lower with Cbz < 25 mg/m2 (61%) vs ≥ 25 mg/m2 (74%), it is of interest to assess if reducing the Cbz approved dose in mCRPC lessens hematologic toxicity and is non-inferior in terms of efficacy. Methods: PROSELICA (NCT01308580) is a randomized, open-label, multinational, phase III study comparing 20 mg/m2 and 25 mg/m2 Cbz for efficacy and tolerability. Pts with a life expectancy > 6 mos, ECOG PS ≤ 2, histologically/cytologically confirmed metastatic prostate adenocarcinoma resistant to hormone therapy and previously treated with a D-containing regimen are eligible. Pts are randomized 1:1 to receive Cbz 20 mg/m² or 25 mg/m² IV Q3W + P 10 mg PO QD, treated until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal of consent (max 10 cycles), and stratified according to ECOG PS, measurable disease (yes/no) and region. The primary endpoint is OS (non-inferiority design). Secondary endpoints include safety, progression-free survival (PCWG2 criteria), PSA and pain progression and response, tumor response in pts with measurable disease and health-related quality of life. Cbz PK and pharmacogenomics will be assessed in pt subgroups. Planned enrollment is 1,200 pts. Study start was in May 2011; as of Jan 2012, 270 pts had been enrolled. The first DMC meeting recommended continuing the study without change.

Intergroup study EORTC-1333-GUCG: A randomized multicenter phase III trial comparing enzalutamide vs. a combination of Ra223 and enzalutamide in asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic castration resistant prostate cancer (CRPC) patients metastatic to bone (PEACE III).

2018 ◽  
Vol 36 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS390-TPS390
Author(s):  
Bertrand F. Tombal ◽  
Yohann Loriot ◽  
Fred Saad ◽  
Raymond S. McDermott ◽  
Sandrine Marreaud ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
The United States ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Favourable Safety Profile ◽  
Health Related

TPS390 Background: α-emitting radiopharmaceutical Ra-223 reduces the risk of death by 30% vs placebo in phase 3 ALSYMPCA (Parker et al. NEJM 2013). Ra-223’s favourable safety profile and lack of significant toxicity support combining it with other agents. The ALSYMPCA trial was developed to add Ra-223 on the contemporary standard of care that did not include last generation AR pathway inhibitors enzalutamide, one of the modern reference treatments for asymptomatic or moderately symptomatic metastatic CRPC (Gillessen et al. Eur Urol. 2017). In addition Ra-223 is registered in symptomatic prostate cancer (PCa), a very late stage of modern patient disease. There is thus a good rationale to combine Ra-223 to modern AR pathway inhibitors and to initiate the treatment in asymptomatic or moderately symptomatic patients. Methods: The EORTC 1333-GUCG study will run in 51 sites (21 activated) across 7 European countries, 4 sites in US and 12 sites in Canada. The study is an intergroup initiative between EORTC (Coordinating Group), UNICANCER; Cancer Trials Ireland (Ireland), ACCRU (The United States), and CUOG (Canada). A total of 560 patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive enzalutamide 160 mg q.d. p.o. or enzalutamide at the same dose and Ra223 at 55 kBq/kg i.v. monthly for 6 months. Patients will be stratified by country, pain (BPI 0-1 vs BPI 2-3), prior docetaxel use (no vs yes) and use of bone targeting agents (no vs yes). The main inclusion criteria require asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic (defined as no opioids and BPI-SF question 3 < 4), metastatic to bone with ≥ 2 bone metastases with or without additional lymph node metastases. Visceral metastases are not allowed. The primary endpoint is radiological progression-free survival (rPFS1), according to PCWG3. Secondary endpoints include: overall survival, PCa specific survival, 1st symptomatic skeletal event (SSE), time to initiation of next systemic anti-neoplastic therapy, time to pain progression, health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L and BPI). Clinical trial information: NCT02194842.

DREAMM-9: Phase III study of belantamab mafodotin plus VRd versus VRd alone in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (TI NDMM).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8556-TPS8556 ◽  
Author(s):  
Saad Zafar Usmani ◽  
Evangelos Terpos ◽  
Wojt Janowski ◽  
Hang Quach ◽  
Sarah West ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Residual Disease ◽  
Single Agent ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Efficacy And Safety ◽  
Open Label

TPS8556 Background: Bortezomib, lenalidomide, and dexamethasone (VRd) is the standard of care for transplant-eligible and TI NDMM, but relapse is usually inevitable. The median progression-free survival (PFS) is ~3 years for patients with TI NDMM, and with each relapse, the duration of response (DoR) diminishes, highlighting the need for novel, effective, targeted agents. Single-agent belantamab mafodotin is a first-in-class B-cell maturation antigen–binding, humanized, afucosylated, monoclonal immunoconjugate, showing deep and durable responses in heavily pretreated patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma ( Lancet Oncol2020). Preclinical work suggests belantamab mafodotin plus bortezomib or lenalidomide enhances anti-myeloma activity. Therefore, studying clinical activity of belantamab mafodotin in combination with these agents is warranted. Methods: DREAMM-9 (NCT04091126) is a two-part, open-label study to determine efficacy and safety of single-agent belantamab mafodotin with VRd vs. VRd alone in patients with TI NDMM. Patients aged ≥18 years with ECOG status 0–2 and adequate organ system functions will be eligible. Part 1 (dose selection) will evaluate safety/tolerability of belantamab mafodotin with VRd administered by single (Day 1) or split dosing (Days 1 and 8) in ≤5 cohorts (n = 12/cohort): 1.9 mg/kg, 2.5 mg/kg split and single, and 3.4 mg/kg split and single. Six more patients may be added to cohort(s) most likely to be selected as recommended Phase III dose (RP3D). Dose-limiting toxicities and adverse events (AEs) will be assessed, and belantamab mafodotin RP3D determined through modified toxicity probability interval criteria. Part 2 (randomized Phase III) will determine efficacy and safety of belantamab mafodotin at RP3D with VRd vs. VRd alone (n = 750) in two arms randomized 1:1. Dual primary endpoints will be rate of minimal residual disease (MRD) negativity and PFS. Secondary endpoints will be response rates (overall response, complete response, very good partial response or better, sustained MRD negativity), DoR, time to progression, and overall survival. Safety assessment will include AEs, serious AEs and ocular findings. In both parts, belantamab mafodotin will be given with VRd for eight induction cycles and then with Rd for maintenance until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline (209664). Drug linker technology licensed from Seattle Genetics; monoclonal antibody produced using POTELLIGENT Technology licensed from BioWa. Clinical trial information: NCT04091126 .

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.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document