Percutaneous hepatic perfusion (PHP) with melphalan for patients with ocular melanoma liver metastases: Preliminary results of FOCUS (PHP-OCM-301/301A) phase III trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9510-9510
Author(s):  
Jonathan S. Zager ◽  
Marlana Orloff ◽  
Pier Francesco Ferrucci ◽  
Evan Scott Glazer ◽  
Aslam Ejaz ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatic Metastases ◽  
Ideal Body Weight ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Ocular Melanoma ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Point Estimate ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Independent Review ◽  
Phase Iii Study

9510 Background: Ocular melanoma, the most common intraocular malignancy, frequently metastasizes to the liver but to date there is no established standard of care for hepatic-dominant ocular melanoma patients. The FOCUS trial began as a randomized, phase III trial (301) comparing PHP with best alternative care (BAC). The trial was subsequently amended (301A) to remove the BAC arm due to enrollment concerns. Methods: Eligible patients with hepatic-dominant ocular melanoma were randomized 1:1 to receive PHP or BAC (investigator’s choice of TACE, pembrolizumab, ipilimumab, or dacarbazine) on the 301 trial. All eligible patients received PHP on the 301A trial. PHP patients could receive up to 6 PHP treatments, repeated every 6-8 weeks with melphalan dosed at 3.0mg/kg ideal body weight (IBW). Patients with progressive disease (PD) were discontinued from study treatment and all patients are followed until death. Patientswere imaged every 12 (±2) weeks until PD. The primary endpoint, ORR (per RECIST 1.1) as assessed by Independent Review Committee, will be characterized by the point estimate and 95% CI for each group (PHP and BAC). Categorical efficacy variables will be presented as frequency counts and percentages and 95% CI. Time-to-event variables will be summarized using Kaplan-Meier methods (median and 95% CI). Results: 144 patients were enrolled overall; 102 were assigned to PHP (301: n=43; 301A: n=59) and 42 were assigned to BAC. 91 PHP patients received treatment (301: n=40; 301A: n=51) and 32 BAC patients received treatment. At the time of this analysis, 4 PHP patients were still ongoing on study treatment with a minimum follow-up of 24 weeks. 79 PHP-treated patients and 29 BAC-treated patients were evaluable for response. ORR among PHP patients was 32.9% (26/79; 95% CI: 22.75-40.40%). ORR among BAC patients was 13.8% (4/29; 95% CI: 3.89-31.66%). The median PFS was 9.03 months (95% CI: 6.24-11.83) among PHP patients and was 3.06 months (95% CI: 2.69-5.65) among BAC patients; this difference was statistically significant ( p=0.0004). Among the 94 patients assessed for safety after treatment with PHP, 40.4% of patients experienced a serious treatment-emergent adverse event, the majority of which were hematological and resolved without sequelae. There were no treatment related deaths in the trial. Conclusions: In this analysis of preliminary data from the FOCUS trial, PHP demonstrates a statistically superior ORR and significantly prolonged PFS in comparison with BAC in the treatment of hepatic metastases from ocular melanoma. The data is encouraging as efficacious treatments for hepatic metastases from ocular melanoma are desperately needed. These early data show an improvement over the previous phase III study in terms of both efficacy (ORR and PFS) as well as toxicity using second generation filters. Clinical trial information: NCT02678572.

Five-year survival outcomes with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy in unresectable stage III NSCLC: An update from the PACIFIC trial.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8511-8511
Author(s):  
David R. Spigel ◽  
Corinne Faivre-Finn ◽  
Jhanelle Elaine Gray ◽  
David Vicente ◽  
David Planchard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Stage Iii ◽  
Smoking History ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Unresectable Stage ◽  
The Pacific ◽  
Patient Reported ◽  
Stage Iii Nsclc

8511 Background: In the placebo-controlled Phase III PACIFIC trial of patients with unresectable Stage III NSCLC whose disease had not progressed after platinum-based concurrent chemoradiotherapy (cCRT), durvalumab improved overall survival (OS) (stratified hazard ratio [HR] 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.53–0.87; p=0.0025; data cutoff [DCO] Mar 22, 2018) and progression-free survival (PFS) (stratified HR 0.52, 95% CI 0.42–0.65; p<0.0001; DCO Feb 13, 2017) based on the DCOs used for the primary analyses, and the degree of benefit remained consistent in subsequent updates. Durvalumab was associated with a manageable safety profile, and did not detrimentally affect patient-reported outcomes, compared with placebo. These findings established consolidation durvalumab after CRT (the ‘PACIFIC regimen’) as the standard of care in this setting. We report updated, exploratory analyses of OS and PFS, assessed approximately 5 years after the last patient was randomized. Methods: Patients with WHO PS 0/1 (and any tumor PD-L1 status) whose disease did not progress after cCRT (≥2 overlapping cycles) were randomized (2:1) 1–42 days following cCRT (total prescription radiotherapy dose typically 60–66 Gy in 30–33 fractions) to receive 12 months’ durvalumab (10 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks) or placebo, stratified by age (<65 vs ≥65 years), sex, and smoking history (current/former smoker vs never smoked). The primary endpoints were OS and PFS (blinded independent central review; RECIST v1.1) in the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. HRs and 95% CIs were estimated using stratified log-rank tests in the ITT population. Medians and OS/PFS rates at 60 months were estimated with the Kaplan–Meier method. Results: Overall, 709/713 randomized patients received treatment in either the durvalumab (n/N=473/476) or placebo (n/N=236/237) arms. The last patient had completed study treatment in May 2017. As of Jan 11, 2021 (median follow-up duration of 34.2 months in all patients; range, 0.2–74.7 months), updated OS (stratified HR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59–0.89; median 47.5 vs 29.1 months) and PFS (stratified HR 0.55, 95% CI 0.45–0.68; median 16.9 vs 5.6 months) remained consistent with the results from the primary analyses. The 60-month OS rates were 42.9% and 33.4% with durvalumab and placebo, respectively, and 60-month PFS rates were 33.1% and 19.0%, respectively. Updated treatment effect estimates for patient subgroups will be presented. Conclusions: These updated survival analyses, based on 5-year data from PACIFIC, demonstrate robust and sustained OS plus durable PFS benefit with the PACIFIC regimen. An estimated 42.9% of patients randomized to durvalumab remain alive at 5 years and approximately a third remain both alive and free of disease progression. Clinical trial information: NCT02125461.

Phase III Trial of Infusional Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, Oxaliplatin, and Irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI) Compared With Infusional Fluorouracil, Leucovorin, and Irinotecan (FOLFIRI) As First-Line Treatment for Metastatic Colorectal Cancer: The Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (13) ◽  
pp. 1670-1676 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alfredo Falcone ◽  
Sergio Ricci ◽  
Isa Brunetti ◽  
Elisabetta Pfanner ◽  
Giacomo Allegrini ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Metastatic Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Peripheral Neurotoxicity ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Secondary Resection ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose The Gruppo Oncologico Nord Ovest (GONO) conducted a phase III study comparing fluorouracil, leucovorin, oxaliplatin, and irinotecan (FOLFOXIRI [irinotecan 165 mg/m2 day 1, oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 day 1, leucovorin 200 mg/m2 day 1, fluorouracil 3,200 mg/m2 48-hour continuous infusion starting on day 1, every 2 weeks]) with infusional fluorouracil, leucovorin, and irinotecan (FOLFIRI). Methods Selection criteria included unresectable metastatic colorectal cancer, age 18 to 75 years, and no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease. The primary end point was response rate (RR). Results A total of 244 patients were randomly assigned. An increase of grade 2 to 3 peripheral neurotoxicity (0% v 19%; P < .001), and grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (28% v 50%; P < .001) were observed in the FOLFOXIRI arm. The incidence of febrile neutropenia (3% v 5%) and grade 3 to 4 diarrhea (12% v 20%) were not significantly different. Responses, as assessed by investigators, were, for FOLFIRI and FOLFOXIRI, respectively, complete, 6% and 8%; and partial, 35% and 58%, (RR, 41% v 66%; P = .0002). RR confirmed by an external panel was 34% versus 60% (P < .0001). The R0 secondary resection rate of metastases was greater in the FOLFOXIRI arm (6% v 15%; P = .033, among all 244 patients; and 12% v 36%; P = .017 among patients with liver metastases only). Progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were both significantly improved in the FOLFOXIRI arm (median PFS, 6.9 v 9.8 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.63; P = .0006; median OS, 16.7 v 22.6 months; HR, 0.70; P = .032). Conclusion The FOLFOXIRI regimen improves RR, PFS, and OS compared with FOLFIRI, with an increased, but manageable, toxicity in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer with favorable prognostic characteristics. Further studies of FOLFOXIRI in combination with targeted agents and in the neoadjuvant setting are warranted.

A Randomized Phase III Trial of Melphalan and Dexamethasone (MDex) Versus Bortezomib, Melphalan and Dexamethasone (BMDex) for Untreated Patients with AL Amyloidosis

Blood ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 128 (22) ◽  
pp. 646-646 ◽  
Author(s):  
Efstathios Kastritis ◽  
Xavier Leleu ◽  
Bertrand Arnulf ◽  
Elena Zamagni ◽  
María Teresa Cibeira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Board Of Directors ◽  
Research Funding ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Cardiac Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Al Amyloidosis ◽  
Advisory Committees ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Hematologic Response ◽  
Grade 3

Abstract Background. Current upfront treatment of light chain (AL) amyloidosis is often based on bortezomib in patients. However, data on the safety and efficacy of bortezomib in this setting mostly derive from uncontrolled, retrospective series, that are difficult to compare due to different proportion of patients with advanced disease. Here we report the analysis of a multicenter randomized phase III trial comparing MDex, a current standard of care, and MDex with the addition of bortezomib (BMDex) in newly-diagnosed AL amyloidosis that was performed in Europe and Australia (EMN-03 study, NCT01277016). Patients and Methods. Main eligibility criteria included measurable disease (M-protein >10 g/L or dFLC >50 mg/L), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ³30 mL/min, and adequate liver function. Previously treated patients, those who had >30% bone marrow plasma cell or lytic bone lesions, NYHA class >II heart failure, grade 3 sensory or grade 1 painful peripheral neuropathy, or ECOG performance status >2 were excluded. In January 2013 the protocol was amended to include Mayo stage III patients, provided their NT-proBNP was <8500 ng/L (stage IIIa). Patients were randomized to receive either MDex (melphalan at 0.22 mg/kg and dexamethasone at 40 mg daily for 4 consecutive days every 28 days) or BMDex (bortezomib added at 1.3 mg/m2, on days 1, 4, 8, and 11 in cycles 1 and 2, and on days 1, 8, 15, and 22 in the following cycles). The primary endpoint was overall hematologic response at 3 months. Treatment was continued until completion of MDex cycle 9 or BMDex cycle 8, or achievement of CR or of at least partial response (PR) plus organ response after cycle 6, and was discontinued in case PR was not achieved by cycle 3. Enrollment is now completed (110 patients) with the last patient enrolled in February 2016 (database lock: July 25, 2016). Results. Patients' characteristics are reported in the Table. The proportion of patients experiencing at least 1 grade 3-4 severe adverse events (SAE) was similar in the MDex and BMDex arms (49% vs. 60%, P=0.11). The total number of reported adverse events per cycle was lower in the MDex group (10% vs 23%, P<0.01). Most common SAEs (MDex vs. BMDex) were cytopenia (4% vs. 7%, P=0.04), fluid retention (3% vs. 6%, P=0.02), and neuropathy (0 vs. 2%, P<0.01). One patient died within 3 months in the MDex arm and 3 in the BMDex group (P=0.28). Response was evaluated by intent to treat. Hematologic response rates after cycle 3 were 51% and 78% (P=0.001), with 28% and 53% complete response (CR) /very good partial response (VGPR) (P=0.003), in the MDex and BMDex arms, respectively. Overall hematologic response at the end of treatment, after a median of 5 cycles, was 56% and 81% (P=0.001), with 38% and 64% CR/VGPR in the MDex and BMDex arms, respectively (P=0.002). Cardiac response was reached in 8 of 33 evaluable patients treated with MDex (24%) and 10 of 26 (38%) who received BMDex (P=0.119). Renal response was attained in 17 of 35 patients (48%) in both arms. However, there was a higher proportion of cardiac progression in the MDex arm with borderline statistical significance (32% vs. 15%, P=0.054). After a median follow-up of living patients of 25 months, 26 patients (24%) died, 16 in the MDex arm and 10 in the BMDex arm with no significant difference in survival (Figure 1a). Achievement of hematologic and cardiac response at 3 months significantly improved survival (Figures 1b and 1c). Conclusion. This is the first prospective randomized trial of novel agents in AL amyloidosis. The criteria of hematologic and cardiac response are validated in the prospective setting for the first time. The primary endpoint, hematologic response at 3 months has been reached, showing more frequent and more profound hematologic responses with BMDex, preventing progression of cardiac dysfunction, with a modest increase in toxicity. This regimen can be proposed as a new standard of care in AL amyloidosis. We would like to acknowledge the European Myeloma Network, the Australasian Leukaemia and Lymphoma Group and the Leukaemia Foundation of Australia for their ongoing support, and Janssen-Cilag for partially funding the trial and providing the study drug. Disclosures Kastritis: Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cibeira:Janssen: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Mollee:Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Research Funding; Amgen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Nilelse: Research Funding. Hajek:Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Moreau:Janssen: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria; Novartis: Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria; Takeda: Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Honoraria. Mateos:Janssen, Celgene, Amgen, Takeda, BMS: Honoraria. Wechalekar:Takeda: Honoraria; Janssen: Honoraria; Glaxo Smith Kline: Honoraria; Celgene: Honoraria. Dimopoulos:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Genesis: Consultancy, Honoraria; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Palumbo:Janssen Cilag: Honoraria; Takeda: Employment, Honoraria. Sonneveld:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Celgene: Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Karyopharm: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Merlini:Pfizer: Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Millennium Takeda: Consultancy; Prothena: Honoraria; GlaxoSmithKline: Consultancy. Palladini:Prothena: Honoraria.

A randomized, controlled, double-blind phase III study (AVOREN) of bevacizumab/interferon-α2a vs placebo/interferon- α2a as first-line therapy in metastatic renal cell carcinoma

2007 ◽  
Vol 25 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3-3 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Escudier ◽  
P. Koralewski ◽  
A. Pluzanska ◽  
A. Ravaud ◽  
S. Bracarda ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
First Line Therapy ◽  
Interferon Α2a ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Adequate Organ Function

3 Background: Bevacizumab (BEV) is a monoclonal antibody that inhibits tumor angiogenesis by targeting VEGF. In relapsed RCC, BEV improved time to progression compared with placebo (2.5 vs. 4.8 months). A phase III trial was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of BEV in combination with interferon (IFN)-a2a as first-line treatment in metastatic (m) RCC. The final analysis of progression-free survival (PFS) and interim analysis of overall survival (OS) are presented. Methods: Nephrectomized patients with clear cell mRCC, KPS of =70%, no CNS metastases and adequate organ function received IFN- a2a (x3/week at a recommended dose of 9 MIU for up to 1 year) plus BEV (10mg/kg q2w) or placebo until disease progression. Tumor assessments were performed every 8 weeks until week 32 and 12 weekly thereafter. Patients were stratified according to country and Motzer score. Results: Between June 2004 and October 2006, 649 patients were randomized (641 treated) at 101 centers in 18 countries. The treatment arms were well balanced for prognostic factors. At the data cutoff, 505 progression events had occurred, 111 patients remained on treatment, 287 had discontinued (discontinuations due to AEs were 12% with IFN vs. 28% with IFN-a2a/BEV), and 251 died. BEV-related side effects were generally mild and consistent with previous observations. The addition of BEV to IFN-a2a significantly increased PFS (10.2 vs. 5.4 mo) (HR=0.63; p<0.0001) and objective tumor response rate (30.6% vs. 12.4%; p<0.0001). A trend toward improved OS was observed with the addition of BEV to IFN-a2a (p=0.0670). Conclusions: BEV improves PFS when combined with IFN-a2a in mRCC. No unexpected safety events were observed. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Phase III trial of adjuvant capecitabine/cisplatin (XP) versus capecitabine/cisplatin/RT (XPRT) in resected gastric cancer with D2 nodal dissection (ARTIST trial): Safety analysis

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4537-4537 ◽  
Author(s):  
J. Lee ◽  
W. Kang ◽  
D. Lim ◽  
J. Park ◽  
Y. Park ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Cancer ◽  
Disease Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Chemoradiation Therapy ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Eligibility Criteria ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Resected Gastric Cancer ◽  
Disease Free

4537 Background: Although the adjuvant chemoradiation therapy has gained popularity and has become the standard of care in patients with resected gastric cancer in U.S., the role of chemoradiation therapy after extended D2 dissection has been questioned. We conducted a phase III trial to compare capecitabine/cisplatin (XP) vs XP + radiotherapy (RT) in curatively D2 resected gastric cancer patients in terms of disease free survival and overall survival. Methods: Eligibility criteria were as follows: stage Ib (T1N1, T2bN0) - IV (M1 excluded), curatively ≥ D2 resected gastric adenocarcinoma. XP only: X 2,000 mg/m2/d D1∼14, CDDP 60 mg/m2 D1 repeated every 3 weeks, 6 cycles; XP + RT: X 2,000 mg/m2/d D1∼14, CDDP 60 mg/m2 D1 x 2 cycles ⋄ RT 45 Gy (25 fractions) + X 1,650 mg/m2/d during RT ⋄ X 2,000 mg/m2/d D1∼14, CDDP 60 mg/m2 D1 x 2 cycles. The primary endpoint is 3-year disease-free survival. Results: From October 2004 to April 2008, 458 patients (XP arm: 228 patients; XP/RT arm: 230 patients) were enrolled. In XP arm, 172 (75%) of 228 enrolled patients completed 6 cycles of chemotherapy. In XP + RT arm, 188 (82%) of 230 patients completed the full course of XP 2 cycles - X + RT - XP 2 cycles. Conclusions: Safety and feasibility analysis of the two arms will be reported at the meeting. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Cabazitaxel or mitoxantrone with prednisone in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) previously treated with docetaxel: Estimating mean overall survival (OS) for health economic analyses from a phase III trial (TROPIC).

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 128-128 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Oudard ◽  
F. Joulain ◽  
A. De Geer ◽  
A. O. Sartor
Keyword(s):  
Goodness Of Fit ◽  
Graphical Method ◽  
Survival Function ◽  
Information Criteria ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Point Estimate ◽  
Weibull Function ◽  
Term Survival ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Previously Treated

128^ Background: TROPIC evaluated the efficacy and safety of the novel taxane cabazitaxel in men with mCRPC previously treated with docetaxel. Median OS was significantly improved, as previously reported (12.7 months in mitoxantrone arm vs 15.1 months in cabazitaxel arm, HR=0.72 [0.61 – 0.84], p<0.0001- updated OS results). Median OS is the most useful descriptive statistic for physicians and patients as it reflects a point estimate in time by which 50% patients may survive regardless of disease status or progression. It avoids assumptions on long-term survival beyond the follow-up period of the clinical trial. Payers however are interested in making a coverage and reimbursement decisions based on the overall therapeutic benefit relative to its risk, and the expected impact on healthcare expenditures. Analyses such as cost-effectiveness analysis therefore require the estimation of mean OS. Methods: Mean OS is only observable when the last patient has died. Its estimation can be derived via an extrapolation of the trial Kaplan-Meier curve using a survival function. Several parametric distributions (exponential, weibull, lognormal, loglogistic and Gompertz) were tested. The parametric distribution that best fitted the trial Kaplan-Meier curves was selected using the Akaike's Information criteria (AIC), the Bayesian Information Criteria (BIC) and graphical method to evaluate the goodness of fit of the distributions. Mean OS from the best fitted model was generated to support payer decision making. Results: Using AIC/BIC and graphical method, the Weibull survival function, S(t)=exp(-l ts) where l is a scale parameter and s a shape parameter, was selected as the distribution that best fitted the TROPIC data. Results of the estimated mean survival assuming a Weibull function are described in the table. Conclusions: Assuming a Weibull distribution, mean OS is estimated at 14.5 months in mitoxantrone arm vs 18.5 months in cabazitaxel arm, leading to 4 months OS difference in favour of cabazitaxel. [Table: see text] [Table: see text]

Concurrent or layered treatment with radium-223 (Ra-223) and enzalutamide (Enza) or abiraterone plus prednisone/prednisolone (Abi/pred): A retrospective study of real-world clinical outcomes in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5026-5026
Author(s):  
Neal D. Shore ◽  
A. Oliver Sartor ◽  
Cora N. Sternberg ◽  
Fred Saad ◽  
Bertrand F. Tombal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Clinical Outcomes ◽  
Real World ◽  
Descriptive Analysis ◽  
Randomized Study ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Kaplan Meier ◽  
Radium 223 ◽  
Phase Iii Study

5026 Background: In clinical practice, Ra-223 is often combined with Enza or Abi/pred. ERA 223 (NCT02043678) showed increased fracture risk with concurrent Ra-223+Abi/pred. We assessed real-world symptomatic skeletal events (SSEs) and overall survival (OS) of pts with mCRPC who received concurrent or layered Ra-223+Enza or Abi/pred. Methods: Patients with mCRPC treated with Ra-223 in US cancer clinics from 1/01/2013 to 6/30/2017 were identified from a Flatiron prostate cancer registry of electronic health records. Treatment initiation defined subgroups: concurrent (both started within 30 days) or layered (1 started ≥30 days after the other). Baseline (BL) was the first dose of Ra-223. Descriptive analysis was performed for BL characteristics, SSEs, and OS (Kaplan–Meier). Results: Of 625 pts treated with Ra-223, 48% received Ra-223+Enza or Abi/pred. Layered treatment was more common (73%) than concurrent (27%). BL characteristics and clinical outcomes were summarized [Table]. Conclusions: In a real-world setting, Ra-223+Enza or Abi/pred treatment was mainly layered. SSE rates with layered vs concurrent Ra-223+Abi/pred varied between subgroups; results must be treated cautiously given small pt numbers and a non-randomized study. The ongoing PEACE III trial is investigating concurrent Ra-223+Enza; a Phase III study (ESCALATE) exploring layered Ra-223+Enza is planned. [Table: see text]

ENGOT-OV44/FIRST study: A randomized, double-blind, adaptive, phase III study of platinum-based therapy with dostarlimab (TSR-042) + niraparib versus standard-of-care (SOC) platinum-based therapy as first-line treatment of stage 3/4 non-mucinous epithelial ovarian cancer (OC).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS5600-TPS5600 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anne-Claire Hardy-Bessard ◽  
Kathleen N. Moore ◽  
Mansoor Raza Mirza ◽  
Bernard Asselain ◽  
Andres Redondo ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Residual Disease ◽  
Survival Rates ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Figo Stage ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Clinical Activity ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
The Us ◽  
Phase Iii Study

TPS5600 Background: Despite surgery and SOC therapy (paclitaxel and carboplatin ± bevacizumab[bev]), 5-year survival rates remain low for patients (pts) with FIGO stage 3/4 OC. Niraparib (ZEJULA) is the first selective poly(ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi) approved in the US and Europe for maintenance treatment in pts with recurrent OC regardless of BRCAmut status. Preclinical data suggest synergy with PARPi + anti-PD-1 blockade. Niraparib + pembrolizumab has shown clinical efficacy in pts with platinum-resistant or secondary refractory OC regardless of biomarker status. Dostarlimab is an anti–PD-1 humanized monoclonal with clinical activity as monotherapy in early phase trials. The primary objective of the currently enrolling FIRST trial is to compare PFS (per RECIST v1.1) in pts treated with SOC + dostarlimab + niraparib to SOC. Methods: Eligible pts (up to 912) are FIGO stage 3 (with residual disease, CC0 high risk, or planned neoadjuvant therapy) or stage 4, non-mucinous epithelial OC and ECOG score < 2. After 1 cycle of SOC, pts are stratified by concurrent bev use, BRCAmut/HRR status, and disease burden then randomized as 1:1:2 to 1 of 3 arms (Table). An innovative feature of ENGOT-OV44/FIRST (NCT03602859; EUDRACT 2018-000413-20) is the pre-planned adaptive study design to adapt the control arm to the evolving SOCs in OC, allowing pts in the control arm to receive up to date SOC. These adaptations will occur when practice-changing data are released. Following publication of SOLO1 results, BRCAmut pts will only be randomized to arm 2 or 3 to ensure they receive niraparib. Further adaptations may be incorporated as new data become available, leading to stop randomization in arm 1 or 2 of pts based on their biomarker status. Clinical trial information: NCT03602859. [Table: see text]

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document