Clinical outcomes in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with combination of nivolumab and cabozantinib (nivo-cabo) in the salvage setting.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e16570-e16570
Author(s):  
Deepak Ravindranathan ◽  
Yuan Liu ◽  
Dylan J. Martini ◽  
Bassel Nazha ◽  
Jacqueline T Brown ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Dose Reduction ◽  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Grade Ii ◽  
Line Setting

e16570 Background: The CheckMate 9ER trial showed that the combination of nivolumab and cabozantinib (nivo-cabo) in first line setting for treatment of mRCC was superior to sunitinib in terms of objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) and led to its FDA approval. We report outcomes of cohort of patients with mRCC treated with nivo-cabo in the salvage setting. Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 17 patients with mRCC treated at Winship Cancer Institute who progressed through at least one line of prior therapy. These patients were then treated with either sequences: [1] cabozantinib and then add nivolumab upon progression (n = 8) and [2] nivolumab/ipilimumab or nivolumab and then add cabozantinib upon progression (n = 9) with two with nivolumab and ipilimumab. Median PFS and OS rates, and clinical benefit (defined as complete response or partial response, or stable disease) were described. Results: Thirteen patients had clear cell histology and four patients had non-clear cell histology. For sequence [1], the mPFS for cabozantinib alone was 9.9 months and combination of nivolumab added to cabozantinib was 8.9 months. For sequence [2], the mPFS for nivolumab with or without ipilimumab was 5.9 months and combination of cabozantinib added to nivolumab was 10.4 months. The 12-month OS rate was 88% for sequence [1] and 89% for sequence [2]. The 24-month, OS rate was 50% for sequence [1] and 89% for sequence [2]. 5/8 (63%) patients in sequence [1] and 7/9 (78%) patients in sequence [2] had clinical benefit. 3/8 (37.5%) patients in sequence [1] and 2/9 (22%) patients in sequence [2] experienced immune-related adverse effects such as hypothyroidism (grade II for two patients), pneumonitis (grade II), hepatic transaminase elevations (grade II), and pancreatitis (grade III). No patients in sequence [1] needed dose reduction in cabozantinib once nivolumab was added. 3/9 (33%) patients had dose reduction in cabozantinib in sequence [2] due to diarrhea. Conclusions: Nivo-cabo demonstrates activity in the salvage setting but there is still need to understand the optimal sequencing of both agents in the treatment of mRCC. Outcomes from this combination treatment are to be further validated from ongoing phase III trial, PDIGREE (NCT03793166).

Clinical benefit (CB) of high-dose interleukin-2 (HD IL-2) in clear cell (cc) metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 461-461
Author(s):  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Kinjal Parikh ◽  
Srinivas Kiran Tantravahi ◽  
Hilda Crispin ◽  
Joan Van Atta ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Interleukin 2 ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Standard Of Care ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
High Dose ◽  
Select Group ◽  
Best Response

461 Background: HD IL-2, an immunotherapy, is a standard of care for a select group of patients (pts) with mRCC. Generally objective response (OR) rates, i.e. complete response (CR) + partial response (PR), of 16-20% are discussed with pts, but not disease stabilization (SD). Recent data suggest that cancer immunotherapy may improve survival without inducing OR. Thus, treatment with HD IL-2 may provide survival benefit to an additional group of pts not experiencing OR, but only SD as the best response. Here we report CB ( OR+SD), and specifically report outcomes of cc mRCC pts experiencing SD as the best response, on treatment with HD IL-2. Methods: All sequential cc mRCC pts treated with HD IL-2 at the University of Utah Huntsman Cancer Institute from 2000-2012 were included. Pts were evaluated for best response, progression-free survival (PFS), time to next treatment (TNT) and overall survival (OS). Two practitioners independently reviewed HD IL-2 response with discrepancies adjudicated by a third reviewer. Results: 85 pts, 79% male, were identified with a median age of 56 (range 32-76) years. Pts belonged to the following MSKCC risk categories: 11 (13%) good, 70 (82%) intermediate, and 4 (5%) poor risk. A CR was identified in 9 (11%), PR in 5 (6%), SD in 26 (31%), progressive disease (PD) in 38 (45%), and unknown/not evaluable (NE) in 7 (8%) pts; yielding a clinical benefit in 40 (47%) pts. The median PFS, TNT, and OS in these individual groups of pts are compared in the table. Conclusions: A clinical benefit of HD IL-2 was achieved in nearly half of all clear cell mRCC pts. OS was not significantly different in OR and SD groups. Even though OR favorably determine outcomes, SD is also an important response criterion, and may be discussed during counseling pts for treatment with HD IL-2. [Table: see text]

Side-effect analysis of sunitinib (S) in patients treated with metastatic renal cell cancer (mRCC): Single center experience in the National Institute of Oncology, Hungary—Influence of dose reduction/modification and application schedule on the efficacy of S.

2013 ◽  
Vol 31 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. e15530-e15530
Author(s):  
Krisztian Nagyivanyi ◽  
Krisztina Biro ◽  
Istvan Bodrogi ◽  
Fruzsina Eva Gyergyay ◽  
Zsofia Kuronya ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Side Effects ◽  
Dose Reduction ◽  
Cell Cancer ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
First Line ◽  
Application Form ◽  
Single Center Experience ◽  
Line Setting

e15530 Background: S, an active and relatively well tolerated treatment for mRCC, based on the result of a global phase III study. Methods: Retrospectively, 383 patient’s data with clear cell mRCC were collected, who were treated with S in our department between 01/nov/2005 and 31/dec/2012. S was used in 1st or 2 nd line setting. The first few dozen subjects were involved in a clinal trial after progression on first line INF therapy. In Hungary S became reimbursed by the public health insurence from 01/jan/2008 in second line, and from 01/feb/2010 in first line. All patients had definitely favorable or intermediate risk based on MSKCC risk group criteria. The starting dose of S was mostly 50 mg (schedule 4 weeks on followed by 2 weeks off). Results: We investigated the prevalence of necessity of dose reduction/modification or pretence to follow an out of ordinary application form. We registered the frequency and modality of the different types of side effects, we also studied the outcome of patients. Incidence of grade 3+4 side effects was nearly 60%. The most common side effects were fatigue (63%), mucositis/stomatitis (40,2%), hand-foot syndome (16,1%), diarrhea (34%), hypertension (34%), nausea (2%), anaemia (8,6%), leukopenia (4,6%), thrombopenia (20%) and hypothyreosis (20%). Objective response rate based on RECIST and progression-free survival (PFS) were also recorded. The efficacy of treatment was nearly similar to the global clinical trial results. CR was rare (4,2%), most of our patients had PR (31,1%) or SD (51,2%) as best response. In first line setting the results were even better (CR 10,5%, PR 44% and SD 57,5). Conclusions: S is effective and safe agent to treat patients with mRCC. Due to side effects, dose reduction / modification is often needed but rarely requires treatment discontinuation. The early detection and right management of side effects is crucial to maintain the patients on the treatment. Unfortunately the deviation from the standard care may bias the efficacy.

Nivolumab (NIVO) + low-dose ipilimumab (IPI) as first-line (1L) therapy in microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair-deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC): Two-year clinical update.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4040-4040 ◽  
Author(s):  
Heinz-Josef Lenz ◽  
Sara Lonardi ◽  
Vittorina Zagonel ◽  
Eric Van Cutsem ◽  
M. Luisa Limon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Therapy Option ◽  
Grade 3

4040 Background: In the phase 2 CheckMate 142 trial, NIVO + low-dose IPI had robust, durable clinical benefit and was well tolerated as 1L therapy for MSI-H/dMMR mCRC (median follow-up 13.8 months [mo; range, 9–19]; Lenz et al. Ann Oncol 2018;29:LBA18). Longer follow-up is presented here. Methods: Patients (pts) with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC and no prior treatment for metastatic disease received NIVO 3 mg/kg Q2W + low-dose IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W until disease progression or discontinuation. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed (INV) objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Results: In 45 pts with median follow-up of 29.0 mo, ORR (95% CI) increased to 69% (53–82) (Table) from 60% (44.3–74.3); complete response (CR) rate increased to 13% from 7%. The concordance rate of INV and blinded independent central review was 89%. Median duration of response (DOR) was not reached (Table). Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were not reached, and 24-mo rates were 74% and 79%, respectively (Table). Nineteen pts discontinued study treatment without subsequent therapy. An analysis of tumor response post discontinuation will be presented. Ten (22%) pts had grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs); 3 (7%) had grade 3–4 TRAEs leading to discontinuation. Conclusions: NIVO + low-dose IPI continued to show robust, durable clinical benefit with a deepening of response, and was well tolerated with no new safety signals identified with longer follow-up. NIVO + low-dose IPI may represent a new 1L therapy option for pts with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Clinical trial information: NTC02060188 . [Table: see text]

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

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

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

A phase III, randomized, controlled study to compare tivozanib with sorafenib in patients (pts) with advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC).

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 310-310 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. J. Motzer ◽  
P. Bhargava ◽  
B. Esteves ◽  
M. Al-Adhami ◽  
W. Slichenmyer ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Kinase Inhibitor ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Vegf Receptor ◽  
Randomized Controlled ◽  
Long Term Treatment ◽  
Clear Cell Rcc

310 Background: Drugs that block vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) pathway signaling, such as the tyrosine kinase inhibitor sorafenib, have become standard treatment for pts with RCC. Tivozanib (AV-951) is a potent, selective small-molecule pan-VEGF receptor (VEGFR) inhibitor, with activity against the VEGFR-1, -2, and -3 kinases at subnanomolar concentrations. Preliminary results from a phase II randomized discontinuation trial of tivozanib (1.5 mg/d; 3 wks on, 1 wk off) in pts with RCC demonstrated an objective response rate (ORR) of 27% and a median progression-free survival (PFS) of 11.8 mo by independent radiology review, with a favorable safety profile. Patients with clear cell RCC who had undergone nephrectomy had an ORR of 32% and median PFS of 14.8 mo (Bhargava, et al. ASCO 2010. Abstract 4599). Based on this antitumor activity a phase III, randomized, controlled, global, multicenter trial is currently in progress to compare tivozanib with sorafenib in pts with advanced RCC. Methods: Approximately 500 adults with clear cell RCC who have undergone nephrectomy and received ≤ 1 prior systemic treatment (no prior VEGF-targeted therapy) were randomized 1:1 to treatment with tivozanib or sorafenib. Pts are receiving 1.5 mg/d tivozanib orally in 4-week cycles (3 wks on, 1 wk off) or continuous 400 mg sorafenib orally twice daily. The primary endpoint will be PFS by independent radiology review; secondary endpoints will include overall survival, ORR, and duration of response. Safety is being monitored through adverse event reporting and laboratory analyses; toxicities are graded using the NCI Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events, version 3.0. The effect of therapy on health-related quality of life will be compared between arms using kidney cancer-specific (FKSI-DRS), oncology (FACT-G), and general (EQ-5D) assessments. Pharmacokinetics and biomarker analyses will be performed. Results: Pending. Conclusions: Enrollment completed in August 2010. An ongoing extension study will allow access to tivozanib for pts who demonstrate progressive disease on sorafenib, as well as long-term treatment with tivozanib or sorafenib for pts who demonstrate clinical benefit. [Table: see text]

ELOQUENT-1: A phase III, randomized, open-label trial of lenalidomide/dexamethasone with or without elotuzumab in subjects with previously untreated multiple myeloma (CA204-006).

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. TPS8113-TPS8113 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meletios A. Dimopoulos ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Paul Gerard Guy Richardson ◽  
Robert Z. Orlowski ◽  
Jesùs F. San-Miguel ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Response Duration ◽  
Surface Glycoprotein ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Cell Transplant ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Cell Surface Glycoprotein ◽  
Prior Therapy

TPS8113 Background: Elotuzumab (Elo) is a humanized monoclonal IgG1 antibody targeting the cell surface glycoprotein CS1, which is highly expressed on >95% of MM cells. In a MM xenograft mouse model, the combination of Elo + lenalidomide (Len) significantly reduced tumor volume in a synergistic manner compared with either agent alone. In a phase 2 study (N=73) of Elo (10 or 20 mg/kg) in combination with Len and low-dose-dexamethasone (Dex) in pts with RR MM, the 10 mg/kg dose group (n=36) demonstrated objective response rates (ORR) of 92% in all pts, and 100% in pts who had received only 1 prior therapy (n=16). The higher response rate in pts with fewer prior lines of therapy provides a rationale for investigating this combination earlier in the disease course. This randomized, open-label, phase 3 trial will determine if the addition of Elo to Len/Dex improves progression-free survival (PFS) in pts with newly diagnosed, untreated MM. Methods: Pts (N=750) with newly diagnosed symptomatic MM ineligible for stem cell transplant will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive 28-day cycles of Len 25 mg PO (days1-21) and Dex 40 mg PO (days 1, 8, 15 and 22) with or without Elo. Elo dose and schedule is 10 mg/kg IV on days 1, 8, 15, 22 in the first 2 cycles and on days 1 and 15 of cycles 3-18 followed by 20 mg/kg on day 1 of cycle 19 onward. Dex 8 mg IV + 28 mg PO is used during the weeks with Elo. Treatment will continue until disease progression, death, or withdrawal of consent. Pts will be followed up for response every 4 weeks until progressive disease and for survival every 16 weeks. The primary endpoint is PFS (90% power for a hazard ratio [experimental to control arm] of 0.74) and the secondary endpoints are ORR and overall survival. Exploratory endpoints are safety, time to response, duration of response, time to subsequent therapy, health-related quality of life, and pharmacokinetics and immunogenicity of Elo. Potential biomarkers will also be assessed. As of January 1, 2012, 13 pts were enrolled and 9 pts were treated. NCT01335399.

A randomized, double-blind, multi-center phase III study evaluating paclitaxel with and without RAD001 in patients with gastric or esophagogastric junction carcinoma who have progressed after therapy with a fluoropyrimidine/platinum-containing regimen (RADPAC).

2017 ◽  
Vol 35 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4027-4027 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sylvie Lorenzen ◽  
Jorge Riera Knorrenschild ◽  
Claudia Pauligk ◽  
Thorsten Oliver Goetze ◽  
Susanna Hegewisch-Becker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gastric Carcinoma ◽  
Esophagogastric Junction ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Phase Iii Study ◽  
Line Setting

4027 Background: There is a need for effective treatments in the second- or further line setting in advanced gastric cancer, especially for new agents. In the current trial we evaluated paclitaxel with RAD001 (everolimus) in patients with gastric carcinoma who have progressed after therapy with a fluoropyrimidine/platinum-containing regimen. Methods: This is a randomized, double-blind, multi-center phase III study. Patients with gastric carcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the esophagogastric junction (EGJ) who have progressed after treatment with a fluoropyrimidine/platinum-containing regimen were randomly assigned to receive Paclitaxel (80 mg/m2) on day 1, 8 and 15 plus placebo (arm A) or RAD001 (10mg daily, arm B) d1-d28, repeated every 28 days as 2nd, 3rd or 4th line therapy. Primary end point was overall survival (OS), secondary endpoints were best overall response, disease control rate, progression free survival (PFS) and toxicity. Results: 300 patients (median age: 62 years; median lines prior therapy: 2; 47.7% of patients had prior taxane therapy) were randomly assigned (Arm A, 150, Arm B, 150). In the intention to treat population, there was no significant difference in median PFS (placebo, 2.07 vs. RAD001, 2.2 months, HR 0.88, p = 0.3) or median OS (placebo, 5.0 vs. RAD001, 6.1 months, HR 0.93, p = 0.54). For patients with prior taxane use, RAD001 improved PFS (placebo 1.8 vs. RAD001, 2.7 months, HR 0.69, p = 0.03) and OS (placebo 3.9 vs. RAD001, 5.8 months, HR 0.73, p = 0.07). Combination of paclitaxel and RAD001 was tolerable, but the RAD001 arm was associated with significantly more grade 3-5 mucositis (13.3% vs. 0.7%; p < 0.001). Conclusions: The addition of RAD001 to paclitaxel/RAD001 did not improve outcomes in pretreated metastatic gastric/EGJ cancer. Of note, activity was seen in the taxane pretreated group. Additional biomarker studies are planned to look for subgroups that may have a benefit. Clinical trial information: 2009-018092-14.

Analysis of toxicity and clinical outcomes (CO) in full versus reduced dose cabozantinib (cabo) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) patients (pts).

2019 ◽  
Vol 37 (7_suppl) ◽  
pp. 671-671
Author(s):  
Dylan J Martini ◽  
Julie M. Shabto ◽  
Yuan Liu ◽  
Bradley Curtis Carthon ◽  
Alexandra Speak ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiographic Progression ◽  
Clear Cell ◽  
Univariate Analysis ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Complete Response ◽  
Poor Prognostic Factor ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Reduced Dose ◽  
Kaplan Meier

671 Background: The full dose of cabo is 60 mg, but some pts are treated with a reduced dose with the clinical anticipation of adverse events (AEs). We compared AEs and CO in mRCC pts treated with full versus reduced dose cabo. Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 65 mRCC pts treated with cabo at Winship Cancer Institute from 2016-2018. CO were measured by overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response (OR). OS and PFS were measured from first dose of cabo to date of death and clinical or radiographic progression, respectively. OR was defined as partial response (PR) or complete response (CR) per RECISTv1.1. AEs were collected from clinic notes. Univariate analysis (UVA) of association between AEs and CO was performed using logistic regression model. Results: Most pts were males (68%) and the median age was 63 years. Most (79%) had clear cell RCC (ccRCC) and the majority were IMDC intermediate (59%) or poor (39%) risk. Most pts (68%) received 60 mg and 48% of these pts underwent a dose reduction for AEs. Nearly all pts (95%) who started on a reduced dose experienced AEs, compared to 66% for pts treated with 60 mg. OR rate was similar for pts on 60 mg (18%) and pts on a reduced dose (19%). The median survival was comparable in pts treated with 60 mg and pts treated with a reduced dose (10.9 vs. 8.8 months, p=0.92 for OS and 5.6 vs. 5.1 months, p=0.23 for PFS) per Kaplan Meier estimation. AEs, particularly gastrointestinal (GI) AEs, were associated with significantly lower chance of OR (Table). Conclusions: CO may be comparable in mRCC pts treated with full versus reduced dose of cabo, but a reduced dose of cabo may not be associated with decreased AEs. GI side effects may be a poor prognostic factor in mRCC pts treated with cabo. Larger studies are warranted to validate these findings. [Table: see text]

A phase 2, open-label, multicenter study to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of KN046 in combination with chemotherapy in subjects with advanced non-small cell lung cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9060-9060
Author(s):  
Yunpeng Yang ◽  
Wenfeng Fang ◽  
Yan Huang ◽  
Xingya Li ◽  
Siyuan Huang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Efficacy Evaluation ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Pivotal Phase ◽  
Doublet Chemotherapy ◽  
Platinum Doublet

9060 Background: Dual blockade of PD-1 and CTLA-4 has shown improved overall survival (OS) in combination with a short course of chemotherapy. KN046 is a novel bispecific antibody that blocks both PD-L1 interaction with PD-1/CD80 and CTLA-4 interaction with CD80/CD86. We hypothesized that KN046 could be combined with a full course of chemotherapy and build more durable clinical benefit. Methods: This study enrolled systemic treatment naive, stage IV NSCLC patients (pts). Eligible pts received KN046 plus platinum doublet chemotherapy until progressive disease, unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of informed consent or death. Efficacy evaluation was performed by investigators per RECIST 1.1. Safety and tolerability were assessed per NCI-CTCAE v5.0. Results: As of the Jan. 19, 2021, 87 pts [Cohort 1 (n = 51), Cohort 2 (n = 36)] have been enrolled with 83 pts having tumor PD-L1 expression data (PD-L1 ≥1%: 55.4%; PD-L1 < 1%: 44.6%). 33.3% pts remained on the study treatment and 66.7% pts discontinued treatment due to disease progression (27.6%), TEAE (13.8%), death (9.2%) and other reasons (16%). The median treatment duration of KN046 was 21 weeks (range: 1.6̃68.7 weeks). Treatment related TEAE (TRAE) occurred in 92% pts. 25.3% pts experienced Grade≥3 TRAE [diarrhoea (5.7%), alanine aminotransferase increased (4.6%), infusion related reaction (3.4%), rash (3.4%), aspartate aminotransferase increased, dermatitis allergic and immune-mediated pneumonitis (2.3%, respectively), anaphylactoid reaction, autoimmune hepatitis, back pain, bilirubin conjugated increased, hypertension, neutrophil count decreased, platelet count decreased, pneumonitis, rash maculo-papular, septic shock and white blood cell count decreased (1.1%, respectively). In 81 efficacy evaluable pts, the overall objective response rate (ORR) was 50.6% (95% CI: 39.3%,61.9%) and disease control rate (DCR) was 87.7% (95% CI: 78.5%-93.9%). The ORR and DCR in pts with non-squamous NSCLC (n = 48) were 45.8% (95% CI: 31.4%, 60.8%) and 89.6% (95% CI: 77.3%, 96.5%). The ORR and DCR in pts with squamous NSCLC (n = 33) were 57.6% (95% CI: 39.2%, 74.5%) and 84.8% (95% CI: 68.1%, 94.9). Progression free survival (PFS) and OS events have occurred in 53% and 18% patients. Median PFS was 5.9 (95%CI: 5.3, 8.7) months. Median OS was not reached. OS rate at 12 and 15 months were both 74.9%. Similar OS curves have been observed in PD-L1 ≥1% and PD-L1 < 1% pts. In PD-L1 ≥1% patients, median PFS was 6.7 months (10.8 months for PD-L1 ≥1% squamous NSCLC pts). Conclusions: KN046 combined with platinum doublet chemotherapy is tolerated and has shown promising clinical benefit as IL treatment for stage IV NSCLC particularly in PD-L1≥1% tumors and squamous histology. Pivotal Phase III trial in advanced unresectable or metastatic squamous NSCLC is currently ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT04054531.

scholarly journals Efficacy and Safety of Trabectedin or Dacarbazine for Metastatic Liposarcoma or Leiomyosarcoma After Failure of Conventional Chemotherapy: Results of a Phase III Randomized Multicenter Clinical Trial

2016 ◽  
Vol 34 (8) ◽  
pp. 786-793 ◽  
Author(s):  
George D. Demetri ◽  
Margaret von Mehren ◽  
Robin L. Jones ◽  
Martee L. Hensley ◽  
Scott M. Schuetze ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Disease Control ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Hazard Ratio ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Prior Therapy ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
End Point ◽  
Patient Reported

Purpose This multicenter study, to our knowledge, is the first phase III trial to compare trabectedin versus dacarbazine in patients with advanced liposarcoma or leiomyosarcoma after prior therapy with an anthracycline and at least one additional systemic regimen. Patients and Methods Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive trabectedin or dacarbazine intravenously every 3 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival (OS), secondary end points were disease control—progression-free survival (PFS), time to progression, objective response rate, and duration of response—as well as safety and patient-reported symptom scoring. Results A total of 518 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to either trabectedin (n = 345) or dacarbazine (n = 173). In the final analysis of PFS, trabectedin administration resulted in a 45% reduction in the risk of disease progression or death compared with dacarbazine (median PFS for trabectedin v dacarbazine, 4.2 v 1.5 months; hazard ratio, 0.55; P < .001); benefits were observed across all preplanned subgroup analyses. The interim analysis of OS (64% censored) demonstrated a 13% reduction in risk of death in the trabectedin arm compared with dacarbazine (median OS for trabectedin v dacarbazine, 12.4 v 12.9 months; hazard ratio, 0.87; P = .37). The safety profiles were consistent with the well-characterized toxicities of both agents, and the most common grade 3 to 4 adverse effects were myelosuppression and transient elevation of transaminases in the trabectedin arm. Conclusion Trabectedin demonstrates superior disease control versus conventional dacarbazine in patients who have advanced liposarcoma and leiomyosarcoma after they experience failure of prior chemotherapy. Because disease control in advanced sarcomas is a clinically relevant end point, this study supports the activity of trabectedin for patients with these malignancies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document