Pembrolizumab (pembro) vs placebo (pbo) in patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) previously treated with sorafenib: Updated data from the randomized, phase III KEYNOTE-240 study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 268-268
Author(s):  
Philippe Merle ◽  
Julien Edeline ◽  
Mohamed Bouattour ◽  
Ann-Lii Cheng ◽  
Stephen Lam Chan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Time ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
End Points ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Over Time

268 Background: KEYNOTE-240 (NCT02702401) examined the anti-PD-1 antibody pembro and demonstrated improvement in OS and PFS vs pbo in pts with aHCC previously treated with sorafenib. However, the study did not meet prespecified statistical significance criteria for OS and PFS. Median OS (final analysis) was 13.9 mo for pembro vs 10.6 mo for pbo (HR 0.781; 95% CI 0.611-0.998). At the first interim analysis when PFS and ORR were prespecified to be tested, median PFS was 3.0 mo for pembro vs 2.8 mo for pbo (HR 0.775; 95% CI 0.609-0.987) and ORR was 16.9% (CR, n = 3) for pembro and 2.2% (CR, n = 0) for pbo. AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of pembro. Longer-term data from KEYNOTE-240 after ~1.5 years of additional follow-up are reported. Methods: Adults with confirmed aHCC who experienced failure (progression or intolerance) to sorafenib therapy were randomized 2:1 to pembro 200 mg IV Q3W + best supportive care (BSC) or pbo + BSC for ≤35 cycles or until confirmed progression/unacceptable toxicity, pt withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision. Dual primary end points were OS and PFS, assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) per RECIST v1.1. Secondary end points included ORR, DOR, DCR, TTP (all assessed by BICR per RECIST v1.1), and safety. Results: Of 413 pts, 278 were randomized to pembro and 135 to pbo. As of July 13, 2020, median time from randomization to data cutoff was 39.6 mo (range 31.7-48.8) for pembro and 39.8 mo (31.7-47.8) for pbo. Median OS was 13.9 mo (95% CI 11.6-16.0) for pembro and 10.6 mo (8.3-13.5) for pbo (HR 0.771; 95% CI 0.617-0.964). Estimated OS rates at 24 and 36 mo for pembro and pbo were 28.8% and 20.4% and 17.7% and 11.7%, respectively. Median PFS was 3.3 mo (95% CI 2.8-4.1) for pembro and 2.8 mo (1.6-3.0) for pbo (HR 0.703; 95% CI 0.559-0.885). Estimated PFS rate at 24 mo was 11.8% for pembro and 4.8% for pbo. ORR was 18.3% (95% CI 14.0-23.4) for pembro and 4.4% (1.6-9.4) for pbo. Median time to response was 2.7 mo (95% CI 1.2-16.9) for pembro and 2.9 mo (1.1-6.9) for pbo. Median DOR was 13.9 mo (range 1.5+ to 41.9+) for pembro and 15.2 mo (2.8-21.9) for pbo; 45.1% of responders in pembro arm and 33.3% of responders in pbo arm had DOR ≥12 mo. DCR was 61.9% for pembro and 53.3% for pbo. Best overall responses were 10 CR, 41 PR, 121 SD, and 85 PD for pembro and 0 CR, 6 PR, 66 SD, and 54 PD for pbo. The median TTP was 4.0 mo (95% CI 2.8-5.3) for pembro and 2.8 mo (1.6-3.0) for pbo. No new or unexpected AEs occurred. The frequency of sponsor-assessed immune-mediated hepatitis events did not increase with additional follow-up. There continued to be no HBV or HCV viral flare events. Conclusions: In previously treated pts with aHCC, improvement in OS and PFS was maintained over time with pembro vs pbo, and the safety profile remained consistent over time. These data support the benefit:risk profile of pembro. Clinical trial information: NCT02702401.

Pembrolizumab (pembro) versus placebo (pbo) in patients (pts) with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (aHCC) previously treated with sorafenib: Updated data from the randomized, phase 3 KEYNOTE-240 study.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 4072-4072
Author(s):  
Richard S. Finn ◽  
Julien Edeline ◽  
Mohamed Bouattour ◽  
Ann-Lii Cheng ◽  
Stephen Lam Chan ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Median Time ◽  
Safety Profile ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Time Range ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
End Points ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
To Receive

4072 Background: KEYNOTE-240 (NCT02702401) examined the anti–PD-1 antibody pembro and showed improvement in OS and PFS vs pbo in pts with aHCC previously treated with sorafenib. The study did not meet prespecified statistical significance criteria for OS and PFS. Median OS (final analysis) was 13.9 mo for pembro vs 10.6 mo for pbo (HR 0.781; 95% CI 0.611-0.998). At the first interim analysis when testing for PFS and ORR was prespecified, median PFS was 3.0 mo for pembro vs 2.8 mo for pbo (HR 0.775; 95% CI 0.609-0.987) and ORR was 16.9% (CR, n = 3) for pembro and 2.2% (CR, n = 0) for pbo. AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of pembro. Longer term data from KEYNOTE-240 after ̃1.5 y of additional follow-up are reported. Methods: Adults with confirmed aHCC for whom sorafenib therapy failed (progression or intolerance) were randomly assigned 2:1 to receive pembro 200 mg IV Q3W + best supportive care (BSC) or pbo + BSC for ≤35 cycles or until confirmed progression/unacceptable toxicity, pt withdrawal of consent, or investigator decision to withdraw pt. Dual primary end points were OS and PFS, assessed by blinded independent central review (BICR) per RECIST v1.1. Secondary end points included ORR, DOR, DCR, TTP (all assessed by BICR per RECIST v1.1), and safety. Results: Of 413 pts, 278 were randomized to receive pembro; 135, to pbo.As of July 13, 2020, median time (range) from randomization to data cutoff was 39.6 mo (31.7-48.8) for pembro and 39.8 mo (31.7-47.8) for pbo. Median OS (95% CI) was 13.9 mo (11.6-16.0) for pembro and 10.6 mo (8.3-13.5) for pbo (HR 0.771; 95% CI 0.617-0.964). Estimated OS rates at 24 and 36 mo for pembro and pbo were 28.8% and 20.4% and 17.7% and 11.7%, respectively. Median PFS (95% CI) was 3.3 mo (2.8-4.1) for pembro and 2.8 mo (1.6-3.0) for pbo (HR 0.703; 95% CI 0.559-0.885). Estimated PFS rate at 24 mo was 11.8% for pembro and 4.8% for pbo. ORR (95% CI) was 18.3% (14.0-23.4) for pembro and 4.4% (1.6-9.4) for pbo. Median time to response (95% CI) was 2.7 mo (1.2-16.9) for pembro and 2.9 mo (1.1-6.9) for pbo. Median DOR (range) was 13.9 mo (1.5+ to 41.9+) for pembro and 15.2 mo (2.8-21.9) for pbo; 53.7% of responders in the pembro arm and 50.0% of responders in the pbo arm had DOR ≥12 mo. DCR was 61.9% for pembro and 53.3% for pbo. Best overall responses were 10 CR, 41 PR, 121 SD, and 85 PD for pembro and 0 CR, 6 PR, 66 SD, and 54 PD for pbo. Median TTP (95% CI) was 4.0 mo (2.8-5.3) for pembro and 2.8 mo (1.6-3.0) for pbo. No new or unexpected AEs occurred. The frequency of sponsor-assessed immune-mediated hepatitis events did not increase with additional follow-up. There continued to be no HBV or HCV viral flare events. Conclusions: In previously treated pts with aHCC, improvement in OS and PFS was maintained over time with pembro vs pbo, and the safety profile remained consistent. These data support the benefit:risk profile of pembro. Clinical trial information: NCT02702401.

Pembrolizumab As Second-Line Therapy in Patients With Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma in KEYNOTE-240: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Phase III Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (3) ◽  
pp. 193-202 ◽  
Author(s):  
Richard S. Finn ◽  
Baek-Yeol Ryoo ◽  
Philippe Merle ◽  
Masatoshi Kudo ◽  
Mohamed Bouattour ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Study Drug ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Advanced Hepatocellular Carcinoma ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Previously Treated

PURPOSE Pembrolizumab demonstrated antitumor activity and safety in the phase II KEYNOTE-224 trial in previously treated patients with advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC). KEYNOTE-240 evaluated the efficacy and safety of pembrolizumab in this population. PATIENTS AND METHODS This randomized, double-blind, phase III study was conducted at 119 medical centers in 27 countries. Eligible patients with advanced HCC, previously treated with sorafenib, were randomly assigned at a two-to-one ratio to receive pembrolizumab plus best supportive care (BSC) or placebo plus BSC. Primary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS; one-sided significance thresholds, P = .0174 [final analysis] and P = .002 [first interim analysis], respectively). Safety was assessed in all patients who received ≥ 1 dose of study drug. RESULTS Between May 31, 2016, and November 23, 2017, 413 patients were randomly assigned. As of January 2, 2019, median follow-up was 13.8 months for pembrolizumab and 10.6 months for placebo. Median OS was 13.9 months (95% CI, 11.6 to 16.0 months) for pembrolizumab versus 10.6 months (95% CI, 8.3 to 13.5 months) for placebo (hazard ratio [HR], 0.781; 95% CI, 0.611 to 0.998; P = .0238). Median PFS for pembrolizumab was 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 2.5 to 4.1 months) for placebo at the first interim analysis (HR, 0.775; 95% CI, 0.609 to 0.987; P = .0186) and 3.0 months (95% CI, 2.8 to 4.1 months) versus 2.8 months (95% CI, 1.6 to 3.0 months) at final analysis (HR, 0.718; 95% CI, 0.570 to 0.904; P = .0022). Grade 3 or higher adverse events occurred in 147 (52.7%) and 62 patients (46.3%) for pembrolizumab versus placebo; those that were treatment related occurred in 52 (18.6%) and 10 patients (7.5%), respectively. No hepatitis C or B flares were identified. CONCLUSION In this study, OS and PFS did not reach statistical significance per specified criteria. The results are consistent with those of KEYNOTE-224, supporting a favorable risk-to-benefit ratio for pembrolizumab in this population.

Final overall survival for the phase III KN177 study: Pembrolizumab versus chemotherapy in microsatellite instability-high/mismatch repair deficient (MSI-H/dMMR) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 3500-3500
Author(s):  
Thierry Andre ◽  
Kai-Keen Shiu ◽  
Tae Won Kim ◽  
Benny Vittrup Jensen ◽  
Lars Henrik Jensen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Failure Time ◽  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Sensitivity Analyses ◽  
Crossover Effect ◽  
End Points ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Crossover Rate

3500 Background: In the phase III, randomized open-label KEYNOTE-177 (NCT02563002) study 1L pembrolizumab (pembro) versus chemotherapy (chemo) provided superior progression-free survival (PFS) at second interim analysis (IA2) in patients (pts) with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. The study continued to final analysis of overall survival (OS), planned after 190 OS events or 12 months after IA2, whichever occurred first. We present results of the final analysis of OS, 12 months after IA2. Methods: A total of 307 pts with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC and ECOG PS 0 or 1 were randomized 1:1 to 1L pembro 200 mg Q3W for up to 2y or investigator’s choice of mFOLFOX6 or FOLFIRI Q2W ± bevacizumab or cetuximab. Treatment continued until PD, unacceptable toxicity, pt/investigator decision to withdraw, or completion of 35 cycles (pembro only). Pts receiving chemo could crossover to pembro for up to 35 cycles after confirmed PD. Primary end points were OS and PFS (RECIST v1.1, central review). Secondary end points included ORR, duration of response (DOR) (RECIST v1.1, central review), and safety. For OS significance, the p-value had to meet a prespecified α of 0.0246 (one-sided). Sensitivity analyses to adjust for crossover effect were performed. Data cut-off for final analysis was Feb 19, 2021. Results: Median (range) study follow-up was 44.5 mo (36.0-60.3) with pembro vs 44.4 mo (36.2-58.6) with chemo. 56 (36%) pts crossed over from chemo to pembro, with 37 more receiving anti-PD-1/PD-L1 therapies off study (60% effective crossover rate in the ITT). The HR for OS favored pembro vs chemo with a trend toward reduction in the risk of death (HR 0.74; 95% CI, 0.53-1.03; P=0.0359; median not reached [NR] vs 36.7 mo); this difference did not reach statistical significance. Sensitivity analysis by the rank-preserving structure failure time model and inverse probability of censoring weighting showed OS HRs of 0.66 (95% CI 0.42-1.04) and 0.77 (95% CI 0.44-1.38), respectively. Pembro vs chemo met the prespecified criteria for PFS superiority at IA2. At final analysis, median PFS was 16.5 mo vs 8.2 mo (HR 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45-0.79), but was not formally tested per analysis plan. Confirmed ORR was 45.1% (20 CR, 49 PR) vs 33.1% (6 CR, 45 PR). Median (range) DOR was NR (2.3+ to 53.5+) vs 10.6 mo (2.8 to 48.3+), respectively. Treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 79.7% vs 98.6% of pts; 21.6% vs 66.4%, respectively, had grade ≥3 TRAEs. Conclusions: As 1L therapy for pts with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC, pembro vs chemo provides statistically superior PFS with fewer TRAEs, and is associated with a trend toward reduced mortality that did not meet statistical significance likely due to the high crossover rate from chemo to anti-PD1/PD-L1 therapies. Together these data confirm pembro as a new standard-of-care in the 1L for pts with MSI-H/dMMR mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT02563002.

SWOG S1216: A phase III randomized trial comparing androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) plus TAK-700 with ADT plus bicalutamide in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) (NCT01809691).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5001-5001
Author(s):  
Neeraj Agarwal ◽  
Catherine Tangen ◽  
Maha H. A. Hussain ◽  
Shilpa Gupta ◽  
Melissa Plets ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Meaningful Improvement ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Grade 3

5001 Background: Tak is an oral selective nonsteroidal 17, 20-lyase inhibitor that blocks the synthesis of gonadal and adrenal androgens. We evaluated the clinical benefit of Tak with ADT in pts with newly diagnosed mHSPC. Methods: Pts with mHSPC with a Zubrod performance status (PS) of 0-2 and a PSA of ≥ 2 ng/ml were randomized 1:1 to ADT+Tak (300 mg twice daily) or ADT+Bic (50 mg daily). Stratification factors included PS (0-1 vs ≥2), extent of disease (minimal vs extensive), and receipt of ADT prior to registration (yes vs no). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints were progression free survival (PFS; based on PSA, imaging or clinical progression), PSA at 7 months (≤0.2 vs 0.2 < PSA; ≤-4 vs. > 4 ng/ml) and adverse event (AE) profile. With 2.75 yrs to accrue 1,186 eligible pts and 3 additional yrs of follow-up, we would have 90% power to determine a 33% improvement in OS from 54 to 72 mos (1-sided α = 0.025). A final analysis was pre-specified after 523 deaths using a 1-sided α = 0.022 to account for interim analyses. Results: Between 3/2013 and 7/2017, 1,313 pts were randomized and 1,279 were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis (32 pts were ineligible and 2 pts withdrew consent). Median age was 68 yrs and 10% of subjects were Black. Median PSA was 30 ng/mL (range 2-6710) and 49% of pts had extensive disease. After a median follow-up of 4.9 yrs, PFS and PSA response were significantly improved with Tak over Bic but no significant improvement in OS was observed (Table). More grade 3/4 AEs occurred in Tak vs. Bic arms (43% vs. 14%), and included hypertension (20% vs. 5%) and fatigue (5% vs. 2%). Five pts in Tak and 1 pt in the Bic arm had grade 5 AE. Conclusions: Despite clinically meaningful improvement in various outcome measures with Tak+ADT over Bic+ADT in this representative population of mHSPC, the improvement in OS did not meet the pre-specified criteria for statistical significance. The median OS of 70 mos in the control arm (standard ADT) was higher than that reported in contemporary phase 3 trials in this setting, and 16 mos higher than originally estimated. This trial sets a new landmark for survival estimates when pts with mHSPC have access to multiple approved subsequent life-prolonging therapies. Funding: NIH/NCI/NCTN grants U10CA180888, U10CA180819, U10CA180820; U10CA180821; and in part by Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Takeda Pharmaceutical Company LTD) Clinical trial information: NCT01809691. [Table: see text]

Overall survival (OS) results of phase III ARAMIS study of darolutamide (DARO) added to androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) for nonmetastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (nmCRPC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 5514-5514 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karim Fizazi ◽  
Neal D. Shore ◽  
Teuvo Tammela ◽  
Albertas Ulys ◽  
Egils Vjaters ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Safety Profile ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Castration Resistant Prostate Cancer ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Castration Resistant ◽  
Secondary Endpoints ◽  
Favorable Safety

5514 Background: DARO is a structurally distinct androgen receptor inhibitor with a favorable safety profile, approved for treating men with nmCRPC after demonstrating significantly prolonged metastasis-free survival, compared with placebo (PBO), in the phase III ARAMIS trial: median 40.4 vs 18.4 months, respectively (HR 0.41; 95% CI 0.34–0.50; P<0.0001). We report final analyses of OS and prospectively collected, patient-relevant secondary endpoints, and updated safety results. Methods: 1509 patients (pts) with nmCRPC were randomized 2:1 to DARO 600 mg twice daily (n=955) or PBO (n=554) while continuing ADT. Secondary endpoints included OS, and times to pain progression, first cytotoxic chemotherapy, and first symptomatic skeletal event. The OS analysis was planned to occur after approximately 240 deaths. Secondary endpoints were evaluated in a hierarchical order. Results: Final analysis was conducted after 254 deaths were observed (15.5% of DARO and 19.1% of PBO patients). After unblinding at the primary analysis, 170 pts crossed over from PBO to DARO. DARO showed a statistically significant OS benefit corresponding to a 31% reduction in the risk of death compared with placebo. All other secondary endpoints were significantly prolonged by DARO (Table), regardless of the effect of crossover and subsequent therapies on survival benefit. Incidences of treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) with ≥5% frequency were generally comparable between DARO and PBO, similar to the safety profile observed at the primary analysis. Incidences of AEs of interest (including falls, CNS effects, and hypertension) were not increased with DARO compared with PBO when adjusted for treatment exposure. AEs in the crossover group were consistent with those for the DARO treatment arm. Conclusions: DARO showed a statistically significant OS benefit for men with nmCRPC. In addition, DARO delayed onset of cancer-related symptoms and subsequent chemotherapy, compared with PBO. With extended follow-up, safety and tolerability were favorable and consistent with the primary ARAMIS analysis (Fizazi et al, N Engl J Med 2019;380:1235-46). Clinical trial information: NCT02200614 .[Table: see text]

scholarly journals Ibrutinib Plus Rituximab Versus Placebo Plus Rituximab for Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia: Final Analysis From the Randomized Phase III iNNOVATE Study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Buske ◽  
Alessandra Tedeschi ◽  
Judith Trotman ◽  
Ramón García-Sanz ◽  
David MacDonald ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Overall Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Patient Characteristics ◽  
Prior Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Waldenström’S Macroglobulinemia ◽  
Mutation Status ◽  
Waldenström's Macroglobulinemia ◽  
Over Time

PURPOSE The double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled phase III iNNOVATE study showed sustained efficacy of ibrutinib-rituximab in Waldenström's macroglobulinemia (WM). Here, we present the final analysis from iNNOVATE. METHODS Patients had confirmed symptomatic WM, either previously untreated or previously treated; patients with prior rituximab had at least a minor response to their last rituximab-based regimen. Patients were randomly assigned to once-daily ibrutinib 420 mg plus rituximab or placebo plus rituximab (n = 75 per arm). The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary end points included response rate, time to next treatment, hemoglobin improvement, overall survival, and safety. RESULTS With a median follow-up of 50 (range, 0.5-63) months, median (95% CI) PFS was not reached (57.7 months to not evaluable) with ibrutinib-rituximab versus 20.3 months (13.0 to 27.6) with placebo-rituximab (hazard ratio, 0.250; P < .0001). PFS benefit was regardless of prior treatment status, MYD88 and CXCR4 mutation status, or key patient characteristics. Higher response rates (partial response or better) were observed with ibrutinib-rituximab (76% v 31% with placebo-rituximab; P < .0001) and were sustained over time. Median time to next treatment was not reached with ibrutinib-rituximab versus 18 months with placebo-rituximab. More patients receiving ibrutinib-rituximab versus placebo-rituximab had sustained hemoglobin improvement (77% v 43%; P < .0001). Median overall survival was not reached in either arm. Ibrutinib-rituximab maintained a manageable safety profile; the prevalence of grade ≥ 3 adverse events of clinical interest generally decreased over time. CONCLUSION In the final analysis of iNNOVATE with a median follow-up of 50 months, ibrutinib-rituximab showed ongoing superiority across clinical outcomes in patients with WM regardless of MYD88 or CXCR4 mutation status, prior treatment, and key patient characteristics.

Final analysis results from TITAN: A phase III study of apalutamide (APA) versus placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with metastatic castration-sensitive prostate cancer (mCSPC) receiving androgen deprivation therapy (ADT).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 11-11
Author(s):  
Kim N. Chi ◽  
Simon Chowdhury ◽  
Anders Bjartell ◽  
Byung Ha Chung ◽  
Andrea Juliana Pereira de Santana Gomes ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Repeated Measures ◽  
Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Cox Proportional Hazards Model ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Mixed Effect ◽  
End Points ◽  
Risk Of Death

11 Background: TITAN evaluated APA or PBO added to ADT in pts with mCSPC. Pts with high- and low-volume disease, prior docetaxel, prior treatment for localized disease, and prior ADT (≤ 6 mos) were eligible. At the first interim analysis, with 22.7 mos median follow-up, APA significantly improved dual primary end points of overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] 0.67) and radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) (HR 0.48) compared with PBO (Chi et al. NEJM. 2019). At that time, OS analysis was first planned interim while rPFS was final. TITAN was unblinded, allowing pts without progression who were still receiving PBO to cross over to APA. Herein, we report the final analysis of efficacy and safety results from TITAN. Methods: 1052 mCSPC pts were randomized 1:1 to receive APA (240 mg QD) or PBO plus ADT. Time-to-event end points were analyzed by Kaplan-Meier method and Cox proportional hazards model. A preplanned sensitivity analysis for OS, accounting for crossover using inverse probability censoring weighted (IPCW) log-rank test, was conducted. No formal statistical retesting was performed; nominal p values were reported without multiplicity adjustment. Change from baseline in Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Prostate (FACT-P) total score was assessed using a mixed-effect repeated-measures model. Results: With 44 mos median follow-up, 405 OS events had occurred. After unblinding, 208 PBO pts (39.5%) crossed over to APA. Median treatment duration was 39.3 mos for the APA group, 20.2 mos for the entire PBO group, and 15.4 mos for the PBO→APA crossover group. OS was superior in the APA group compared with the PBO group despite crossover (Table). 48-mo survival rates were 65% (APA) vs 52% (PBO). Other end points also favored APA vs PBO (Table). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL), per total FACT-P, was maintained in the APA group through the study and was not different from the PBO group. Safety was consistent with previous reports. Conclusions: With close to 4 yrs of follow-up, the final analysis of TITAN demonstrated that in a broad population of pts with mCSPC, APA plus ADT provides an improvement in OS with a 35% reduction in risk of death, which increased to 48% reduction after adjusting for pts who crossed over from PBO to APA. In addition, there was consistent benefit with APA in other end points, including delaying castration resistance, and HRQoL continued to be maintained with an acceptable safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT02489318. [Table: see text]

Efficacy of oxaliplatin plus 5-fluorouracil/leucovorin (FOLFOX4) versus doxorubicin in advanced HCC: Updates on the EACH study.

2011 ◽  
Vol 29 (4_suppl) ◽  
pp. 160-160 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Thongprasert ◽  
S. Qin ◽  
H. Lim ◽  
V. Bhudhisawasdi ◽  
X. Yin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Statistical Significance ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Rank Test ◽  
Open Label ◽  
Advanced Hcc

160 Background: In Asia, where hepatitis B is very common, patients often present with locally advanced or metastatic hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), and their prognosis is poor. The EACH study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of FOLFOX4 vs. doxorubicin as palliative systemic chemotherapy in advanced HCC. Methods: The open-label, randomized, multicenter phase III study was conducted in 371 patients in China, Taiwan, Korea and Thailand, who had locally advanced or metastatic HCC and were ineligible for resection. Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive either FOLFOX4 (oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2 i.v. d1; LV 200 mg/m2 i.v. h0–h2 d1 and d2; 5FU 400 mg/m2 i.v. bolus h2, then 600 mg/m2 over 22 hours d1 and d2 q2w) or doxorubicin (50 mg/m2 i.v. q3w). The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS); secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), response rate (RR) by RECIST and safety. Data from final and follow-up analyses of the intent-to-treat (ITT) population and selected subgroup analyses are presented. Results: At the final analysis, median OS with FOLFOX4 (N = 184) was 6.40 months (95% CI: 5.30, 7.03) vs. 4.97 months (95% CI: 4.23, 6.03) with doxorubicin [N = 187; p = 0.0695 using a stratified log-rank test; statistical significance (p = 0.0425) was achieved at the post hoc follow-up analysis conducted 7 months later]. Median PFS with FOLFOX4 was 2.93 months (95% CI: 2.43, 3.53) vs. 1.77 months with doxorubicin (95% CI: 1.63, 2.30; p = 0.0002). The RR was 8.2% vs. 2.7% of patients with FOLFOX4 and doxorubicin, respectively (p = 0.0233), and the disease control rate (DCR) was 52.2% vs. 31.6% (p < 0.0001). In the Chinese sub-population, OS, PFS, RR and DCR were significantly improved with FOLFOX4 vs. doxorubicin at both the final and follow-up analyses. In the other subgroups analyzed, the OS and PFS benefits of FOLFOX4 vs. doxorubicin were generally consistent. Conclusions: In the ITT population, median OS was greater with FOLFOX4 than doxorubicin throughout the study and statistical significance was achieved after continued follow-up. FOLFOX4 can benefit patients with advanced HCC, as it significantly increases median OS, PFS, RR and DCR compared with doxorubicin. [Table: see text]

Final analysis of the PROMISE-GIM6 phase III trial assessing GnRH agonist use during chemotherapy as a strategy to preserve ovarian function in premenopausal patients with early breast cancer.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 516-516
Author(s):  
Matteo Lambertini ◽  
Luca Boni ◽  
Andrea Michelotti ◽  
Emanuela Magnolfi ◽  
Alessio Aligi Cogoni ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Hormone Receptor ◽  
Ovarian Function ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Post Treatment ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Hormone Receptor Positive ◽  
Premenopausal Patients

516 Background: Current guidelines recommend GnRH agonist (GnRHa) use during chemotherapy (CT) as a strategy to reduce the risk of premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) in premenopausal patients with early breast cancer (EBC). However, no long-term safety data are available raising some concerns on concurrent use of GnRHa during CT in patients with hormone receptor-positive disease. In addition, there is no evidence on the protective role of this strategy in patients with germline BRCA mutations ( mBRCA). Here, we report the final analysis of the PROMISE-GIM6 phase III randomized study, the largest trial addressing the role of GnRHa use during CT in premenopausal EBC patients (Del Mastro et al, JAMA 2011 & Lambertini et al, JAMA 2015). Methods: From October 2003 to January 2008, 281 premenopausal patients aged 18 to 45 years with stage I-III EBC candidates for (neo)adjuvant CT were randomized to receive CT alone or combined with the GnRHa triptorelin. Primary endpoint was incidence of CT-induced POI (defined as amenorrhea and post-menopausal FSH/estradiol levels 1 year following CT). This final analysis reports on post-treatment pregnancies, disease-free survival (DFS) and overall survival (OS). An exploratory descriptive analysis in mBRCA patients is also reported. (ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT00311636) Results: Of the 281 randomized patients (CT+GnRHa arm = 148; CT alone arm = 133), 80% had hormone receptor-positive disease. At the time of this final analysis, 38 (13.5%) patients were lost to follow-up. Median follow-up was 12.4 years (IQR: 11.3-13.2 years). In the CT+GnRHa and CT alone arms, respectively, 9 (10-year cumulative incidence of pregnancy 6.5%, 95% CI 3.5%-12.3%) and 4 (10-year cumulative incidence of pregnancy 3.2%, 95% CI 1.2%-8.3%) patients had a post-treatment pregnancy (HR 2.14, 95% CI 0.66-6.92). No differences in 10-year DFS (72.4% in CT+GnRHa arm vs. 71.2% in CT alone arm: HR 1.16, 95% CI 0.76-1.77) nor in 10-year OS (82.0% in CT+GnRHa arm vs. 85.9% in CT alone arm: HR 1.17, 95% CI 0.67-2.03) were observed. There was no interaction between treatment effect and hormone receptor status. In patients with hormone receptor-positive disease, HR was 1.02 (95% CI 0.63-1.63) for DFS and 1.12 (95% CI 0.59-2.11) for OS. Out of 43 patients tested for BRCA, overall incidence of POI, irrespective of treatment arm, was 20% in mBRCA patients (n = 10) and 12% in patients without mBRCA (n = 33). In mBRCA patients, incidence of POI was 0% and 33% in the CT+GnRHa and CT alone arms, respectively. One post-treatment pregnancy was described in a patient with mBRCA1 in the CT alone arm. Conclusions: The final analysis of the PROMISE-GIM6 trial at a median follow-up of 12.4 years provides reassuring evidence on the safety of GnRHa use during CT as a strategy to preserve ovarian function in premenopausal patients with hormone receptor-positive EBC. Clinical trial information: NCT00311636.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document