Efficacy and safety of avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) in elderly patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Extended follow-up results from JAVELIN Renal 101.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 301-301
Author(s):  
Yoshihiko Tomita ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Hideaki Miyake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Age Groups ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Age Group ◽  
Grade 3

301 Background: In the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006), A + Ax demonstrated significantly longer progression-free survival (PFS) and a higher objective response rate (ORR) vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. The role of immune checkpoint + VEGFR inhibition in elderly patients remains unclear. Here we report the efficacy of A + Ax vs S by age group from the second interim analysis (IA) of overall survival (OS) and the safety of A + Ax by age group from the first IA. Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 wk + Ax 5 mg orally twice daily or S 50 mg orally once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). PFS and ORR per independent central review (RECIST 1.1), OS, and safety by age group (<65, ≥65 to <75, and ≥75 y) were assessed. Results: A total of 271/138/33 and 275/128/41 patients in each age group (<65, ≥65 to <75, and ≥75 y, respectively) were randomized to the A + Ax or S arm, respectively. The proportion of IMDC risk groups was generally well balanced between the A + Ax and S arm in each age group, although in the ≥75 y age group, the frequency of patients with intermediate risk was slightly higher in the A + Ax arm, and that of patients with favorable risk was slightly higher in the S arm. The percentages of patients with favorable/intermediate/poor risk in each age group were 19%/61%/19%, 28%/58%/13%, and 12%/76%/12% in the A + Ax arm vs 20%/63%/16%, 23%/60%/16%, and 24%/61%/15% in the S arm. At data cut-off (Jan 2019) for the second IA, median follow-up for OS and PFS was 19.3 vs 19.2 mo and 16.8 vs 15.2 mo for the A + Ax vs S arm, respectively. The table shows OS, PFS, and ORR by age group. In the A + Ax arm, the most common treatment-emergent adverse events (AEs) were diarrhea (62%/68%/42%), hypertension (49%/49%/55%), palmar-plantar erythrodysesthesia syndrome (37%/31%/15%), fatigue (37%/53%/30%), and nausea (34%/37%/21%) in each age group. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs and immune-related AEs were observed in 69%/74%/73% and 39%/40%/24% of patients in each age group, respectively. Conclusions: A + Ax demonstrated favorable efficacy across age groups, including patients aged ≥75 y. OS was still immature; follow-up for the final analysis is ongoing. The safety profile was generally consistent between age groups. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006 . [Table: see text]

Efficacy of avelumab plus axitinib (A + Ax) versus sunitinib (S) by number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC): Extended follow-up results from JAVELIN Renal 101.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 302-302
Author(s):  
Yoshihiko Tomita ◽  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Toni K. Choueiri ◽  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Hideaki Miyake ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Risk Groups ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
To Receive

302 Background: In the phase III JAVELIN Renal 101 trial (NCT02684006), A + Ax demonstrated progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR) benefit across IMDC risk groups (favorable, intermediate, and poor) vs S in patients with previously untreated aRCC. Here we report efficacy of A + Ax vs S by number of IMDC risk factors (0, 1, 2, 3, and 4-6) and target tumor sites (1, 2, 3, and ≥4) at baseline from the second interim analysis of overall survival (OS). Methods: Patients were randomized 1:1 to receive A 10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 wk + Ax 5 mg orally twice daily or S 50 mg orally once daily for 4 wk (6-wk cycle). PFS and ORR per independent central review (RECIST 1.1) and OS were assessed. Results: At data cut-off (Jan 2019), median (m) follow-up for OS and PFS was 19.3 vs 19.2 mo and 16.8 vs 15.2 mo for the A + Ax vs S arm, respectively. The table shows OS, PFS, and ORR by number of IMDC risk factors and target tumor sites at baseline. A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across subgroups. Conclusions: With extended follow-up, A + Ax generally demonstrated efficacy benefit vs S across the number of IMDC risk factors and tumor sites at baseline in aRCC. OS was still immature; follow-up for the final analysis is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT02684006 . [Table: see text]

Efficacy of Melphalan and Prednisone Plus Thalidomide in Patients Older Than 75 Years With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: IFM 01/01 Trial

2009 ◽  
Vol 27 (22) ◽  
pp. 3664-3670 ◽  
Author(s):  
Cyrille Hulin ◽  
Thierry Facon ◽  
Philippe Rodon ◽  
Brigitte Pegourie ◽  
Lotfi Benboubker ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Multiple Myeloma ◽  
Overall Survival ◽  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Standards Of Care ◽  
Newly Diagnosed ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
To Receive

Purpose Until recently, melphalan and prednisone were the standards of care in elderly patients with multiple myeloma. The addition of thalidomide to this combination demonstrated a survival benefit for patients age 65 to 75 years. This randomized, placebo-controlled, phase III trial investigated the efficacy of melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide in patients older than 75 years with newly diagnosed myeloma. Patients and Methods Between April 2002 and December 2006, 232 previously untreated patients with myeloma, age 75 years or older, were enrolled and 229 were randomly assigned to treatment. All patients received melphalan (0.2 mg/kg/d) plus prednisone (2 mg/kg/d) for 12 courses (day 1 to 4) every 6 weeks. Patients were randomly assigned to receive 100 mg/d of oral thalidomide (n = 113) or placebo (n = 116), continuously for 72 weeks. The primary end point was overall survival. Results After a median follow-up of 47.5 months, overall survival was significantly longer in patients who received melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide compared with those who received melphalan and prednisone plus placebo (median, 44.0 v 29.1 months; P = .028). Progression-free survival was significantly prolonged in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group (median, 24.1 v 18.5 months; P = .001). Two adverse events were significantly increased in the melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide group: grade 2 to 4 peripheral neuropathy (20% v 5% in the melphalan and prednisone plus placebo group; P < .001) and grade 3 to 4 neutropenia (23% v 9%; P = .003). Conclusion This trial confirms the superiority of the combination melphalan and prednisone plus thalidomide over melphalan and prednisone alone for prolonging survival in very elderly patients with newly diagnosed myeloma. Toxicity was acceptable.

Safety of everolimus for women over age 65 with advanced breast cancer (BC): 12.5-month follow-up of BOLERO-2.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (27_suppl) ◽  
pp. 104-104 ◽  
Author(s):  
Hope S. Rugo ◽  
Howard A. Burris ◽  
Michael Gnant ◽  
José Baselga ◽  
Martine J. Piccart-Gebhart ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Mammalian Target Of Rapamycin ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Tolerability Profile ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Grade 3

104 Background: Postmenopausal women with estrogen-receptor–positive (ER+) BC who relapse/progress on a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) are usually treated with the steroidal AI exemestane (EXE), but there is no currently approved treatment for this indication. The BOLERO-2 trial showed that adding everolimus (EVE), an oral inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), to EXE significantly improved clinical benefit beyond that of EXE alone (Hortobagyi et al, SABCS 2011, Abstract S3-7). As many women with advanced BC are elderly, the tolerability profile of EVE + EXE in this population is of interest. Methods: BOLERO-2 is a phase III, randomized trial comparing EVE (10 mg once daily) vs placebo (PBO), both plus EXE (25 mg once daily), in postmenopausal women with advanced ER+ BC progressing or recurring after NSAIs. Safety data with a focus on elderly patients are reported at 12.5 months’ median follow-up. Results: Baseline disease characteristics, age, and prior cancer therapy were well balanced between treatment arms (N = 724). At 12.5 months’ median follow-up, the addition of EVE to EXE significantly improved progression-free survival in patients <65 (HR, 0.37; p < .05) or ≥65 years of age (HR, 0.56; p < .05). Adverse events (AEs) of special interest (all grades) occurring more frequently with EVE vs PBO (overall study population) included stomatitis (66.6% vs 11.3%), infection (50.4% vs 25.2%), rash (44.0% vs 8.4%), pneumonitis (18.7% vs 0.4%), and hyperglycemia (15.4% vs 2.5%). Elderly EVE-treated patients (≥65 years) had similar or marginally lower incidence of stomatitis (52.1%), rash (32.3%), pneumonitis (14.6%), and hyperglycemia (12.5%) compared with the overall population. Grade 3-4 AEs in patients ≥70 years of age (n = 161) reported only among patients receiving EVE (n = 118) included fatigue (10.2%), anemia (10.2%), hyperglycemia (8.5%), stomatitis (7.6%), dyspnea (6.8%), pneumonitis (5.1%), neutropenia (3.4%), and hypertension (3.4%). Conclusions: Adding EVE to EXE was well tolerated in the overall population and in elderly patients with advanced BC; grade 3-4 AEs were uncommon and manageable. Overall, AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of EVE.

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]

The NIBIT-M1 trial: Activity of ipilimumab plus fotemustine in patients with melanoma and brain metastases.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 8529-8529 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michele Maio ◽  
Alessandro Testori ◽  
Paolo Antonio Ascierto ◽  
Ruggero Ridolfi ◽  
Mario Santinami ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brain Metastases ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Whole Brain Radiotherapy ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Primary Objective ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Free Survival ◽  
Brain Radiotherapy ◽  
Grade 3

8529 Background: Patients (pts) with metastatic melanoma (MM) often develop treatment-resistant brain metastases (mets). Treatment includes fotemustine (FTM), which crosses the blood-brain barrier. Ipilimumab (ipi) has shown activity in pts with MM and asymptomatic brain mets (Heller et al. ASCO 2011; abs 8581). In the phase II NIBIT-M1 trial, MM pts with asymptomatic brain mets were eligible for treatment with ipi plus FTM. Here, data from this pt subset are reported. Methods: Eligible pts received induction therapy with ipi 10 mg/kg every 3 wks (Q3W) x4 and FTM 100 mg/m2 weekly for 3 wks, followed by ipi Q12W from Week (W) 24 and FTM Q3W from W9. The primary objective was the immune-related (ir) disease control rate (irDCR: complete/partial response [CR/PR] or stable disease [SD] using the ir response criteria). Secondary objectives included ir objective response rate (ORR) and progression-free survival (PFS); overall survival (OS), and safety. Tumor assessments were performed Q8W from W12 to W36 and Q12W thereafter. Results: Among 86 enrolled pts, 20 had brain mets. Of these, 7 had prior whole brain radiotherapy (n=4) or radiosurgery (n=3). As of December 2011, the irDCR was 50% (10/20; 95% CI, 27.2–72.8%) with an irORR of 40% (95% CI, 19.1–63.9%: 2 CRs and 6 PRs). Pts with irDC also had stability/reduction (n=5) or disappearance (n=5) of brain mets. Among pts with progressive disease, all but one had progression in the brain. With median follow-up of 8.3 months (range: 0.4–16.9), median irPFS was 4.6 months (95% CI, 0.7–12.3). The 1-year OS rate was 52.9% (95% CI, 26.6–79.2); median OS was not reached. Induction with ipi and FTM was completed by 55% and 85% pts, respectively. Grade 3/4 drug-related adverse events (AEs) occurred in 60% pts; most commonly myelotoxicity (50%), increased ALT/AST (5%) and gastrointestinal (5%). AEs were generally manageable and reversible per protocol guidance. CNS AEs of any grade (i.e., haemorrhage, headache and seizure) occurred in 25% pts (grade 3/4 in 2 pts) and were attributed to disease progression. Conclusions: The combination of ipi plus FTM is active and safe in pts with MM and brain mets, regardless of prior treatment, and will be further explored in the phase III NIBIT-M2 trial.

Safety of everolimus for women over 65 years of age with advanced breast cancer (BC): 12.5-mo follow-up of BOLERO-2.

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 551-551 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathleen I. Pritchard ◽  
Howard A. Burris ◽  
Hope S. Rugo ◽  
Michael Gnant ◽  
José Baselga ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Elderly Patients ◽  
Postmenopausal Women ◽  
Mammalian Target Of Rapamycin ◽  
Safety Data ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Tolerability Profile ◽  
Once Daily ◽  
Grade 3

551 Background: Postmenopausal women with estrogen-receptor–positive (ER+) BC who relapse/progress on a nonsteroidal aromatase inhibitor (NSAI) are usually treated with the steroidal AI exemestane (EXE); but there is no currently approved treatment for this indication. The BOLERO-2 trial showed that adding everolimus (EVE), an oral inhibitor of mammalian target of rapamycin (mTOR), to EXE significantly improved clinical benefit beyond that of EXE alone (Hortobagyi et al, SABCS 2011, Abstract S3-7). As many women with advanced BC are elderly, the tolerability profile of EVE + EXE in this population is of interest. Methods: BOLERO-2 is a phase III, randomized, trial comparing EVE (10 mg once daily) vs placebo (PBO), both plus EXE (25 mg once daily) in postmenopausal women with advanced ER+ BC progressing or recurring after NSAIs. Safety data with a focus on elderly patients are reported at 12.5 mo median follow-up. Results: Baseline disease characteristics, age, and prior cancer therapy were well balanced between treatment arms (N = 724). At 12.5 months’ median follow-up, the addition of EVE to EXE significantly improved progression-free survival in patients <65 (HR = 0.37; P < .05) or ≥65 years of age (HR = 0.56; P < .05). Adverse events (AEs) of special interest (all grades) occurring more frequently with EVE vs PBO (overall study population) included stomatitis (66.6% vs 11.3%), infections (50.4% vs 25.2%), rash (44.0% vs 8.4%), pneumonitis (18.7% vs 0.4%), and hyperglycemia (15.4% vs 2.5%). Elderly EVE-treated patients (≥65 years) had similar or marginally lower incidence of stomatitis (52.1%), rash (32.3%), pneumonitis (14.6%), and hyperglycemia (12.5%) compared with the overall population. Grade 3/4 AEs in patients ≥70 years of age (n = 161) reported only among patients receiving EVE (n = 118) included fatigue (10.2%), anemia (10.2%), hyperglycemia (8.5%), stomatitis (7.6%), dyspnea (6.8%), pneumonitis (5.1%), neutropenia (3.4%), and hypertension (3.4%). Conclusions: Adding EVE to EXE was well tolerated in the overall population and in elderly patients with advanced BC; grade 3/4 AEs were uncommon and manageable. Overall, AEs were consistent with the known safety profile of EVE.

Final analysis of the CheckMate 025 trial comparing nivolumab (NIVO) versus everolimus (EVE) with >5 years of follow-up in patients with advanced renal cell carcinoma (aRCC).

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (6_suppl) ◽  
pp. 617-617 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert J. Motzer ◽  
Scott S. Tykodi ◽  
Bernard Escudier ◽  
Stephane Oudard ◽  
Hans J. Hammers ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Primary Analysis ◽  
Duration Of Response ◽  
Long Term Follow Up ◽  
Previously Treated ◽  
Grade 3

617 Background: CheckMate 025 demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) in previously treated patients (pts) with aRCC, with improved safety and tolerability in the NIVO arm compared with EVE. The primary analysis was based on 14-months minimum follow-up. Here, we report an updated, final analysis with an extended minimum follow-up of 64 months. Methods: Previously treated pts with predominantly clear cell aRCC were randomized (1:1) to NIVO 3 mg/kg IV every 2 weeks or EVE 10 mg orally once daily until progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included objective response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and safety. Confirmed ORR and PFS were per investigator (inv) using RECIST v1.1. Results: Overall, 410 vs 411 pts were randomized to NIVO vs EVE, respectively. OS benefit was maintained and PFS favored NIVO vs EVE with long-term follow-up (HR 0.84 (95% CI 0.72–0.99). (Table) ORR was higher (23% vs 4%) with NIVO vs EVE and median duration of response (DOR) was longer (18.2 vs 14.0 months). Ongoing response was observed in 28% vs 18% of pts with NIVO vs EVE. Most pts received subsequent systemic anticancer therapy: 276 pts in the NIVO arm (67%; most commonly EVE [35%] or axitinib [33%]) and 296 pts in the EVE arm (72%; most commonly axitinib [41%] or NIVO [26%]). No new safety signals or treatment-related deaths emerged with long-term follow-up in either arm. More pts in the EVE arm (37%) experienced a grade 3/4 treatment-related AE compared with pts in the NIVO arm (21%). Conclusions: At >5-years minimum follow-up, response rates and survival remain superior with NIVO vs EVE, and 28% of responses to NIVO are ongoing. Long-term follow-up highlights the efficacy and safety of NIVO monotherapy in pts with aRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT01668784. [Table: see text]

First-line nivolumab (NIVO) plus ipilimumab (IPI) plus two cycles of chemotherapy (chemo) versus chemo alone (4 cycles) in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC): Two-year update from CheckMate 9LA.

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 9000-9000
Author(s):  
Martin Reck ◽  
Tudor-Eliade Ciuleanu ◽  
Manuel Cobo ◽  
Michael Schenker ◽  
Bogdan Zurawski ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Benefit ◽  
Performance Status ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Stage Iv ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Expression Level ◽  
First Line ◽  
Ecog Performance Status ◽  
Grade 3

9000 Background: In the randomized phase 3 CheckMate 9LA trial (NCT03215706), first-line NIVO + IPI combined with 2 cycles of chemo significantly improved overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and objective response rate (ORR) vs chemo alone (4 cycles). Clinical benefit was observed regardless of programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression level and histology. Here we report data with 2 years’ minimum follow-up from this study. Methods: Adult patients (pts) with stage IV / recurrent NSCLC, ECOG performance status ≤ 1, and no known sensitizing EGFR/ALK alterations were stratified by PD-L1 (< 1% vs ≥ 1%), sex, and histology (squamous vs non-squamous) and were randomized 1:1 to NIVO 360 mg Q3W + IPI 1 mg/kg Q6W + chemo (2 cycles; n = 361) or chemo alone (4 cycles; n = 358). Pts with non-squamous NSCLC in the chemo-alone arm could receive pemetrexed maintenance. The primary endpoint was OS. Secondary endpoints included PFS and ORR by blinded independent central review, and efficacy by different PD-L1 levels. Safety was exploratory. Results: At a minimum follow-up of 24.4 months for OS (database lock: Feb 18, 2021), pts treated with NIVO + IPI + chemo continued to derive OS benefit vs chemo, with a median OS of 15.8 months vs 11.0 months, respectively (HR, 0.72 [95% CI, 0.61–0.86]); 2-year OS rates were 38% vs 26%. Median PFS with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was 6.7 months vs 5.3 months (HR, 0.67 [95% CI, 0.56–0.79]); 8% and 37% of pts who had disease progression received subsequent immunotherapy, respectively. ORR was 38% with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs 25% with chemo. Similar clinical benefit with NIVO + IPI + chemo vs chemo was observed in all randomized pts and across the majority of subgroups, including by PD-L1 expression level (Table) or histology. Any grade and grade 3–4 treatment-related adverse events were reported in 92% and 48% of pts in the NIVO + IPI + chemo arm vs 88% and 38% in the chemo arm, respectively. Conclusion: With 2 years’ minimum follow-up, first-line NIVO + IPI + chemo demonstrated durable survival and benefit versus chemo in pts with advanced NSCLC; no new safety signals were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT03215706. [Table: see text]

JUPITER-02: Randomized, double-blind, phase III study of toripalimab or placebo plus gemcitabine and cisplatin as first-line treatment for recurrent or metastatic nasopharyngeal carcinoma (NPC).

2021 ◽  
Vol 39 (18_suppl) ◽  
pp. LBA2-LBA2
Author(s):  
Rui-hua Xu ◽  
Hai-Qiang Mai ◽  
Qiu-Yan Chen ◽  
Dongping Chen ◽  
Chaosu Hu ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Interim Analysis ◽  
Locally Advanced ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Final Analysis ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Line Treatment ◽  
First Line ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Grade 3 ◽  
First Line Treatment

LBA2 Background: Gemcitabine-cisplatin (GP) chemotherapy is the standard 1st line treatment for locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic (r/m) NPC. Toripalimab, a humanized IgG4K monoclonal antibody specific for PD-1, provided durable responses in patients (pts) with r/m NPC as monotherapy in the ≥2nd line setting (POLARIS-02 study). The results of JUPITER-02, a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded Phase III trial of toripalimab in combination with GP chemotherapy as first-line treatment for r/m NPC are summarized. Methods: Pts with advanced NPC with no prior chemotherapy in the r/m setting were randomized (1:1) to receive toripalimab 240 mg or placebo d1 in combination with gemcitabine 1000 mg/m2 d1, d8 and cisplatin 80 mg/m2 d1 every 3 weeks (Q3W) for up to 6 cycles, followed by monotherapy with toripalimab or placebo Q3W until disease progression, intolerable toxicity, or completion of 2 years of treatment. Stratification factors were ECOG PS (0 vs. 1) and extent of disease (recurrent vs. primary metastatic) at enrollment. Progression-free survival (PFS) and response were assessed by independent review committee (IRC) per RECIST v1.1. The primary endpoint was PFS by IRC in the ITT population. Secondary end points included ORR, DOR and OS. There was one prespecified interim analysis of PFS at 130 PFS events with a planned final analysis at 200 PFS events. Results: 289 pts were randomized: 146 to the toripalimab arm and 143 to the placebo arm. By May 30, 2020 as the interim analysis cutoff date, the median treatment duration was 39 weeks in the toripalimab arm and 36 weeks in the placebo arm. A significant improvement in PFS was detected for the toripalimab arm compared to the placebo arm (HR = 0.52 [95% CI: 0.36-0.74] two-sided p = 0.0003), with median PFS of 11.7 vs. 8.0 months. The 1-year PFS rates were 49% and 28% respectively. An improvement in PFS was observed across relevant subgroups, including all PD-L1 subgroups. The ORR was 77.4% vs. 66.4% (P = 0.033) and the median DOR was 10.0 vs. 5.7 months (HR = 0.50 [95% CI: 0.33-0.78]). As of Jan 15, 2021, OS was not mature, with 25 deaths in the toripalimab arm and 35 in the placebo arm (HR = 0.68 [95% CI: 0.41-1.14], P = 0.14). The incidence of Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) (89.0% vs 89.5%); AEs leading to discontinuation of toripalimab/placebo (7.5% vs 4.9%); and fatal AEs (2.7% vs 2.8%) were similar between two arms; however, immune-related (irAEs) (39.7% vs. 18.9%) and Grade ≥3 irAEs (7.5% vs. 0.7%) were more frequent in the toripalimab arm. Conclusions: The addition of toripalimab to GP chemotherapy as 1st-line treatment for pts with advanced NPC provided superior PFS and ORR and longer DOR than GP alone with a manageable safety profile. These results support the use of toripalimab with GP chemotherapy as the new standard care for this population. Clinical trial information: NCT03581786.

scholarly journals Phase III Trial of Bevacizumab Plus Interferon Alfa Versus Interferon Alfa Monotherapy in Patients With Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: Final Results of CALGB 90206

2010 ◽  
Vol 28 (13) ◽  
pp. 2137-2143 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian I. Rini ◽  
Susan Halabi ◽  
Jonathan E. Rosenberg ◽  
Walter M. Stadler ◽  
Daniel A. Vaena ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽  
Renal Cell ◽  
Objective Response ◽  
Progression Free Survival ◽  
Interferon Alfa ◽  
Phase Iii ◽  
Phase Iii Trial ◽  
Grade 3

Purpose Bevacizumab is an antibody that binds vascular endothelial growth factor and has activity in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (RCC). Interferon alfa (IFN-α) is the historic standard initial treatment for RCC. A prospective, randomized, phase III trial of bevacizumab plus IFN-α versus IFN-α monotherapy was conducted. Patients and Methods Patients with previously untreated, metastatic clear cell RCC were randomly assigned to receive either bevacizumab (10 mg/kg intravenously every 2 weeks) plus IFN-α (9 million units subcutaneously three times weekly) or the same dose and schedule of IFN-α monotherapy in a multicenter phase III trial. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Secondary end points were progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate, and safety. Results Seven hundred thirty-two patients were enrolled. The median OS time was 18.3 months (95% CI, 16.5 to 22.5 months) for bevacizumab plus IFN-α and 17.4 months (95% CI, 14.4 to 20.0 months) for IFN-α monotherapy (unstratified log-rank P = .097). Adjusting on stratification factors, the hazard ratio was 0.86 (95% CI, 0.73 to 1.01; stratified log-rank P = .069) favoring bevacizumab plus IFN-α. There was significantly more grade 3 to 4 hypertension (HTN), anorexia, fatigue, and proteinuria for bevacizumab plus IFN-α. Patients who developed HTN on bevacizumab plus IFN-α had a significantly improved PFS and OS versus patients without HTN. Conclusion OS favored the bevacizumab plus IFN-α arm but did not meet the predefined criteria for significance. HTN may be a biomarker of outcome with bevacizumab plus IFN-α.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document