Pembrolizumab plus axitinib versus sunitinib in metastatic renal cell carcinoma: outcomes of Japanese patients enrolled in the randomized, phase III, open-label KEYNOTE-426 study

Background In the phase III open-label KEYNOTE-426 (NCT02853331) study, first-line pembrolizumab and axitinib improved overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) versus sunitinib for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). KEYNOTE-426 evaluated patients enrolled from 25 sites in Japan. Methods Patients enrolled in Japan were included in this post hoc subgroup analysis. Adults with clear cell mRCC were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive intravenous pembrolizumab 200 mg every 3 weeks plus oral axitinib 5 mg twice daily or oral sunitinib 50 mg once daily (4 weeks on/2 weeks off). Dual primary endpoints were OS and PFS as assessed by blinded independent central review. Objective response rate (ORR) and safety were secondary endpoints. Results The Japanese subgroup comprised 94 patients (pembrolizumab–axitinib, n = 44; sunitinib, n = 50; 11% of the intent-to-treat population). Median time from randomization to data cutoff (January 6, 2020) was 29.5 months (range 24.6–37.3). Consistent with the intent-to-treat population, the OS, PFS, and ORR suggested improvement with pembrolizumab–axitinib versus sunitinib in the Japanese subgroup. Grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 70% of patients receiving pembrolizumab–axitinib versus 78% receiving sunitinib; 11 (25%) patients receiving pembrolizumab–axitinib and 13 (27%) patients receiving sunitinib discontinued the study medication due to AEs. TRAEs led to the discontinuation of pembrolizumab, axitinib, pembrolizumab–axitinib, or sunitinib in 32%, 34%, 14%, and 20%, respectively. No deaths from TRAEs occurred. Conclusions Efficacy outcomes for the Japanese subgroup were consistent with those of the global population. Safety in Japanese patients was consistent with the results from the global population.

Zervixkarzinom: Immuntherapie hält Einzug in die Erstlinie

Die Keynote-826 Studie untersucht die Wirksamkeit von Pembrolizumab bei metastasiertem, rezidiviertem oder persistenten Gebärmutterhalskrebs, der unter Chemotherapie progredient ist. Eingeschlossen wurden Patientinnen mit Plattenepithelkarzinom, adenosquamösem Karzinom oder Adenokarzinom des Gebärmutterhalses, die bisher keine systemische Chemotherapie für die metastasierte oder rezidvierte Situation erhalten hatten und bei denen eine kurative Behandlung (wie Operation und/oder Bestrahlung) nicht mehr in Frage kam. In der doppelblinden Phase-III-Studie wurden Patientinnen im Verhältnis 1:1 randomisiert. Untersucht wurde der Nutzen der der Zugabe von Pembrolizumab zur Chemotherapie mit oder ohne Bevacizumab. Primäre Endpunkte waren das progressionsfreie Überleben (PFS) und das Gesamtüberleben (OS). Bei Ergänzung mit Pembrolizumab betrug das mediane progressionsfreie Überleben von 548 Patientinnen (kombinierter PD-L1-Score ≥1) 10,4 Monate, in der Placebo-Gruppe 8,2 Monate. In der Intention-to-Treat-Population (617 Patientinnen) lag das progressionsfreie Überleben bei 10,4 Monate bzw. 8,2 Monate. Bei 317 Patienten mit einem kombinierten positiven PD-L1-Score von 10 oder mehr betrug das progressionsfreie Überleben 10,4 Monate bzw. 8,1 Monate. In der Pembrolizumab-Gruppe lag das Gesamtüberleben nach 24 Monaten bei 53,0 % und 41,7 % in der Placebo-Gruppe, bzw. 50,4 % und 40,4 % sowie 54,4 % und 44,6 %. Demzufolge zeigten die Patientinnen unter Pembrolizumab ein signifikant längeres progressionsfreies und Gesamtüberleben als unter Placebo.

Efficacy and Safety of Appropriate Shocks and Antitachycardia Pacing in Transvenous and Subcutaneous Implantable Defibrillators: An Analysis of All Appropriate Therapy in the PRAETORIAN trial

Background: The PRAETORIAN trial showed non-inferiority of the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (S-ICD) compared to the transvenous ICD (TV-ICD) with regard to inappropriate shocks and complications. In contrast to the TV-ICD, the S-ICD cannot provide antitachycardia pacing (ATP) for monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT). This pre-specified secondary analysis evaluates appropriate therapy and whether ATP reduces the number of appropriate shocks. Methods: The PRAETORIAN trial was an international, investigator-initiated randomized trial, which included patients with an indication for ICD therapy. Patients with prior VTs below 170 bpm or refractory recurrent monomorphic VTs were excluded. In 39 centers, 849 patients were randomized to receive an S-ICD (N=426) or TV-ICD (N=423) and were followed for a median of 49.1 months. ICD programming was mandated by protocol. Appropriate ICD therapy was defined as therapy for ventricular arrhythmias. Arrhythmias were classified as discrete episodes and storm episodes (≥3 episodes within 24 hours). Analyses were performed in the modified intention-to-treat population. Results: In the S-ICD group, 86/426 patients received appropriate therapy, versus 78/423 patients in the TV-ICD group, during a median follow-up of 52 months (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.4% and 17.5%, P=0.45). In the S-ICD group, 83 patients received at least one shock, versus 57 patients in the TV-ICD group (48-month Kaplan-Meier estimates 19.2% and 11.5%, P=0.02). Patients in the S-ICD group had a total of 254 shocks, compared to 228 shocks in the TV-ICD group (P=0.68). First shock efficacy was 93.8% in the S-ICD group and 91.6% in the TV-ICD group (P=0.40). The first ATP attempt successfully terminated 46% of all monomorphic VTs, but accelerated the arrhythmia in 9.4%. Ten S-ICD patients experienced 13 electrical storms, versus 18 TV-ICD patients with 19 electrical storms. Patients with appropriate therapy had an almost two-fold increased relative risk of electrical storms in the TV-ICD group compared to the S-ICD group (P=0.05). Conclusions: In this trial, no difference was observed in shock efficacy of the S-ICD compared with the TV-ICD. Although patients in the S-ICD group were more likely to receive an ICD shock, the total number of appropriate shocks was not different between the two groups.

A Simplified Geriatric Assessment (sGA) Can Identify Older Patients with Relapse/Refractory (R/R) Aggressive Lymphoma Suitable for Autologous Stem Cell Transplantation (ASCT): Final Results of Recanz Multicentre Prospective Phase 2 Study By the Fondazione Italiana Linfomi (FIL)

Introduction: We recently demonstrated in a large multicentre study that sGA can identify fit older patients with aggressive lymphoma able to tolerate first-line intensive treatment with curative intent and to obtain similar results than younger people (Merli at al JCO 2021). Regardless of age, about 40% of patients with aggressive lymphoma are either refractory or will eventually relapse after treatment with curative intent. Salvage platinum-based regimens followed by ASCT in responsive disease is a standard of care to obtain longer second remission. However, in many case series, patients over 65 years are excluded from the transplant approach because of potential severe toxicities of high-dose therapy in older patients. This study was designed to evaluate the feasibility and activity of high-dose treatment followed by ASCT in older FIT patients with R/R aggressive lymphoma selected with a sGA. Methods: Patients with R/R aggressive lymphoma after one line of treatment, aged between 65 and 75, and FIT to sGA were eligible for the study. Salvage treatment could be chosen between R-DHAP, R-ICE or other platinum or gemcitabine-containing regimens and stem cells were mobilized after 1 or 2 cycles. Patients achieving at least partial response after 3 courses and who remained FIT to sGA evaluation were eligible for ASCT and were conditioned with either BEAM or FEAM. Results: From May 2014 to August 2019, seventy-five patients from 16 FIL centres were enrolled and 70 were eligible for the study. Sixty-six of them had a diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, one had follicular 3b, 2 mantle cell and 1 Burkitt histology. Salvage treatment was R-DHAP in 48 patients, R-ICE in seven and gemcitabine or oxalyplatinum containing regimens in the remaining ones. Overall response rate after three courses was 44% (21 complete and 10 partial remission). Among the 39 unresponsive patients, 29 had progressive and 4 stable disease, 2 patients died of septic shock and heart failure during salvage and 4 patients withdrew their consent to ASCT. Four patients relapsed soon after response achievement before undergoing the transplant. ASCT was performed in 27 patients with a median of 5.6 x 10 6 CD34/Kg reinfused. No differences emerged in demographic and clinical characteristics between patients reaching the ASCT timepoint or not (Tab 1a). By intention to treat analysis, 2-y overall survival (OS) and PFS of the entire intention-to-treat population were 65% (95%CI: 50-76%) and 34% (95%CI: 22-46%) respectively, without differences according to age (Tab 1b). After a median of 27 months, 2-y OS was 79% (95CI: 51-86%) and EFS 56% (95CI: 32-75%). Twenty-four patients obtained a complete remission (CR) and 20 of them are in continuous CR after more than 12 months. Three patients progressed 1-8 months after ASCT and died. Most common non-hematologic grade 3-4 adverse events were gastrointestinal (10%) and infectious (8%). Conclusion: This study shows that sGA can identify older patients with R/R aggressive lymphoma who are able to tolerate and can benefit from high-dose therapy and ASCT. The poor response to second-line immunochemotherapy remains the major drawback of this approach since less than 50% of patients could actually receive ASCT. Nevertheless the 2-y survival of 65% in the intention to treat population is remarkable and sets the stage for the evaluation of new approaches such as CAR-T or bispecific antibodies also in older patients. A next step should be to explore the usefulness of sGA in the selection of candidates to these innovative treatments. Figure 1 Figure 1. Disclosures Tucci: Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gentili: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Musuraca: janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; incyte: Consultancy, Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Cavallo: ROCHE: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Servier: Speakers Bureau; Gilead: Speakers Bureau. Zilioli: Roche, Italfarmaco: Consultancy, Honoraria; MSD, Janssen: Consultancy, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accommodations; Gentili, Takeda, Gilead, Servier: Consultancy, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Other: travel expenses, accommodation. Merli: EUSA Pharma: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Roche: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; MSD: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Gilead Science: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees, Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses; Celgene: Other: Travel, Accomodations, Expenses. Marcheselli: sandoz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees. Rossi: Abbvie: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Alexion: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Astellas: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Daiichi Sankyo: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Celgene: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Janssen: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Novartis: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Pfizer: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Jazz: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees; Sanofi: Honoraria; Takeda: Membership on an entity's Board of Directors or advisory committees.

Inhaled and intranasal ciclesonide for the treatment of covid-19 in adult outpatients: CONTAIN phase II randomised controlled trial

Objective To determine if inhaled and intranasal ciclesonide are superior to placebo at decreasing respiratory symptoms in adult outpatients with covid-19. Design Randomised, double blind, placebo controlled trial. Setting Three Canadian provinces (Quebec, Ontario, and British Columbia). Participants 203 adults aged 18 years and older with polymerase chain reaction confirmed covid-19, presenting with fever, cough, or dyspnoea. Intervention Participants were randomised to receive either inhaled ciclesonide (600 μg twice daily) and intranasal ciclesonide (200 μg daily) or metered dose inhaler and nasal saline placebos for 14 days. Main outcome measures The primary outcome was symptom resolution at day 7. Analyses were conducted on the modified intention-to-treat population (participants who took at least one dose of study drug and completed one follow-up survey) and adjusted for stratified randomisation by sex. Results The modified intention-to-treat population included 203 participants: 105 were randomly assigned to ciclesonide (excluding two dropouts and one loss to follow-up) and 98 to placebo (excluding three dropouts and six losses to follow-up). The median age was 35 years (interquartile range 27-47 years) and 54% were women. The proportion of participants with resolution of symptoms by day 7 did not differ significantly between the intervention group (42/105, 40%) and control group (34/98, 35%); absolute adjusted risk difference 5.5% (95% confidence interval −7.8% to 18.8%). Results might be limited to the population studied, which mainly included younger adults without comorbidities. The trial was stopped early, therefore could have been underpowered. Conclusion Compared with placebo, the combination of inhaled and intranasal ciclesonide did not show a statistically significant increase in resolution of symptoms among healthier young adults with covid-19 presenting with prominent respiratory symptoms. As evidence is insufficient to determine the benefit of inhaled and intranasal corticosteroids in the treatment of covid-19, further research is needed. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04435795 .

1433. Impact of 2019 US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Guidance on Developing Drugs for Urinary Tract Infection (UTI) on the Perceived Efficacy of Antibiotics for the Treatment of Uncomplicated UTI (uUTI)

Background In 2019, the FDA issued guidance on drug development for treatment of UTIs. To explore the impact of this guidance, we compared clinical and microbiological outcomes of the fluoroquinolones norfloxacin and ciprofloxacin and the β-lactams pivmecillinam and sulopenem for treatment of uUTIs from original publications versus recent analyses conducted in accordance with the FDA guidance. Methods The efficacy of pivmecillinam 400 mg twice daily (BID), 3 days (3d) versus norfloxacin 400 mg BID, 3d was reported in a 2002 publication. Patient-level data were used to re-analyze clinical and microbiological outcomes in the microbiological intent-to-treat population in accordance with the 2019 FDA guidance. For descriptive comparison, we present the efficacy of ciprofloxacin 250 mg BID, 3d vs sulopenem 500 mg BID, 5d in the 2020 SURE-1 trial (also conducted in accordance with FDA guidance) alongside historical efficacy data for ciprofloxacin. Results Re-analysis of data from the trial of pivmecillinam and norfloxacin showed microbiological responses for pivmecillinam and norfloxacin of 64% and 79%, respectively. Microbiological responses were higher, 75% for pivmecillinam and 91% for norfloxacin, in the original analysis. For clinical response, re-analysis showed 75% for pivmecillinam and 88% for norfloxacin, while historical data were 82% and 88%, respectively. In the SURE-1 trial, the microbiological response of patients assessed at Day 12 was 76.6% for sulopenem and 79.1% for ciprofloxacin. In a 2002 publication, bacterial eradication at 4 to 11 days after treatment was 93.7% for ciprofloxacin 250 mg, a higher response rate than that reported in SURE-1. For clinical response, rates were 78.7% for ciprofloxacin in SURE-1 and 92.7% for the historical ciprofloxacin data. Conclusion When assessed in accordance with the 2019 FDA guidance, clinical and microbiological efficacy of both fluoroquinolones and β-lactam antibiotics appears lower than has been published in the past. Healthcare providers should be aware that newer antibiotics may appear to have a lower efficacy than older antibiotics due to the application of more stringent definitions in the FDA guidance. Disclosures Anne Santerre Henriksen, MS, Advanz (Consultant)Shionogi BV (Consultant)UTILITY Therapeutics (Consultant) Lindsay Nicolle, MD, Entos (Consultant)GSK (Consultant)Iterum (Consultant)Utility Therapeutics (Consultant) Anita F. Das, PhD, Adagio Therapeutics, Inc. (Consultant)

Modified FOLFIRINOX Versus CISGEM Chemotherapy for Patients With Advanced Biliary Tract Cancer (PRODIGE 38 AMEBICA): A Randomized Phase II Study

PURPOSE Whether triplet chemotherapy is superior to doublet chemotherapy in advanced biliary tract cancer (BTC) is unknown. METHODS In this open-label, randomized phase II-III study, patients with locally advanced or metastatic BTC and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1 were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive oxaliplatin, irinotecan, and infusional fluorouracil (mFOLFIRINOX), or cisplatin and gemcitabine (CISGEM) for a maximum of 6 months. We report the results of the phase II part, where the primary end point was the 6-month progression-free survival (PFS) rate among the patients who received at least one dose of treatment (modified intention-to-treat population) according to Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1 (statistical assumptions: 6-month PFS rate ≥ 59%, 73% expected). RESULTS A total of 191 patients (modified intention-to-treat population, 185: mFOLFIRINOX, 92; CISGEM, 93) were randomly assigned in 43 French centers. After a median follow-up of 21 months, the 6-month PFS rate was 44.6% (90% CI, 35.7 to 53.7) in the mFOLFIRINOX arm and 47.3% (90% CI, 38.4 to 56.3) in the CISGEM arm. Median PFS was 6.2 months (95% CI, 5.5 to 7.8) in the mFOLFIRINOX arm and 7.4 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 8.7) in the CISGEM arm. Median overall survival was 11.7 months (95% CI, 9.5 to 14.2) in the mFOLFIRINOX arm and 13.8 months (95% CI, 10.9 to 16.1) in the CISGEM arm. Adverse events ≥ grade 3 occurred in 72.8% of patients in the mFOLFIRINOX arm and 72.0% of patients in the CISGEM arm (toxic deaths: mFOLFIRINOX arm, two; CISGEM arm, one). CONCLUSION mFOLFIRINOX triplet chemotherapy did not meet the primary study end point. CISGEM doublet chemotherapy remains the first-line standard in advanced BTC.

Covid-19 in the Phase 3 Trial of mRNA-1273 During the Delta-variant Surge

BackgroundFollowing emergency use authorization in December 2020, the Coronavirus Efficacy (COVE) trial was amended to an open-label phase, where participants were unblinded and those randomized to placebo were offered vaccination. Emergence of the delta variant of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) has been associated with increased incidences of coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) among unvaccinated and vaccinated persons. This exploratory analysis evaluated the incidence and genetic sequences of Covid-19 cases in the ongoing COVE trial during the open-label phase, with a focus on July-August 2021, when delta-variants surged in the US.MethodsCovid-19 cases were identified in participants initially randomized to mRNA-1273 (vaccinated from July-December 2020) and those initially randomized to the placebo (vaccinated December 2020-April 2021) who received at least one dose and were SARS-CoV-2-negative at baseline in the modified-intent-to-treat population were analyzed. Included were Covid-19 cases occurring after 26-Mar-2021 with positive RT-PCR results in nasopharyngeal samples (central lab test) and reported Covid-19 symptoms. Genetic sequencing of Covid-19 cases was also performed.ResultsThere were 14,746 participants in the earlier mRNA-1273 (mRNA-1273e) group and 11,431 in the later placebo-mRNA1273 (mRNA-1273p) group. Covid-19 cases increased from the start of the open-label phase to July-August 2021. During July and August, 162 Covid-19 cases occurred in the mRNA-1273e group and 88 in the mRNA-1273p group. Of the cases sequenced, 144/149 [97%]) in the mRNA-1273 and 86/88 (99%) in the mRNA-1273p groups were attributed to delta. The incidence rate of Covid-19 was lower for the mRNA-1273p (49.0/1000 person-years) versus mRNA-1273e (77.1/1000 person-years) group [36.4% (95% CI 17.1%-51.5%) reduction]. There were fewer severe Covid-19 cases in the mRNA-1273p (6; 6.2/1000 person-years) than mRNA-1273e (13; 3.3/1000 person-years) [46.0% (95% CI −52.4%-83.2%) reduction]. Three Covid-19 related hospitalizations occurred with two resulting deaths in the mRNA-1273e group.ConclusionIncidence rates of Covid-19 and severe Covid-19 were lower during the months when delta was the dominant variant (July/August 2021) among COVE participants vaccinated more recently. Analysis of COVID-19 cases from the open-label phase of the COVE study is ongoing.

Study of fiscal decentralization, macroeconomic stability and regional growth in Indonesia

Indonesia has been implementing fiscal decentralization since 2001. In theory, fiscal decentralization affected macroeconomic stability and economic growth—this study using data panels at the provincial level from 2010 to 2013. In the relationship between fiscal decentralization and macroeconomic stability with control variable income, significant variables are income to GRDP, GRDP per capita, and population. If control variable expenditure, significant variables are expenditure to GRDP, GRDP per capita, and population. In the model that analyzes fiscal decentralization and economic growth with control variable income, significant variables are income to GRDP, consumption to GRDP, and population. Meanwhile, if control variable expenditure, significant variables are expenditure to GRDP, consumption to GRDP, and population. By using sensitivity analysis, the population variable is a high priority. Therefore stakeholders should treat population variables carefully.