Assessment of sacituzumab govitecan (SG) in patients with prior neoadjuvant/adjuvant chemotherapy in the phase 3 ASCENT study in metastatic triple-negative breast cancer (mTNBC).

Abstract

1080 Background: mTNBC is a heterogenous disease with few treatment options and poor outcomes. Pts who recur ≤ 12 mo after completing (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy may represent a subset with more aggressive disease. SG is an antibody-drug conjugate composed of an anti–Trop-2 antibody coupled to the cytotoxic SN-38 payload via a proprietary, hydrolyzable linker. SG received accelerated approval for pts with mTNBC who received ≥ 2 prior therapies for metastatic disease; clinical benefit for SG over treatment of physician's choice (TPC) was confirmed in the phase 3 ASCENT study (NCT02574455) for median progression-free survival (PFS; 5.6 vs 1.7 mo), median overall survival (OS; 12.1 vs 6.7 mo), objective response rate (ORR; 35% vs 5%), clinical benefit rate (CBR; 45% vs 9%), and median duration of response (6.3 vs 3.6 mo). This ASCENT subanalysis of pts with mTNBC who recurred ≤ 12 mo after (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and then only received 1 line of therapy in the metastatic setting assessed the benefit of SG in this subgroup vs the overall trial population. Methods: In ASCENT, pts with mTNBC refractory/relapsing after ≥ 2 prior chemotherapies were randomized 1:1 to receive SG (10 mg/kg IV on days 1 and 8, every 21 days) or TPC (capecitabine, eribulin, vinorelbine, or gemcitabine). Per protocol, a pt was eligible after only 1 prior regimen in the metastatic setting if their disease recurred within 12 months of completing (neo)adjuvant therapy. Primary endpoint was PFS per RECIST 1.1 by independent review in brain metastases-negative (BMNeg) pts. Efficacy and safety was assessed in a subset of pts who recurred ≤ 12 mo after (neo)adjuvant chemotherapy and then received 1 line of therapy in the metastatic setting. Results: In total, 33 and 32 BMNeg pts with a median age of 49 and 51 yrs received SG and TPC in this subgroup, respectively. In this subgroup, treatment with SG (vs TPC) improved PFS (median 5.7 vs 1.5 mo; HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.22-0.76; P = 0.0049) and OS (median 10.9 vs 4.9 mo; HR, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.28-0.91; P = 0.0227). We also observed higher ORR (30% vs 3%) and CBR (42% vs 6%) with a median response duration of 6.7 mo with SG vs not calculable with TPC. The efficacy results from this subgroup are similar to those for SG vs TPC in the overall BMNeg population. The safety profile of SG in pts in this subgroup was consistent with prior reports. There were no treatment-related deaths with SG. Conclusions: Pts with mTNBC who recurred ≤ 12 mo after (neo)adjuvant therapy and then had 1 line of prior therapy in the metastatic setting may represent a subset with more aggressive disease. In this subgroup, pts had superior outcomes with SG vs TPC in the second-line metastatic setting, consistent with the benefit seen in the overall BMNeg population. Studies are ongoing (NeoSTAR, NCT04230109; SASCIA, NCT04595565) to evaluate SG as an earlier-line treatment option for TNBC. Clinical trial information: NCT02574455 .