First-line sugemalimab with chemotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma: a randomized phase 3 study.

TPS255 Background: ESCC is the predominant histological subtype of esophageal cancer, particularly in Asian countries. Platinum-based chemotherapy is the first-line standard therapy for patients with unresectable, locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic ESCC. The FP regimen is recommended as the preferred treatment by guidelines. However, the survival benefit conferred by this therapy leaves considerable space for improvement, with median OS being less than 1 year. Blockade of the immune checkpoint receptors has shown clinical benefits in multiple tumor types. Recent studies combining standard treatments with checkpoint inhibitors have shown encouraging efficacy and favorable safety profile in patients with unresectable, locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic ESCC. CS1001 (sugemalimab) is the first full-length, fully human immunoglobin G4 (IgG4, s228p) anti-programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) monoclonal antibody developed by the OMT transgenic rat platform. In an ongoing Phase Ib trial, CS1001 in combination with FP regimen demonstrated an ORR of 67.6% (25/37) and an mPFS of 9.0 months with a manageable safety profile in unresectable, locally advanced or distantly metastatic ESCC (19 Feb 2020 data cutoff; Shen, L., et al, ESMO 2020). Methods: CS1001-304 is a randomized, double-blind Phase III study to compare the efficacy and safety of FP regimen with CS1001 or placebo as first-line treatment in ESCC. The study enrolls patients with histologically or cytologically confirmed unresectable locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic ESCC who have ECOG PS of 0-1, patients are not eligible for curative therapy (curative surgery or definitive chemoradiotherapy), and have not received any prior systemic anti-tumor therapy for locally advanced or metastatic disease. Approximately 540 patients will be randomized at 2:1 into CS1001 + FP and placebo + FP arms respectively, stratified by PD-L1 expression status (PD-L1 expression < 1% vs ≥ 1% and < 10% vs ≥10%), ECOG PS (0 vs 1) and distant metastasis (no vs yes). Patients randomized to either arm will receive FP regimen (fluorouracil: 800 mg/m2/day, continuous intravenous infusion [IV], D1-4 of each cycle; cisplatin: 80 mg/m2, IV, D1 of each cycle), Q3W for up to 6 cycles in combination with CS1001 1200 mg or placebo (IV, D1 of each cycle), Q3W for up to 24 months. AEs will be monitored throughout the study and graded per NCI CTCAE v5.0. Tumor response will be assessed by RECIST v1.1 every 6 weeks in the first 12 months, and every 12 weeks thereafter. The primary endpoints are blinded independent central review (BICR)-assessed PFS and OS. Secondary endpoints include investigator-assessed PFS, BICR and investigator-assessed ORR and DoR, safety, PK profile, and immunogenicity. The study is actively enrolling patients in over 60 sites in China. Clinical trial information: NCT04187352.

4035 Background: NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI demonstrated significant overall survival (OS) benefit vs chemo in previously untreated patients (pts) with advanced ESCC in the phase 3 CheckMate 648 study. We report expanded results from the primary analysis with 13-month (mo) minimum follow-up. Methods: Pts with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC were randomized to NIVO (240 mg Q2W) + chemo (fluorouracil + cisplatin Q4W), NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W), or chemo. Primary endpoints were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) per blinded independent central review (BICR) in pts with tumor cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥ 1%. Secondary endpoints planned for hierarchical testing included OS, PFS, and objective response rate (ORR) per BICR in all randomized pts. Duration of response (DOR) per BICR and PFS2 per investigator (time from randomization to progression after subsequent systemic therapy, initiation of second subsequent systemic therapy, or death) were exploratory endpoints. Results: Among all pts randomized to NIVO + chemo (n = 321), NIVO + IPI (n = 325), or chemo (n = 324), PFS2 favored NIVO + chemo (HR 0.64, 95% CI 0.54–0.77) and NIVO + IPI (HR 0.74, 95% CI 0.62–0.88) vs chemo. ORR (95% CI) was 47% (42–53), 28% (23–33), and 27% (22–32), respectively. More responders with NIVO + chemo or NIVO + IPI vs chemo had prolonged DOR (≥12 mo; 39%, 48%, and 23%, respectively). Efficacy data by tumor cell PD-L1 and PD-L1 combined positive score will be presented. Grade 3/4 treatment-related adverse events with potential immunologic etiology (select TRAEs) occurred in ≤ 6% of pts with NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI, and non-endocrine select TRAEs resolved in 57%–95% of pts across organ categories (Table). Conclusions: NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI demonstrated favorable PFS2 and a higher proportion of pts with prolonged DOR vs chemo, as well as acceptable safety profiles. These results provide further support for each regimen as a new potential 1L standard of care in advanced ESCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03143153. [Table: see text]

BackgroundFirst‐line nivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab both demonstrated significant overall survival (OS) benefit versus chemotherapy in previously untreated patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) in the CheckMate 648 trial, leading to approvals of both nivolumab‐containing regimens in many countries. We report longer‐term follow‐up data.MethodsThis open‐label, phase III trial (NCT03143153) enrolled adults with previously untreated, unresectable, advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to nivolumab plus chemotherapy, nivolumab plus ipilimumab, or chemotherapy. Primary endpoints were OS and progression‐free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review. Hierarchical testing was performed first in patients with tumor cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD‐L1) expression of ≥1% and then in the overall population.ResultsA total of 970 patients were randomly assigned. After 29 months of minimum follow‐up, nivolumab plus chemotherapy continued to demonstrate improvement in OS versus chemotherapy (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.59 [95% CI: 0.46–0.76]) in patients with tumor cell PD‐L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.78 [95% CI: 0.65–0.93]) and with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.62 [95% CI: 0.48–0.80]) in patients with tumor cell PD‐L1 expression of ≥1% and in the overall population (HR = 0.77 [95% CI: 0.65–0.92]). In patients with tumor cell PD‐L1 expression of ≥1%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy demonstrated PFS benefit versus chemotherapy (HR = 0.67 [95% CI: 0.51–0.89]); PFS benefit was not observed with nivolumab plus ipilimumab versus chemotherapy (HR = 1.04 [95% CI: 0.79–1.36]). Among all treated patients (n = 936), Grade 3–4 treatment‐related adverse events were reported in 151 (49%, nivolumab plus chemotherapy), 105 (32%, nivolumab plus ipilimumab), and 110 (36%, chemotherapy) patients.ConclusionsNivolumab plus chemotherapy and nivolumab plus ipilimumab continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful OS benefit versus chemotherapy with no new safety signals identified with longer follow‐up, further supporting use as first‐line standard treatment options for patients with advanced ESCC.

O-3 Nivolumab (NIVO) plus chemotherapy (chemo) or ipilimumab (IPI) vs chemo as first-line treatment for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC): Expanded efficacy and safety analyses from CheckMate 648

LBA4001 Background: NIVO demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) vs chemo in previously treated patients (pts) with ESCC (ATTRACTION-3). We report OS and progression-free survival (PFS) from CheckMate 648, the first global phase III study to evaluate both an immuno-oncology (I-O)/chemo combination and an I-O/I-O combination in advanced ESCC. Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, recurrent or metastatic ESCC were enrolled regardless of tumor cell PD-L1 expression. Pts were randomized to NIVO (240 mg Q2W) + chemo (fluorouracil + cisplatin Q4W), NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W), or chemo alone. Primary endpoints for both comparisons were OS and PFS per blinded independent central review (BICR) in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1%. Hierarchically tested secondary endpoints included OS and PFS in all randomized pts. Results: 970 pts were randomized to NIVO + chemo, NIVO + IPI, and chemo arms (49% with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1%). With 13 months (mo) minimum follow-up, NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI led to statistically significant improvement in OS vs chemo in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% and all randomized pts (Table). Statistically significant PFS benefit was also observed for NIVO + chemo vs chemo (HR 0.65 [98.5% CI 0.46–0.92]; P = 0.0023) in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1%. PFS in NIVO + IPI vs chemo in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% did not meet the prespecified boundary for significance. The objective response rate (per BICR) was 53% (NIVO + chemo), 35% (NIVO + IPI), and 20% (chemo) in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% and in all randomized pts was 47%, 28%, and 27%, respectively; longer median (95% CI) duration of response was observed vs chemo for pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1%: 8.4 (6.9–12.4), 11.8 (7.1–27.4), and 5.7 (4.4–8.7) mo and for all randomized pts: 8.2 (6.9–9.7), 11.1 (8.3–14.0), and 7.1 (5.7–8.2) mo, respectively. No new safety signals were identified (Table). Conclusions: NIVO plus chemo and NIVO plus IPI both demonstrated superior OS vs chemo, along with durable objective responses and acceptable safety, in pts with advanced ESCC, and each represents a potential new 1L treatment option. Clinical trial information: NCT03143153. [Table: see text]

BackgroundThe published evidence from several randomized controlled clinical trials of immunotherapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma has shown promising results. This study aimed to investigate the efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma.MethodsPubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, and Embase databases were searched for relevant articles published before December 30, 2020. The data for efficacy and safety of immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment were subjected to meta-analysis.ResultsSeven clinical trials comprising 1733 patients were included. The results showed that immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment as second- or later-line treatment was associated with an increased risk of the objective response rate (relative risk: 1.82, 95% confidence interval: 0.82–4.04; P=0.002) and median overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.75, 95% confidence interval: 0.67–0.85; P<0.001) compared with chemotherapy in locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Moreover, immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment was associated with significant improvement in median overall survival (hazard ratio: 0.61, 95% confidence interval: 0.48–0.77, P<0.001) compared with chemotherapy in the programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1)-positive population. However, immune checkpoint inhibitor treatment was also effective in all patients independent of PD-L1 expression. The most common grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events with immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy were anemia, asthenia, rash, fatigue, decreased appetite, diarrhea, pneumonia, decreased neutrophil count, and vomiting. Patients undergoing immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy was associated with a decreased risk of treatment-related adverse events (relative risk: 0.82, 95% confidence interval: 0.62–1.08; P<0.001) and grade ≥3 treatment-related adverse events (relative risk: 0.50, 95% confidence interval: 0.42–0.60; P<0.001) compared with those undergoing chemotherapy.ConclusionsImmune checkpoint inhibitors as second- or later-line therapy may improve overall response rate and overall survival but not all oncological outcomes for patients with locally advanced or metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma. Patients treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors might experience fewer treatment-related adverse events of any grade, but specifically grade ≥3, compared with those treated with chemotherapy.

BackgroundThe combination of anti‐PD‐1 antibody serplulimab and chemotherapy is considered standard first‐line therapy for advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC), but few later‐line treatments are available. Here we evaluated the therapeutic efficacy of the recombinant, humanized anti‐EGFR antibody HLX07 when used alone or together with serplulimab and chemotherapy against advanced ESCC.MethodsThis open‐label, non‐randomized, two‐cohort, phase 2 trial involved patients 18‐75 years old with histologically or cytologically confirmed locally advanced, unresectable, or metastatic ESCC, and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0‐1. Patients who had failed first‐line immuno‐chemotherapy or at least two lines of other systemic therapy received HLX07 monotherapy intravenously at a dose of 1,000 mg once every 2 weeks (Q2W). Patients with no prior systemic therapy received HLX07 (1,000 mg, day 1) and serplulimab (200 mg, day 1) intravenously Q2W for up to 2 years, concurrently with cisplatin (50 mg/m2, day 1) for up to 8 cycles and 5‐fluorouracil (1,200 mg/m2, days 1‐2) for up to 12 cycles intravenously Q2W. The primary endpoints were progression‐free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR).ResultsOverall, 50 patients were enrolled. In the HLX07 monotherapy group, ORR was 15.0% (3/20), and the median PFS was 1.5 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 1.3 to 3.7). The median duration of response was not reached, and the rate of patients showing an objective response lasting at least 6 months was 66.7% (95% CI, 5.4 to 94.5). Two (10.0%, 2/20) patients experienced grade 3‐4 treatment‐related adverse events (TRAEs), including hypomagnesemia, hypocalcemia, and fatigue. No patient experienced grade 5 TRAEs. In the HLX07 combination group, the ORR was 60.0% (18/30), and the median PFS was 7.8 months (95% CI, 3.3 to 9.1). Fourteen (46.7%, 14/30) patients experienced grade 3‐4 TRAEs, and one (3.3%, 1/30) patient died due to serplulimab‐related pneumonitis.ConclusionsHLX07 monotherapy and its combination with serplulimab and chemotherapy showed manageable toxicity and promising antitumor activity in patients with recurrent or metastatic ESCC. Randomized controlled trials are warranted to further establish the safety and efficacy of HLX07 against ESCC.Trial registrationThis trial was registered at Clinicaltrials.gov (NCT05221658).

Tislelizumab plus chemotherapy versus placebo plus chemotherapy as first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic oesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (RATIONALE-306): a global, randomised, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study

363 Background: Platinum-based chemotherapy is the standard first-line treatment for advanced or metastatic ESCC. Recently, the combination of PD-(L)1 pathway blockade with chemotherapy has shown synergistic efficacy in a few clinical trials. SHR-1701 is a novel bifunctional fusion protein composed of a mAb against PD-L1 fused with the extracellular domain of TGF-β receptor II. The purpose of this ongoing phase II trial (ChiCTR2000039909) was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of SHR-1701 combined with chemotherapy for unresectable locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic ESCC in China. Methods: This trial enrolled systemic treatment-naive patients(pts) with histologically or cytologically confirmed unresectable locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic ESCC who had ECOG PS of 0-1. Eligible pts received SHR-1701 (30mg/kg, iv, d1, q3w) combined with up to 6 cycles of albumin-bound paclitaxel (125mg/m2, iv, d1, d8, q3w) and cisplatin (75mg/m2, iv, d1, q3w). For those without progressive disease, maintenance treatment was administrated with SHR-1701 monotherapy until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR). Secondary endpoints included progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), disease control rate (DCR), safety and biomarkers. Results: As of September 21, 2022, 18 pts were enrolled. The median age was 67.5 years (range: 46–75 years) and 16 (88.9%) were male. 10 of the pts (55.6%) presented with distant metastasis. 14 pts were included in the efficacy analysis and 17 were in the safety analysis. The ORR and DCR were 85.7% and 100.0%, respectively. One patient achieved a complete response (CR) which will reach confirmation at next visit. 11 pts had partial response (PR), including 9 confirmed PR, one pending confirmation PR, and one unconfirmed PR. In addition, one PR patient got a CR target lesion. Grade 3-4 treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were observed in 23.5% of pts, including neutropenia (11.8%), leukopenia (5.9%), anemia (5.9%), emesis (5.9%) and rash (5.9%). Immune-related AEs (irAEs) were observed in 52.9%, and only one grade 3 irAE of rash occurred. Conclusions: SHR-1701 plus chemotherapy showed potential clinical benefits with acceptable toxicity as first-line treatment, and it might be a favorable option for pts with advanced ESCC. Clinical trial information: ChiCTR2000039909 .

4034 Background: NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI are approved for the treatment of advanced ESCC in the US, EU, Japan, and many other countries based on the results from CheckMate 648 (NCT03143153). Here, we report 45-mo follow-up results. Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC were randomized to NIVO (240 mg Q2W) + chemo (fluorouracil + cisplatin Q4W), NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W) or chemo. The primary endpoints were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) per blinded independent central review (BICR) in patients (pts) with tumor cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥ 1%. Results: In total, 970 pts were randomized to NIVO + chemo, NIVO + IPI, or chemo. With 45-mo minimum follow-up, NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI demonstrated continued OS benefit and higher 45-mo OS rates vs chemo in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% and all randomized pts (Table). Duration of response (DOR) was longer (Table) and the proportion of responders with DOR ≥ 45 mo was greater with NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI vs chemo in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% (7% and 23% vs 0%, respectively) and all randomized pts (14% and 18% vs 6%). Any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 96% of pts with NIVO + chemo, 80% with NIVO + IPI, and 90% with chemo; grade 3/4 TRAEs occurred in 49%, 33%, and 37% of pts, respectively. No additional TRAEs leading to discontinuation and no new treatment-related deaths were reported with longer follow-up. Conclusions: After 45 mo of follow-up, NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful survival benefit and more durable responses vs chemo, with no new safety signals. These results further support NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI as 1L treatment options for advanced ESCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03143153 . [Table: see text]

TPS4209 Background: There is a substantial need for more effective and tolerable first-line treatment options for patients with advanced ESCC. B7-H3 is a type 1 transmembrane protein that is highly expressed in several cancers, including ESCC, and is associated with a poor prognosis. Ifinatamab deruxtecan (I-DXd; formerly DS-7300a/MK-2400) is a B7-H3–directed antibody-drug conjugate comprising a humanized anti–B7-H3 IgG1 monoclonal antibody (ifinatamab) covalently linked to a potent topoisomerase I inhibitor payload (DXd; an exatecan derivative) by a cleavable linker. In the phase 1/2 DS7300-A-J101 study, I-DXd monotherapy showed promising antitumor activity in participants (pts) with advanced ESCC. KEYMAKER-U06 is an open-label, phase 1/2, umbrella platform study designed to evaluate investigational agents with or without pembrolizumab and/or chemotherapy for advanced gastroesophageal cancer. Substudy 06E (NCT06780111) will be conducted to evaluate I-DXd plus pembrolizumab with or without chemotherapy as first-line therapy for advanced ESCC. Methods: Eligible pts are aged ≥18 years with previously untreated, histologically or cytologically confirmed, locally advanced unresectable or metastatic ESCC, measurable disease per RECIST v1.1 by investigator review and verified by blinded independent central review (BICR), and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Pts will be assigned to 1 of 4 treatment arms: arm 1 (reference treatment; pembrolizumab 200 mg IV Q3W for ≤35 cycles plus chemotherapy [mFOLFOX6: oxaliplatin 85 mg/m 2 IV Q2W plus 5-FU 400 mg/m 2 (bolus) and 2400 mg/m 2 (continuous) IV Q2W plus leucovorin 400 mg/m² IV Q2W]); arm 2 (I-DXd 12 mg/kg IV Q3W plus pembrolizumab); arm 3 (I-DXd 12 mg/kg plus pembrolizumab plus 5-FU 400 mg/m 2 [bolus] and 2400 mg/m 2 [continuous] IV Q2W plus leucovorin 400 mg/m² IV Q2W); and arm 4 (I-DXd [8 mg/kg or 12 mg/kg] IV plus pembrolizumab plus 5-FU 2400 mg/m 2 IV and oxaliplatin 60 mg/m 2 ). Approximately 209 pts will be enrolled. A safety lead-in phase with ≤29 pts will be conducted in arms 2 (n ≤6), 3 (n ≤10), and 4 (n ≤13) using a Bayesian optimal interval design to confirm the safety and recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D; arm 4 only) of I-DXd in combination with other agents; this phase will be conducted sequentially, starting with arm 2, followed by arms 3 and 4. Thereafter, ≤180 pts will be included in the randomized phase (≤60 in arm 1; ≤40 each in arms 2-4). Pts will be randomly assigned 1:2 to arm 1 and the investigational arms. Primary outcomes are safety and tolerability, RP2D of I-DXd, and objective response rate per RECIST v1.1 by BICR for the selected dose. Secondary outcomes include DOR and PFS per RECIST v1.1 by BICR, OS, and pharmacokinetics of I-DXd in combination with other agents. Enrollment is ongoing. Clinical trial information: NCT06780111 .

290 Background: NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI demonstrated superior overall survival (OS) vs chemo in CheckMate 648 (NCT03143153), leading to approvals in the US, EU, Japan, and other countries. We report longer follow-up results. Methods: Adults with previously untreated, unresectable advanced, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC were randomized to NIVO (240 mg Q2W) + chemo (fluorouracil + cisplatin Q4W), NIVO (3 mg/kg Q2W) + IPI (1 mg/kg Q6W) or chemo. Primary endpoints were OS and progression-free survival (PFS) per blinded independent central review (BICR). Hierarchical testing was done first in patients (pts) with tumor cell programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) ≥ 1%, then in all randomized pts. Results: 970 pts were randomized to NIVO + chemo, NIVO + IPI, or chemo. With 29-mo minimum follow-up, NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI continued to show improvement in OS vs chemo, including higher 24-mo OS rates, in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% and all randomized pts. Responses were more durable and a larger proportion of responders had a duration of response (DOR) ≥ 24 mo with NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI vs chemo in pts with tumor cell PD-L1 ≥ 1% (22%, 36%, 13%, respectively) and all randomized pts (21%, 29%, 13%). Additional efficacy data by PD-L1 status will be presented. Any-grade treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) occurred in 96% (grade 3/4, 49%) of pts with NIVO + chemo, 80% (33%) with NIVO + IPI, and 90% (36%) with chemo. Any-grade TRAEs leading to discontinuation occurred in 35% of pts with NIVO + chemo, 19% with NIVO + IPI, and 21% with chemo. Treatment-related deaths occurred in 2% of pts in each arm. Conclusions: NIVO + chemo and NIVO + IPI continued to demonstrate clinically meaningful survival benefit vs chemo, durable objective responses, and acceptable safety profiles with longer follow-up. This further supports each regimen as a new 1L treatment option for advanced ESCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03143153 . [Table: see text]

4037 Background: Fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based chemotherapy are considered first-line therapy options for patients with unresectable advanced or recurrent metastatic esophageal squamous cell carcinoma(ESCC). After fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based chemotherapy is failed, taxanes (docetaxel(DTX) and paclitaxel(PTX)) was mainly used as a second-line treatment for ESCC. Therefore, we conducted a trial to compare DTX and PTX in patients with unresectable advanced or recurrent ESCC who were failed to previous fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based chemotherapy. Methods: We did a randomized, an open-labeled and multicentre phase 2 study. Inclusion criteria included age 20 to 80 years with unresectable advanced or recurrent ESCC, Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status score of 0 or 1. Patients who were refractory to fluoropyrimidine and platinum-based chemotherapy. Treatment consisted of DTX 70 mg/m2 repeated every 21 days or PTX 100 mg/m2 once weekly on days 1, 8, 15, 22, 29, and 36 of a 49-day cycle. Results: 80 patients were enrolled between May 2012 and April 2019. 41 patients received DTX and 39 patients received PTX. After assessment of eligibility, two patients proved uneligible (one for double cancer, one for contraindication to DTX) and were excluded from the analysis. But, 80 patients were evaluable for the toxicity analyses. A median follow-up time was 32 months. Overall survival was significantly longer in the PTX group than in the DTX group (median, 8.8 months vs. 7.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.38 to 0.9998; P = 0.047). The median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the PTX group than in the DTX group (median, 4.4 months vs. 2.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.49; 95% CI, 0.30 to 0.78; P = 0.002). The median time to treatment failure was significantly longer in the PTX group than in the DTX group (median, 3.8 months vs. 2.1 months; hazard ratio, 0.45; 95% CI, 0.28 to 0.73; P＜0.001). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were a decreased neutrophil count (in 28% of the PTX group and in 80% of the DTX group). Febrile neutropenia was also more frequent in the DTX group than the PTX group (46％ vs. 0%). There was one death from sudden death in which treatment-related mortality could not be ruled out. Conclusions: Secound-line treatment with PTX, as compared with DTX, reduced the risk of ESCC. Clinical trial information: UMIN000007940.

BackgroundCurrently, there are no randomized trials on the effect of antiangiogenic therapy in patients with esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). The following study investigated the efficacy and safety of anlotinib in patients with advanced ESCC who were previously treated with chemotherapy.MethodsThis randomized, placebo‐controlled, double‐blind phase 2 trial (NCT02649361) was conducted in 13 Chinese hospitals. Eligible patients were adults with histologically confirmed recurrent or metastatic ESCC who were previously treated with chemotherapy, and were randomly assigned (2:1) to receive oral anlotinib 12 mg or placebo on days 1–14 (repeated every 21 days). The primary endpoint was progression‐free survival (PFS).ResultsOne hundred and sixty‐five patients were randomly assigned to the anlotinib (n = 110) or the placebo (n = 55) arm. Median PFS was 3.02 months (95% CI 2.63–3.65) in the anlotinib group and 1.41 months (95% CI 1.38–1.41) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0.46 [95% CI 0.32–0.66]; p < 0.001). The most common treatment‐related adverse events of grade 3 or 4 were hypertension (17 [16%] patients), decreased appetite (6 [6%] patients), and hyponatremia (4 [4%] patients) in the anlotinib group and decreased appetite (2 [4%] patients) in the placebo group. Three (3%) deaths in the anlotinib group were considered as drug related, while there were no treatment‐related deaths in the placebo group.ConclusionsThe use of anlotinib in previously treated, recurrent, or metastatic ESCC patients significantly improved PFS compared with placebo. Our findings suggest that antiangiogenesis might be an important therapeutic target in advanced ESCC.Clinical Trials RegistrationStudy of Anlotinib in Patients With Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma (ALTER1102), NCT02649361.

4062 Background: The prognosis of pts with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) remains dismal clinically. Paclitaxel and cisplatin were used as the standard first-line regimen in ESCC for almost two decades. Recently, the combination of PD-1/PD-L1 pathway blockades with chemotherapy has shown synergistic efficacy in a few clinical trials. KN046 is the world's first dual immune checkpoint inhibitor, which can block PD-1/PD-L1 and CTLA-4 pathways at the same time. The purpose of this ongoing phase II trial (NCT03925870) in China was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of KN046 monotherapy or combined with chemotherapy for unresectable locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic ESCC. Methods: This trial included 3 cohorts, one of which enrolled systemic treatment naïve pts with histologically or cytologically confirmed unresectable locally advanced, recurrent or metastatic ESCC who have ECOG PS of 0-1. Eligible subjects were given paclitaxel (135-175mg/m2, iv, d1, q3w) and cisplatin (75mg/m2, iv, d2-4, q3w) plus KN046 (5mpk, iv, d1, q3w) for 4̃6 cycles during initial therapy. For those without progressive disease, maintenance treatment was administrated with KN046 monotherapy (5mpk, iv, q2w) until progression or unacceptable toxicity. Tumour response was assessed according to RECIST 1.1 every 6 weeks. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed ORR. Secondary endpoints included DCR, safety, PK profile, and immunogenicity. Results: As of December 14, 2020, 15 pts were enrolled, all of them were male, 52.3% ≥60 years, 64% ECOG 1, 80% with distant metastasis. Median exposure time to KN046 was 11.4 wks and average KN046 treatment was 2.4 cycles. 12 pts were included in the efficacy analysis and 15 pts in the safety analysis. The overall response rate (ORR) and disease control rate (DCR) were 58.3% and 91.6%, respectively. 7 pts (58.3%) had partial response (PR) including one complete response of target lesion. 4 pts (33.3%) had stable disease (SD) with 3 pts showing more than 20% of tumor burden reduction. The overall incidence of KN046 related adverse events was 80.0%, with 13.3% Gr 3 or above TRAE. Infusion-related adverse events occurred during 7.8% and most were mild. Immune related adverse events（irAE）were seen in 53.3% and the most common Gr 3 irAE were nausea (n＝1, 6.7%) and rash (n＝1, 6.7%). Conclusions: KN046 plus paclitaxel/cisplatin demonstrated clinical efficacy and acceptable safety as first-line treatment, and might be a favorable option for pts with advanced ESCC. Clinical trial information: NCT03925870. Research Sponsor: Jiangsu Alphamab Biopharmaceuticals Co., Ltd. Clinical trial information: NCT03925870.