Bev In Pts Research Articles

Durvalumab with paclitaxel/carboplatin (PC) and bevacizumab (bev), followed by maintenance durvalumab, bev, and olaparib in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (AOC) without a tumor BRCA1/2 mutation (non-tBRCAm): Results from the randomized, placebo (pbo)-controlled phase III DUO-O trial.

LBA5506 Background: Olaparib (ola) maintenance (mtx) improved outcomes in pts with newly diagnosed AOC and a BRCAm (DiSilvestro J Clin Oncol 2023;41:609–17) or with bev in pts with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD+) tumors (Ray-Coquard Ann Oncol 2022: LBA29) in response to 1L treatment, but an unmet need remains. Combining an immune checkpoint inhibitor with an antiangiogenic agent and a PARP inhibitor may enhance antitumor effect (Banerjee Ann Oncol 2022: 529MO). The Phase III DUO-O trial (NCT03737643) evaluates PC + bev + durva, followed by mtx bev + durva + ola, in pts with non-tBRCAm AOC in the 1L setting. Methods: Pts had newly diagnosed FIGO stage III or IV, high-grade epithelial, non-tBRCAm AOC and had completed upfront, or were planned to receive interval, debulking surgery and 1 cycle of PC ± bev. At Cycle 2, pts were randomized 1:1:1 to Arm 1: PC + bev (15 mg/kg IV q3w) + durva pbo (up to 6 cycles) followed by mtx bev (15 mg/kg IV q3w; total 15 months [mo]) + durva pbo (total 24 mo) + ola pbo (total 24 mo); Arm 2: PC + bev + durva (1120 mg IV q3w) followed by mtx bev + durva (1120 mg IV q3w) + ola pbo; or Arm 3: PC + bev + durva followed by mtx bev + durva + ola (300 mg bid tablets). The primary endpoint, progression-free survival (PFS; modified RECIST 1.1 per investigator) in Arm 3 vs Arm 1, was tested first in the non-tBRCAm HRD+ population (GIS ≥42, Myriad MyChoice CDx) and then the intent-to-treat (ITT) population. Results: 1130 pts were randomized: 378 Arm 1, 374 Arm 2, and 378 Arm 3. At a prespecified interim analysis (DCO Dec 5, 2022), a statistically significant improvement in PFS was observed for Arm 3 vs Arm 1: HR 0.49 (95% CI 0.34–0.69; P<0.0001) and HR 0.63 (95% CI 0.52–0.76; P<0.0001) in the HRD+ and ITT populations, respectively; a consistent PFS effect was observed in the HRD- subgroup (HR 0.68, 95% CI 0.54–0.86). A numerical improvement in PFS was shown for Arm 2 vs Arm 1 (ITT population), but statistical significance was not reached (Table). During the study, any serious adverse events were reported in 34%, 43% and 39% of pts in Arms 1, 2 and 3, respectively. Conclusions: PC + bev + durva followed by mtx bev + durva + ola in pts with newly diagnosed non-tBRCAm AOC resulted in a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS vs PC + bev followed by mtx bev. Safety was generally consistent with the known profiles of each agent. Clinical trial information: NCT03737643 . [Table: see text]

36MO Maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab (bev) in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer (OC): 5-year (y) progression-free survival (PFS) by molecular subgroup in the PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial

The first-line setting represents the only opportunity for cure in advanced OC. 5-y PFS rates may predict cure as most pts not relapsing at 5 years are potentially cured. In the final overall survival (OS) analysis of the Phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644), maintenance olaparib + bev provided a clinically meaningful OS benefit vs placebo (pbo) + bev in pts with newly diagnosed advanced OC who tested positive for homologous recombination deficiency (HRD+; tumour BRCA1/2 mutation [tBRCAm] and/or genomic instability) regardless of tBRCAm status (Ray-Coquard et al. Ann Oncol 2022:LBA29). We evaluated 5-y PFS by molecular subgroup to help inform the potential for cure. Pts in response after platinum-based chemotherapy + bev were randomized 2:1 to olaparib (300 mg bid for up to 24 months) + bev (15 mg/kg q3w for up to 15 months) or pbo + bev. A post hoc, updated descriptive PFS analysis by molecular subgroup was conducted at the final OS data cutoff (DCO). 537 pts were randomized to olaparib + bev and 269 to pbo + bev (median PFS follow-up in censored pts was 56.7 and 57.8 months, respectively). At DCO (22 March 2022), the 5-y PFS rate was 46% with olaparib + bev vs 19% with pbo + bev in the HRD+ group, 50% vs 25%, respectively, in the tBRCAm group, 41% vs 15%, respectively, in the HRD+ excluding tBRCAm group, 13% vs 13%, respectively, in the HRD−/unknown group, and 8% vs 12%, respectively, in the HRD− group. Updated data for time to first or second subsequent therapy or death will be presented.Table: 36MONo. of events/no. of pts5-y Median PFSHR (95% CI)5-y PFS rate,* (%)Olaparib + bevPbo + bevOlaparib + bevPbo + bevOlaparib + bevPbo + bevITT366/537222/26922.916.60.63 (0.53–0.74)2916HRD+136/255104/13246.817.60.41 (0.32–0.54)4619tBRCAm78/15758/8060.721.70.45 (0.32–0.64)5025HRD+ excluding tBRCAm58/9746/5530.016.60.47 (0.32–0.70)4115HRD−/unknown230/282118/13717.316.00.90 (0.72–1.13)1313HRD−167/19274/8516.616.21.01 (0.77–1.33)812Investigator assessed (RECIST 1.1). tBRCAm status by central labs and HRD status by Myriad MyChoice HRD Plus.*Kaplan–Meier estimates.CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; ITT, intent-to-treat. Open table in a new tab Investigator assessed (RECIST 1.1). tBRCAm status by central labs and HRD status by Myriad MyChoice HRD Plus. *Kaplan–Meier estimates. CI, confidence interval; HR, hazard ratio; ITT, intent-to-treat. The 5-y updated descriptive PFS rates suggest the benefit of adding olaparib to bev is sustained beyond end of treatment and may indicate the potential of cure in HRD+ newly diagnosed advanced OC, supporting use of maintenance olaparib + bev as a standard of care in pts with HRD+ tumours, regardless of tBRCAm status.

Time without symptoms or toxicity (TWiST) in patients with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer receiving maintenance olaparib or placebo plus bevacizumab: Analysis of PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 phase III trial.

5562 Background: In the Phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644), maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab (bev) provided a significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit, compared with placebo plus bev, in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer in response after platinum-based chemotherapy (Ray-Coquard et al. NEJM 2019). A subgroup analysis revealed a substantial PFS benefit in HRD-positive (including BRCA1/BRCA2 mutation) pts (median PFS 37.2 vs 17.7 months) leading to US and EU labels for this combination. We analyzed TWiST in PAOLA-1, using several definitions of toxicity (TOX) and by molecular subgroups. Methods: Pts were randomized 2:1 to maintenance olaparib (300 mg bid) plus bev (15 mg/kg, Day 1, q3w) or placebo plus bev, stratified by first-line treatment outcome and tumor BRCAm status. TWiST is defined as PFS minus time with TOX after randomization and before disease progression or censoring for progression, and was a prespecified exploratory endpoint. Definitions of significant symptoms or TOX were explored using the following approaches: 1) all grade ≥2 adverse events (AEs); and 2) all grade ≥2 AEs selected to be correlated to olaparib (fatigue, nausea, vomiting, and anemia). Area under PFS curve was split into TOX:TWIST ratio and compared between the two arms. Results: Between May 7, 2015 and August 31, 2017, 806 eligible pts were randomly assigned to olaparib plus bev (n = 537) or placebo plus bev (n = 269), with a median duration of treatment with olaparib of 17.3 months (range 0.03–33.0) for olaparib plus bev arm and 15.6 months (range 0.07–26.2) for placebo plus bev at data cutoff for primary endpoint analysis. In the Intent-to-treat population, median duration of TWiST for all grade ≥2 AEs for olaparib plus bev vs placebo plus bev arms was 14.1 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 12.5–16.1) vs 7.7 months (95% CI 5.9–9.1), respectively; and 21.9 months (95% CI 20.2–22.5) vs 16.6 months (95% CI 14.6–18.0) considering only grade ≥2 AEs linked to olaparib. The difference was particularly significant within the HRD-positive subgroup where median duration of TWiST was 24.4 months (95% CI 19.3–not evaluable [NE]) vs 7.4 months (5.8–11.2) for TOX linked to all grade ≥2 AEs, and 36.6 months (95% CI 31.9–NE) vs 17.4 months (15.1–19.4) linked to olaparib AEs only for the olaparib plus bev and placebo plus bev arms, respectively. Conclusions: The substantial PFS benefit provided by maintenance olaparib plus bev vs placebo plus bev in pts with newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer was supported by significant TWiST benefit. TWiST analyses, including all grade ≥2 symptoms or toxicity related to treatment, confirmed the clinically meaningful benefit from the combination, notably in the HRD-positive subgroup. Clinical trial information: NCT02477644.

An open-label phase II study of dostarlimab (TSR-042), bevacizumab (bev), and niraparib combination in patients (pts) with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC): cohort A of the OPAL trial

Objectives: Preclinical evidence suggests that PARP inhibition (PARPi), anti-PD-1 therapy, and anti-angiogenic therapies have interactions that may support synergistic antitumor activity in pts with PROC. This phase 2 study evaluated activity of combination therapy with the PARPi niraparib, the PD-1 inhibitor dostarlimab, and bev in pts with PROC. Methods: Eligible pts had high-grade, platinum-resistant (progressed ≤6 mo after completion of ≥4 cycles of platinum-based chemo), recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, primary peritoneal cancer, or recurrent carcinosarcoma of the ovary (high-grade mixed histology permitted). Pts had 1–2 prior lines of anticancer therapy for OC, and no prior therapy with an anti-PD-1/-L1 or PARPi. Pts received a regimen of 500 mg dostarlimab Q3W x 4, then 1000 mg Q6W + 15 mg/kg bev Q3W + niraparib 300 mg or 200 mg (for weight <77 kg or platelet count <150,000/µL at screening) QD until discontinuation. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and disease control rate (DCR). A posthoc analysis by biomarker (BRCA mutation [BRCAm] status, homologous recombination repair mutation [HRRm], and combined positive score [CPS; a measure of intratumoral and immune infiltrate PD-L1 expression], prior lines of therapy, and prior bev use) was performed. Results: Conclusions: Conclusion: Triplet therapy with niraparib, dostarlimab, and bev is tolerable and demonstrated clinical activity in pts with PROC, most of which were BRCA or HRR wt. AEs were as expected. Clinical trial identification: NCT03574779. Funding: GlaxoSmithKline. Preclinical evidence suggests that PARP inhibition (PARPi), anti-PD-1 therapy, and anti-angiogenic therapies have interactions that may support synergistic antitumor activity in pts with PROC. This phase 2 study evaluated activity of combination therapy with the PARPi niraparib, the PD-1 inhibitor dostarlimab, and bev in pts with PROC. Eligible pts had high-grade, platinum-resistant (progressed ≤6 mo after completion of ≥4 cycles of platinum-based chemo), recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, primary peritoneal cancer, or recurrent carcinosarcoma of the ovary (high-grade mixed histology permitted). Pts had 1–2 prior lines of anticancer therapy for OC, and no prior therapy with an anti-PD-1/-L1 or PARPi. Pts received a regimen of 500 mg dostarlimab Q3W x 4, then 1000 mg Q6W + 15 mg/kg bev Q3W + niraparib 300 mg or 200 mg (for weight <77 kg or platelet count <150,000/µL at screening) QD until discontinuation. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) per RECIST v1.1. Secondary objectives were progression-free survival (PFS), safety, and disease control rate (DCR). A posthoc analysis by biomarker (BRCA mutation [BRCAm] status, homologous recombination repair mutation [HRRm], and combined positive score [CPS; a measure of intratumoral and immune infiltrate PD-L1 expression], prior lines of therapy, and prior bev use) was performed. Conclusion: Triplet therapy with niraparib, dostarlimab, and bev is tolerable and demonstrated clinical activity in pts with PROC, most of which were BRCA or HRR wt. AEs were as expected.

IMbrave150: Exploratory efficacy and safety results of hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) patients (pts) with main trunk and/or contralateral portal vein invasion (Vp4) treated with atezolizumab (atezo) + bevacizumab (bev) versus sorafenib (sor) in a global Ph III study.

4073 Background: Atezo + bev has been approved in &gt;60 countries for pts with unresectable HCC who have not received prior systemic therapy, based on IMbrave150 (NCT03434379; Finn RS NEJM 2020). Due to their poor prognosis and the hemodynamic changes from increased portal vein pressure, pts with main portal vein tumor thrombus are often excluded from pivotal HCC trials. Here, we report exploratory efficacy and safety results of pts with Vp4 (presence of a tumor thrombus in the main trunk and/or contralateral portal vein) using updated IMbrave150 data (Finn RS ASCO GI 2021). Methods: Pts were randomized 2:1 to atezo 1200 mg IV q3w + bev 15 mg/kg IV q3w or sor 400 mg bid until unacceptable toxicity or loss of clinical benefit per investigator. IMbrave150 enrolled 501 systemic treatment (tx)–naive unresectable HCC pts, ≥1 measurable untreated lesion (RECIST 1.1), Child-Pugh class A liver function and ECOG PS 0/1, including 73 (15%) Vp4 pts. This post hoc exploratory analysis was conducted with a median follow-up of 15.6 mo in ITT pts. Results: Of the Vp4 pts, 48 received atezo + bev and 25 received sor. Median OS (mOS) was 7.6 vs 5.5 mo (HR, 0.62; 95% CI: 0.34, 1.11) and median PFS (mPFS) per independent review facility (IRF)–assessed RECIST 1.1 was 5.4 vs 2.8 mo (HR, 0.62; 95% CI: 0.35, 1.09) with atezo + bev and sor, respectively. ORR per IRF RECIST 1.1 was 23% (11/47) with atezo + bev (2 [4%] pts had CR) vs 13% (3/23) with sor (1 [4%] pt had CR). All-grade variceal bleeding was higher with atezo + bev in Vp4 (13.6%) vs rest of ITT pts (2.5%). See table for further efficacy and safety data. Conclusions: The benefits of atezo + bev over sor in Vp4 pts are consistent with those in ITT pts across all efficacy endpoints, despite the expected disease-intrinsic increase in variceal bleeding in Vp4 vs rest of ITT pts. The overall positive benefit-risk profile supports the use of atezo + bev in pts with Vp4. Clinical trial information: NCT03434379. [Table: see text]

Phase Ib/II open-label, randomized evaluation of atezolizumab (atezo) + Imprime PGG (Imprime) + bevacizumab (bev) vs regorafenib (rego) in MORPHEUS: Microsatellite-stable (MSS) metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC).

3559 Background: The MORPHEUS platform consists of multiple, global, open-label, randomized Phase Ib/II trials designed to identify early efficacy and safety signals of treatment (tx) combinations across cancers. Here, atezo (anti-PD-L1) was tested with Imprime and bev (anti-VEGF) for MSS mCRC, a poorly immunogenic cancer generally resistant to checkpoint inhibitors. Imprime acts as a pathogen-associated molecular pattern that, when bound to anti-β glucan antibodies (ABA), activates the innate immune system with the potential to 1) promote priming and expansion of tumor-specific T cells, 2) promote M2-M1 macrophage polarization and 3) enhance the immunomodulatory effects of atezo and bev. Therefore, we hypothesized that atezo + Imprime + bev would induce an antitumor response beyond that of rego, a standard-of-care multikinase inhibitor, in patients (pts) with MSS mCRC. Methods: Pts with MSS mCRC unselected for the Imprime-specific biomarker (ABA) and refractory to 1-2 prior lines of standard therapy received atezo (1200 mg IV every 3 weeks [q3w]) + Imprime (4 mg/kg IV on Days 1, 8, 15) + bev (7.5 mg/kg IV q3w) or control tx with rego (160 mg orally days 1-21; dose escalation to 160 mg during Cycle 1 allowed per institutional guidelines). The primary endpoint was objective response rate (ORR; investigator-assessed RECIST 1.1); secondary endpoints included disease control rate (DCR; response or stable disease ≥ 12 weeks), progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and safety. Results: Pts were followed-up for ≥18 wk. 15 pts received atezo + Imprime + bev and 13 received rego. Grade (Gr) 3/4 tx-related adverse events (TRAEs) were seen in 13% of atezo + Imprime + bev and 62% of rego pts. No Gr 5 AEs occurred in atezo + Imprime + bev pts and 1 (8%) was reported in a rego pt. One pt in each arm (7% vs 8%, respectively) withdrew from tx due to a TRAE. No radiological responses were seen in either arm. Five pts (33%) receiving atezo + Imprime + bev and 8 (62%) receiving rego had stable disease as best response. DCR was 13% with atezo + Imprime + bev and 23% with rego. Median PFS was 1.5 mo (95% CI: 1.4, 2.8) and 2.8 mo (95% CI: 1.6, 3.1), and median OS was 5.7 mo (95% CI: 4.4, 10.5) and 10.2 mo (95% CI: 4.8, NE) with atezo + Imprime + bev and rego, respectively. There was no apparent correlation between baseline PD-L1 expression or CD8+ lymphocyte tumor infiltration and clinical benefit. Further, the systemic exposure of atezo, Imprime and bev and immunogenicity of atezo and bev are in line with previous clinical experience. Additional biomarker, pharmacokinetics and anti-drug antibody data will be shown. Conclusions: Atezo + Imprime + bev was well tolerated; toxicities were consistent with the safety profiles of the individual agents. No efficacy signal was identified with atezo + Imprime + bev in pts with MSS refractory mCRC. Clinical trial information: NCT03555149.

Progression-free survival (PFS) and second PFS (PFS2) by disease stage in patients (pts) with homologous recombination deficiency (HRD)-positive newly diagnosed advanced ovarian cancer receiving bevacizumab (bev) with olaparib/placebo maintenance in the phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial.

5514 Background: In the Phase III PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 trial (NCT02477644), the addition of maintenance olaparib to bev in pts with newly diagnosed advanced high-grade ovarian cancer (HGOC) resulted in a significant PFS benefit, particularly in HRD-positive (HRD+) pts (hazard ratio [HR] 0.33; 95% CI 0.25–0.45) (Ray-Coquard et al. NEJM 2019). We explored efficacy in HRD+ pts by disease stage. Methods: Pts with newly diagnosed, FIGO stage III–IV HGOC in response after platinum-based chemotherapy + bev received bev (15 mg/kg q3w for 15 months [mo]) + either olaparib (300 mg bid for 24 mo) or placebo (pbo). This exploratory analysis evaluated PFS (data cut-off [DCO]: Mar 22 2019) and PFS2 (DCO: Mar 22 2020) in HRD+ pts (tumor BRCA1/ BRCA2 mutation [tBRCAm] or genomic instability score [Myriad myChoice HRD Plus] ≥42) by FIGO stage. Results: 387/806 randomized pts (48%) were HRD+; 272/387 (70%) had stage III disease and 115/387 (30%) had stage IV disease. 153 (56%) HRD+ stage III pts and 61 (53%) HRD+ stage IV pts had a tBRCAm. Among HRD+ stage III pts, 172 (63%) had upfront surgery (51/172 [30%] had residual disease) and 90 (33%) had interval surgery (19/90 [21%] had residual disease); 52 (45%) HRD+ stage IV pts had upfront surgery (34/52 [65%] had residual disease) and 55 (48%) had interval surgery (18/55 [33%] had residual disease). Median follow-up for PFS and PFS2 was respectively 24.8 and 37.2 mo in HRD+ stage III pts and 24.0 and 37.0 mo in HRD+ stage IV pts. Median PFS, PFS2 and HRs are in the Table. Among HRD+ stage III pts, 36-mo PFS2 (olaparib + bev vs pbo + bev) was 74% vs 60%; among HRD+ stage IV pts, 53% vs 30%. Among HRD+ stage III pts with no residual disease after upfront surgery, HR (95% CI) for PFS was 0.15 (0.07–0.30) and for PFS2 was 0.22 (0.06–0.67). Among HRD+ stage III pts with residual disease after upfront surgery or who received neoadjuvant chemotherapy, or HRD+ stage IV pts, HR (95% CI) for PFS was 0.38 (0.27–0.53) and PFS2 was 0.68 (0.46–1.03). Conclusions: In the PAOLA-1 study, maintenance olaparib + bev provided a PFS and PFS2 benefit over pbo + bev in HRD+ pts, irrespective of FIGO stage and residual disease after upfront surgery. Clinical trial information: NCT02477644. [Table: see text]

A phase II study of atezolizumab (ATEZO) and bevacizumab (Bev) in combination with Y90 TARE in patients (Pts) with hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

TPS358 Background: The anti–PD-L1 antibody ATEZO prevents PD-L1 from interacting with PD-1 and B7.1, thus reinvigorating antitumor T cell activity. Anti-VEGF BEV can increase dendritic cell maturation, enhance T cell infiltration, and reduce myeloid-derived suppressor cells and regulatory T-cells in tumors. This combination has been FDA approved for first-line treatment of advanced HCC based on the IMbrave 150 study. On the other hand, locoregional radiotherapy (e.g., Y90 TARE) enhances the diversity of the intratumoral T cell receptor repertoire. It is the standard of care for pts with intermediate-stage HCC (iHCC). Based on preclinical and clinical data, we hypothesize that the combination of Y90 TARE, BEV, and ATEZO induces synergistic tumor-killing. Methods: This is an open-label, multicenter, randomized phase II study of Y90 TARE and BEV plus ATEZO compared with Y90 TARE alone in pts with unresectable IHCC. The primary study objective is to assess and compare the progression-free survival (PFS) (per mRECIST 1.1) of pts in each arm. The main secondary objective is to determine the safety and tolerability (CTCAE v5) of TARE combined with ATEZO and BEV in pts with HCC. Exploratory objectives are to assess the role of the immunoscore and PD-L1 expression levels in the prediction of improved clinical outcome in pts receiving Y-90 TARE and BEV plus ATEZO; the composition of tumor-infiltrating immune cell subtypes in predicting response to a chosen therapy; how Y90 therapy affects the proportion of antigen-presenting cells in the tumor; and symptoms experienced by pts receiving TARE and BEV plus ATEZO treatment, using patient-reported outcomes. Eligible pts have either HCC that is not amenable to surgical resection, confirmed by pathology review, or at least BCLC stage B HCC outside of downstaging criteria. Other standard eligibility criteria apply. Pts must have a pretreatment liver biopsy taken and then be randomized 1:1 to TARE (Arm A) or TARE followed by ATEZO and BEV (Arm B). Pts will have TARE mapping during week (wk) 1 and TARE treatment during wk 2. In Arm B, pts will start BEV plus ATEZO 4 wks (±1 wk) after TARE treatment. Pts will have abdominal MRI or CT scans every 12 weeks, CT scans of the chest every 24 wks, and a second tumor biopsy at 4 wks. Disease progression will be captured by both RECIST 1.1 and mRECIST. We plan to assess the safety of TARE with BEV and ATEZO in the first 10 pts randomized to Arm B for two cycles. If there are no grade ≥ 3 unexpected toxicities possibly, probably or definitely related to combined TARE plus BEV plus ATEZO, the study will continue to accrue 128 pts in total. Pts will continue study treatment (Arm B) for a total of 24 months from initiation of TARE or until intolerable toxicity or disease progression occur, whichever is earlier. Enrollment began in September 2020. Clinical trial information: NCT04541173.

Maintenance olaparib plus bevacizumab (bev) after platinum-based chemotherapy plus bev in patients (pts) with newly diagnosed advanced high-grade ovarian cancer (HGOC): Efficacy by BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutation in the phase III PAOLA-1 trial.

6039 Background: In PAOLA-1/ENGOT-ov25 (NCT02477644), adding the PARP inhibitor olaparib to maintenance bev after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy plus bev led to a statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit in pts with advanced HGOC (HR 0.59; 95% CI 0.49–0.72) (Ray-Coquard et al. 2019). Retrospective subgroup analysis in GOG-0218 (Norquist et al. 2018) suggested BRCA mutation (BRCAm) status did not significantly impact the PFS benefit provided by bev. We explored the efficacy of olaparib plus bev by BRCA1 mutation ( BRCA1m) or BRCA2 mutation ( BRCA2m) in PAOLA-1. Methods: PAOLA-1 is a randomized, double-blind, Phase III trial in pts with newly diagnosed, FIGO stage III–IV, high-grade serous or endometrioid OC, fallopian tube or primary peritoneal cancer receiving platinum-based chemotherapy plus bev then maintenance bev. Pts unrestricted by surgical outcome or BRCAm status and in response to first-line therapy were randomized to maintenance olaparib tablets (300 mg bid for up to 24 months) plus bev (15 mg/kg q3w for up to 15 months in total) or placebo plus bev, stratified by first-line treatment outcome and tumor BRCAm status. Investigator-assessed PFS (modified RECIST v1.1) by BRCAm was a predefined analysis. Results: Of 806 randomized pts, 160 (20%) had tumor BRCA1m, 76 (9%) had tumor BRCA2m and 1 (&lt;1%) had both. Median PFS follow-up was 24.1 and 27.4 months in BRCA1m and BRCA2m pts, respectively. At primary data cutoff, PFS was prolonged with olaparib plus bev versus placebo plus bev in BRCA1m pts and BRCA2m pts (Table). The percentage of BRCA1m pts who received olaparib plus bev and were progression-free at 1 and 2 years was 95% and 73% (vs. 70% and 29% for placebo plus bev) and for BRCA2m pts was 89% and 84% (vs. 84% and 53%) (Kaplan-Meier estimates). Conclusions: In PAOLA-1, maintenance olaparib plus bev provided a significant PFS benefit versus placebo plus bev in all pts analysed, regardless of whether they had BRCA1m or BRCA2m. The median PFS in the control arm suggests a role for bev in this subgroup and the hazard ratio versus an active control arm shows the value of adding maintenance olaparib to bev. Clinical trial information: NCT02477644. [Table: see text]

Patient-reported outcomes (PROs) from the Phase III IMbrave150 trial of atezolizumab (atezo) + bevacizumab (bev) vs sorafenib (sor) as first-line treatment (tx) for patients (pts) with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC).

476 Background: Atezo + bev in pts with unresectable HCC who had not received prior systemic therapy has shown statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in OS and PFS per independent review facility-assessed RECIST 1.1 vs sor in the Phase III IMbrave150 study (Cheng ESMO Asia 2019). Here, we report PRO data from this trial to show pt perspectives on the overall clinical benefit of atezo + bev. Methods: Pts were randomized 2:1 to receive either atezo 1200 mg IV q3w + bev 15 mg/kg IV q3w or sor 400 mg PO BID until loss of clinical benefit or unacceptable toxicity. Pts completed the EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-HCC18 questionnaires before tx, every 3 wk on tx, and every 3 mo after tx discontinuation or disease progression. A pre-specified secondary endpoint was time to deterioration (TTD; first ≥ 10-point decrease from baseline held for 2 consecutive assessments or 1 assessment followed by death within 3 wk) of pt-reported quality of life (QOL), physical functioning, and role functioning. Pre-specified exploratory analyses included TTD of and proportion of pts with a clinically meaningful change (≥ 10 points from baseline) in key pt-reported symptoms. Results: Questionnaire completion rates were ≥ 92% in both arms from baseline through most of the tx period. Compared with sor, atezo + bev delayed TTD of pt-reported QOL (median TTD, 11.2 vs 3.6 mo; HR, 0.63 [95% CI: 0.46, 0.85]), physical functioning (median TTD, 13.1 vs 4.9 mo; HR, 0.53 [95% CI: 0.39, 0.73]), and role functioning (median TTD, 9.1 vs 3.6 mo; HR, 0.62 [95% CI: 0.46, 0.84]). Atezo + bev also delayed TTD in pt-reported appetite loss, fatigue, pain, and diarrhea vs sor; a lower proportion of pts on atezo + bev experienced clinically meaningful deterioration in each of these symptoms vs sor. Conclusions: High-quality PRO results from IMbrave150 showed large and consistent benefits in key aspects of the pt experience with atezo + bev, further supporting its overall clinical benefit in pts with unresectable HCC who have not received prior systemic therapy. Clinical trial information: NCT03434379.

Abstract CT340: Phase 1b/2a study of the nanopharmaceutical CRLX101 with bevacizumab (bev) in the treatment of patients (pts) with refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): results from the planned interim analysis

Abstract Introduction: The inactivation of VHL occurs in most clear cell RCC (ccRCC) tumors and gives rise to the HIF hypoxia response program and to tumor angiogenesis. While antiangiogenic therapies are active in ccRCC, resistance develops in all pts. We hypothesize that dual inhibition strategies will be useful in overcoming resistance. CRLX101 (Cerulean Pharma, Inc., Cambridge, MA, USA), a novel tumor-targeted nanopharmaceutical platform containing camptothecin as its payload, has been shown in pre-clinical models to target HIF and is synergistic with bevacizumab (bev). We combined CRLX101 with bev in refractory mRCC in order to determine the safety and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the combination, and to determine its preliminary therapeutic activity in this setting. Experimental Procedures: Pts with mRCC of all histologic subtypes refractory to conventional antiangiogenic therapies were treated every 2 weeks with bev 10 mg/kg and escalating doses of CRLX101 (12 mg/m2, 15 mg/m2) in a standard 3+3 design with an expansion at the RP2D. Pts were treated until progression, death, or prohibitive toxicity. Adverse events were classified (CTCAE v 4.0), and radiographic results were assessed (RECIST v 1.1). Results Summary: 10 pts were enrolled on study with histologies of the following distribution - 6 clear cell, 2 papillary, 2 chromophobe. Pts had a median of 2 prior therapies. No dose limiting toxicities (DLTs) were observed. CRLX101 at its single-agent RP2D (15 mg/m2) was safely combined with standard bev. Two (2) episodes of grade 3 non-infectious cystitis and 1 episode of grade 3 hypertension were observed. All other toxicities were grade 1 or 2. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.6 months. One third of evaluable pts (33%) achieved a confirmed partial response (PR) including 1 patient with papillary mRCC; 4 pts (44%) had stable disease, and 2 had progressive disease as their best overall response. Prior therapies in the 3 PRs included sunitinib (all) and everolimus (all). PFS results from the stage 1 cohort exceeded the pre-specified threshold and have triggered 2nd stage accrual. Conclusions: CRLX101 can be safely combined with standard doses of bev in pts with refractory mRCC at a RP2D of 15 mg/m2 q2w of CRLX101. Preliminary outcomes to date are superior to historical controls in refractory ccRCC and suggest potential for clinical benefit across histologic subtypes of mRCC. Citation Format: Stephen M. Keefe, Meliessa Hennessy, Orvar Gunnarsson, Ronac Mamtani, David Vaughn, Jean Hoffman-Censits, Katherine Nathanson, Priti Lal, Priti Lal, Daniel Pryma, Scott Eliasof, Edward Garmey, Roger B. Cohen, Naomi B. Haas. Phase 1b/2a study of the nanopharmaceutical CRLX101 with bevacizumab (bev) in the treatment of patients (pts) with refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC): results from the planned interim analysis. [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 105th Annual Meeting of the American Association for Cancer Research; 2014 Apr 5-9; San Diego, CA. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2014;74(19 Suppl):Abstract nr CT340. doi:10.1158/1538-7445.AM2014-CT340

Phase 1B Study of Oral Dual-Pi3K/Mtor Inhibitor Gdc-0980 in Combination with Carboplatin (Carbo)/Paclitaxel (Pac) ± Bevacizumab (Bev) and Cisplatin (Cis)/Pemetrexed (Pem) in Patients (Pts) with Advanced Solid Tumors and Nsclc

ABSTRACT Aim: The PI3K signaling pathway is altered in many tumor types, including NSCLC. GDC-0980 has single-agent activity as well as preclinical cytotoxic synergy with taxane and platinum agents and antiangiogenic synergy with anti-VEGF agents. Methods: This Phase 1b study evaluated the safety and tolerability of GDC-0980 in combination with platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) and Bev in pts with advanced solid tumors (AST) or first-line advanced NSCLC: Arm A – Carbo (AUC 6) + Pac (200 mg/m2); Arm B – Carbo/Pac + Bev (15 mg/kg); Arm C - Cis (75 mg/m2) + Pem (500 mg/m2). On a 21-day cycle, CT regimens were administered on Day 1, and GDC-0980 PO QD on Days 1-14. Pharmacokinetic (PK) analyses were performed. Archival tumor tissue and blood samples for pharmacogenetic and ctDNA analyses were collected. Results: Sixty-five pts (28 in Arm A [17 NSCLC]; 18 in Arm B [10 NSCLC]; 19 in Arm C [12 NSCLC]) were treated with GDC-0980 20 to 40 mg. For AST cohorts in Arms A and B, the MTD of GDC-0980 was 25 mg (DLTs were febrile neutropenia, rash, and fatigue). For NSCLC cohorts in Arms A and C, the maximum administered dose (MAD) was 30 mg GDC-0980. At this dose, Grade 3/4 adverse events (AEs) in >10% of all treated pts were neutropenia (59%), rash (24%), febrile neutropenia and anemia (12%) in Arm A and neutropenia (33%), anemia and fatigue (25%), hypertension, infection, and pneumonitis (17%) in Arm C. Other high-grade AEs of interest were less common: hyperglycemia in Arm A (6%) and Arm C (8%) and rash (8%) in Arm C. Among NSCLC pts treated with 30 mg GDC-0980, objective responses were observed in 9 of 14 (64%) pts in Arm A and 4 of 12 (33%) pts in Arm C. Other pts with follicular thyroid, ovarian, and urothelial cancers (Arm A) and angiosarcoma (Arm B) also had objective responses. There were no apparent PK interactions. Biomarker analysis is ongoing. Conclusions: The safety profile of GDC-0980 30 mg in combination with Carbo/Pac or Cis/Pem is consistent with that of the individual agents, and AEs were manageable and reversible. These GDC-0980 combinations have demonstrated preliminary activity in first-line NSCLC. Disclosure: O. Hamid: Consultant to Genenech; W. Lin: Employee of Genentech, Inc.; B. O'keeffe: Employee of Genentech, Inc.; M.R. Lackner: Employee of Genentech, Inc.; J. Spoerke: Employee of Genentech, Inc.; J. Ware: Employee of Genentech, Inc. All other authors have declared no conflicts of interest.

Interim results of a phase 1b/2a study evaluating the nano pharmaceutical CRLX101 with bevacizumab (bev) in the treatment of patients (pts) with refractory metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC).

412 Background: VHL is inactivated in most clear cell RCC (ccRCC) tumors giving rise to the HIF hypoxia response program and tumor angiogenesis. Antiangiogenic therapies are active in ccRCC, but resistance develops in all pts. Dual inhibition strategies may be needed to overcome resistance. CRLX101, a novel nano pharmaceutical formulation of camptothecin, has been shown in pre-clinical models to target HIF. We combined CRLX101 with bev in the treatment of pts with refractory mRCC in order to determine the safety and the recommended phase 2 dose (RP2D) of the combination, and to determine the therapeutic activity of treatment. Methods: Pts with mRCC refractory to conventional antiangiogenic therapies (all subtypes) were treated every 2 weeks with bev 10 mg/kg and escalating doses of CRLX101 (12 mg/m2, 15 mg/m2) in a standard 3+3 design with an expansion at the RP2D. Pts were treated until progression, death, or prohibitive toxicity. Adverse events were classified using CTCAE v 4.0. Radiographic results were assessed by RECIST v1.1. Results: 10 pts were enrolled on study – 6 clear cell, 2 papillary, 2 chromophobe. Median prior number of therapies was 2. No dose limiting toxicities were observed. CRLX101 at its single-agent RP2D (15 mg/m2) was safely combined with standard bev. 2 episodes of grade 3 non-infectious cystitis and 1 episode of grade 3 hypertension were observed. All other toxicities were grade 1 or 2. The median progression free survival (PFS) was 7.6 months which exceeded our pre-specified threshold of 16 weeks and has triggered 2nd stage accrual. 3 of 9 evaluable pts (33%) achieved a confirmed partial response (PR) including 1 patient with papillary mRCC; 4 pts (44%) displayed stable disease, and 2 had progressive disease as their best overall response. Conclusions: Our results demonstrate that CRLX101 can be safely combined with bev in pts with refractory mRCC. The RP2D is 15 mg/m2 q2w of CRLX101 with standard bev. Preliminary outcomes to date suggest that clinical benefit, manifest as prolonged PFS, is conferred to pts with all histologic subtypes of mRCC. Clinical trial information: NCT01625936.

Efficacy and safety of bevacizumab in nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer with brain metastases.

e19134 Background: Patients (pts) with brain metastases were excluded from bevacizumab (Bev) therapy due to a case of fatal cerebral hemorrhage in 1997. However, several trials showed the safety of Bev in pts with inactive (previously treated or asymptomatic) brain metastases, and Bev therapy was recently permitted as practical care for brain metastases in Japan. Methods: We retrospectively identified pts treated with Bev for inactive brain metastases from NSCLC. CT or MRI scans performed at least 6 weeks after Bev therapy were assessed for response. Results: There were 17 pts. All pts had adenocarcinoma. Median age was 66 (range 57-74), male/female= 8/9, PS0/1/2= 3/10/4, 1st-/2nd-/3rd-/4th-line chemotherapy with Bev = 8/4/4/1, EGFR mutation status; mutated/wild type/unknown=8/7/2; concurrent chemotherapy with Bev: amrubicin (1), pemtrexed (2), cisplatin (carboplatin) + pemetrexed (10), carboplatin + paclitaxel (3), cisplatin + gemcitabine (1); prior chemotherapy: gefitinib (6), erlotinib (3), docetaxel (1), carboplatin + paclitaxel (2), cisplatin + pemetrexed (2), pemetrexed (1); prior therapy for brain metastases: surgery (1), surgery + WBRT (2),WBRT (8), SRS (4), none (2). In 14 pts with evaluable target brain metastases, the response rate for intracranial metastases was 78.6% (95% CI, 49.2-95.4%), and in 15 pts with evaluable target lesions except brain metastases, the response rate for extracranial metastases was 40.0% (95% CI, 16.3-67.7%). Serious toxicities (grade 3/4): hypertension (2/0), proteinuria (0/-). There were 2 bleeding events: one was grade 1 intracraninal hemorrhage, the other was grade 1 bronchopulumonary hemorrhage. Conclusions: Chemotherapy+Bev is effective for pts with inactive brain metastases and is a well-tolerated regimen with a favorable toxicity profile. The updated data including PFS and OS will be presented at the Annual Meeting.

Impact of duration of bevacizumab (Bev) treatment in the prognosis of adults with recurrent malignant gliomas.

2064 Background: Bev is the standard treatment for patients with recurrent glioblastoma (GB) but is also used in treating recurrent anaplastic gliomas (AG). Differences in outcome between these groups and optimal duration of treatment with Bev in pts with recurrent malignant gliomas are not well defined. We examined the relationship between the duration of Bev treatment and the outcome in pts with GB and AG. Methods: In this retrospective chart and data review derived from our longitudinal database, we identified pts with recurrent AG and GB who were treated with Bev alone or Bev-containing regimens between 2005 and 2009; the data was analyzed to determine the overall survival (OS) and the progression free survival (PFS). Results: A total of 261 patients with recurrent malignant gliomas (196 with GB and 65 with AG) were identified. There was no significant difference between the median length of treatment between AG and GB (5.81±0.66 months vs. 6.77±0.52 months, p=0.32). PFS6 was 34.2% (95% CI, 27.8-41.3) for patients with GB and 44.2% (95% CI, 32.5-56.7) for patients with AG. Patients with GB who were treated ≥6 months had a significantly higher OS (29.13 months vs. 20.16 months, p= 0.001) compared to those treated &lt;6 months, and a significantly higher PFS compared to those treated &lt;6months (11.33 months vs. 3.7 months, p=0.0001). For patients with AG, although treatment ≥6 months had a significantly higher PFS (13.93 months vs. 3.53 months, p&lt;0.0001), OS was not significantly different (months 38.6 vs. 52.5 months, p=0.6) compared with those treated &lt;6 months. Conclusions: Length of treatment ≥6 mo with Bev or Bev-containing regimen was associated with improved PFS in both AG and GB but only the GB subgroup showed improved OS. These results suggest equivocal survival benefit in patients with AG with longer duration of bevacizumab treatment, which requires further study in prospective trials.

Abstract P3-02-11: First Analysis of the Value of Circulating Epithelial Tumor Cells and Circulating Endothelial Cells (CTCs/CECs) in Patients with HER-2 Negative Recurrent or Metastatic Breast Cancer Treated with Bevacizumab in Combination with Paclitaxel and Gemcitabine as First Line Therapy (AVALUZ Trial)

Abstract Background: Circulating epithelial tumor cells (CTCs) in peripheral blood are an ideal source for the detection of disseminated tumor cells of an easy sampling procedure. Their prognosis significance has been demonstrated in metastasic breast carcinoma and have potencial to influence the clinical management for pts. with breast cancer (Cristofanilli, NEJM 2004). The antiangiogenic agent bevacizumab (Bev.), in combination with CT, improves progression free survival (PFS) of first line treatments, may modify tumor cell intravasation and CTC count, and may change CEC levels. Aims of this study are the evaluation of the prevalence and kinetics of CTCs and CECs before and after antiangiogenic treatment with Bev in pts with metastatic breast cancer. Methods: Eligible pts. received Bev (10mg/kg q2w) combined with paclitaxel 150 mg/m2 and gemcitabine 2000mg/m2 d 1 y 15 q28d as first line therapy, until disease progression, unacceptable toxicity or withdrawal. For pts. participating in the sub-study, CTC and CEC were measured in 7.5ml of blood at baseline and after the first cycle of treatment. Samples were subjected to imnumomagnetic enrichment with an anti-EpCAM antibody and fluorescence labelled. CTCs were defined as nucleated cells (DAPI+) expressing cytokeratin 8, 18 and 19 but CD45 negative phenotype. CECs were defined as nuclear cells (DAPI+) expressing CD105 PE and CD45 negative phenotype. A sample was considered positive when 1 or more cells were detected. Results: Data are available for 37 pts. We found ≥1 CTCs before first cycle of treatment with bev in 73% of the patients (N=27). After first treatment, reduction of CTCs was found in 57% of the patients (N=16). The median number of CTCs was 34 cells/7.5 ml (min 0-max 845) of blood in the first determination and 4.79 cells/7.5 ml (min 0-max 99) in the second determination, p=0.0075. In 38% of the pts (N=14) we found ≥5 baseline CTCs and after treatment &amp;lt;5 CTCs were found in 89% of the pts (N=25). In 70% of pts with baseline ≥5 CTCs count, a reduction to &amp;lt; 5CTCs was observed in the second determination (N=10), p=0.20 (IC 34.15-93.33). In 10 pts we found CTCs=0 baseline value (35%) and in the second determination after treatment CTCs=0 cells/7.5 ml was observed in 53%, p=0.058. Baseline CECs ≥1 was observed in 100% of the pts (N=31). After first cycle of treatment with bev plus CT CECs=0 was found in 1 patient (3.4%). In 70% of pts (N=14) there was a reduction of baseline CECs count, p=0.3. The median value of baseline CECs was 123 cells/7.5 ml (min 4- max 1407) and the median value in second determination was 54 cells/7.5 ml (min 0-max 349). The median of reduction of CECs after treatment was 70 CECs, p=0.02. Conclusions: The addiction of bev to 1st line CT was related with high reduction of the value of baseline CTCs and CECs count, statistically significant correlation. Reduction to &amp;lt; 5 CTCs of patients with baseline ≥5 CTCs (unfavourable prognosis) was observed in 70% of patients. The results of this explorative study are preliminary and a large number of pts and follow-up is required. Citation Information: Cancer Res 2010;70(24 Suppl):Abstract nr P3-02-11.