Investigator-assessed Progression-free Survival Research Articles

The Efficacy and Safety of Mirvetuximab Soravtansine in FRα-Positive, Third-Line and Later, Recurrent Platinum-Sensitive Ovarian Cancer: The Single-Arm Phase 2 PICCOLO Trial

Mirvetuximab soravtansine-gynx (MIRV) is a first-in-class, folate receptor alpha (FRα)-targeting antibody-drug conjugate with US Food and Drug Administration approval for FRα-positive platinum-resistant ovarian cancer. PICCOLO is a phase 2, global, open-label, single-arm trial of MIRV as third-line or greater (≥3L) treatment in patients with FRα-positive (≥75% of cells with ≥2+ staining intensity) recurrent platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC). Participants received MIRV (6 mg/kg adjusted ideal body weight every 3 weeks) until progressive disease (PD), unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or death. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). Key secondary endpoint was investigator-assessed duration of response (DOR). Additional endpoints included investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. Analyses of subgroups by disease characteristics (eg, platinum-free interval) and treatment history (eg, prior bevacizumab and poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase inhibitor [PARPi] treatment), were exploratory. Seventy-nine participants were enrolled and efficacy evaluable. The primary endpoint was met; ORR was 51.9% (95% CI, 40.4-63.3). Median DOR was 8.25 months (95% CI, 5.55-10.78) and median PFS was 6.93 months (95% CI, 5.85-9.59). OS was not mature at data cutoff. ORR was 45.8% (95% CI, 32.7-59.2) in participants with PD while on/within 30 days of prior PARPi (n=59) and 60.0% (95% CI, 14.7-94.7) in those without PD with prior PARPi (n=5). No new safety signals occurred; most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were gastrointestinal, neurosensory, and resolvable ocular events. TEAEs led to discontinuation in 13 participants (16%) and death in 2 participants (3%). MIRV as ≥3L treatment in heavily pretreated recurrent FRα-positive PSOC demonstrated notable efficacy and tolerable safety, including among those with prior PD on or within 30 days of PARPi. (Funding, ImmunoGen, Inc; NCT05041257).

Toripalimab Plus Chemotherapy as a First-Line Therapy for Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer

Patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC) have poor prognoses and unmet medical needs. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of toripalimab plus etoposide and platinum-based chemotherapy (EP) vs placebo plus EP as a first-line treatment for patients with ES-SCLC. This multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase 3 randomized clinical trial (EXTENTORCH study) enrolled patients from September 26, 2019, to May 20, 2021, and was conducted at 49 sites in China. Eligible patients had histologically or cytologically confirmed ES-SCLC without previous systemic antitumor therapy for ES-SCLC. Data were analyzed between May 6, 2023, and June 1, 2024. Patients were randomized (1:1) to receive toripalimab, 240 mg, or placebo plus EP every 3 weeks for up to 4 to 6 cycles, followed by maintenance with toripalimab or placebo until disease progression, intolerable toxic effects, or up to 2 years of treatment. The primary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Whole-exome sequencing results identified correlative biomarkers for clinical efficacy. Among 595 screened patients, 442 eligible patients were randomized (median [range] age, 63 [30-77] years; 366 [82.8%] male); 223 patients were randomized to toripalimab plus EP, and 219 to placebo plus EP. By April 20, 2023, the median (range) survival follow-up was 13.7 (0.0-42.7) months. Compared with placebo, toripalimab improved investigator-assessed PFS (hazard ratio [HR], 0.67 [95% CI, 0.54-0.82]; P < .001), and significantly reduced the risk of death (HR, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.65-0.98]; P = .03). The median OS was 14.6 (95% CI, 12.9-16.6) months in the toripalimab group vs 13.3 (95% CI, 11.8-14.4) months in the placebo group. Whole-exome sequencing results from 300 patients identified low intratumor heterogeneity, HLA-A11+ HLA-B62- haplotype, wild-type KMT2D and COL4A4, or sequence variations in CTNNA2 or SCN4A correlated with favorable PFS and OS in the toripalimab group. No new safety signals were observed. Grade 3 or higher treatment-emergent adverse event incidence was similar between the toripalimab and placebo safety set groups (199 of 222 patients [89.6%] vs 193 of 216 patients [89.4%], respectively). In this phase 3 randomized clinical trial, adding toripalimab to first-line chemotherapy demonstrated significant improvements in PFS and OS for patients with ES-SCLC. The treatment exhibited an acceptable safety profile, supporting this combination regimen as a new treatment option for patients with ES-SCLC. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04012606.

FDA Approval Summary: Polatuzumab Vedotin in the First-Line Treatment of Select Large B-cell Lymphomas.

In April 2023, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration granted regular approval to polatuzumab vedotin-piiq in combination with a rituximab product, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, and prednisone (pola+R-CHP) for adult patients who have previously untreated diffuse large B-cell lymphoma, not otherwise specified or high-grade B-cell lymphoma and who have an International Prognostic Index score of 2 or greater. Approval was based on POLARIX, a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial evaluating the superiority of substituting vincristine with polatuzumab vedotin in the rituximab, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, vincristine, and prednisone (R-CHOP) regimen as first-line therapy for patients with large B-cell lymphoma (LBCL). Efficacy was based on investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) in 879 patients who were randomized to receive pola+R-CHP or R-CHOP, followed by two cycles of rituximab alone. PFS was statistically significantly longer with pola+R-CHP with a HR of 0.73 [95% CI: 0.57, 0.95] and log-rank p-value of 0.0177 (two-sided α=0.05). There was no improvement demonstrated in the key secondary endpoints of CR rate at the end of therapy or overall survival (OS). Several issues raised uncertainty about the benefit-risk of polatuzumab vedotin in this curative-intent setting including the modest PFS benefit of pola+R-CHP and lack of OS benefit. The application was therefore presented at an Oncology Drug Advisory Committee. This article summarizes key aspects of the regulatory review, including perspectives on PFS and OS results and other endpoints.

Camizestrant, a next-generation oral SERD, versus fulvestrant in post-menopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (SERENA-2): a multi-dose, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial

Resistance to endocrine therapies in hormone receptor-positive breast cancer is challenging. We aimed to assess the next-generation oral selective oestrogen receptor degrader (SERD) and complete oestrogen receptor antagonist, camizestrant, versus the first-approved SERD, fulvestrant, in post-menopausal women with oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative, advanced breast cancer. SERENA-2 is an open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial that is being conducted at 74 study centres across Asia, Europe, the Middle East, and North America. Female patients aged 18 years or older who were post-menopausal with histologically or cytologically confirmed metastastic or locoregional oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer, an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group or WHO performance status of 0 or 1, and disease recurrence or progression on at least one line of endocrine therapy, and no more than one previous endocrine therapy in the advanced setting. Patients were initially randomly assigned (1:1:1:1) to receive oral camizestrant once daily at 75 mg, 150 mg, or 300 mg (until the 300 mg group was closed), or fulvestrant intramuscularly at 500 mg (per label). Randomisation was managed through an interactive web-based system and stratified by previous treatment with CDK4/6 inhibitors and presence of liver and/or lung metastases. The primary objective was to determine clinical efficacy of camizestrant versus fulvestrant at each dose level using the primary endpoint of investigator-assessed progression-free survival, per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours (version 1.1), assessed by intention to treat in all randomly assigned patients (full analysis set). No formal statistical comparison for the efficacy analysis of the camizestrant 300 mg dose versus fulvestrant was to be performed. Safety analyses included all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of study treatment. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04214288, and is ongoing. Between May 11, 2020, and Aug 10, 2021, 240 patients were randomly assigned to receive camizestrant 75 mg (n=74), 150 mg (n=73), 300 mg (n=20), or fulvestrant (n=73), and were included in the full analysis set. All patients received at least one dose of study drug. Median follow-up was 16·6 months (IQR 12·9-19·4) for the camizestrant 75 mg group, 16·3 months (12·9-18·3) for the camizestrant 150 mg group, and 14·7 months (12·7-20·1) for the fulvestrant 500 mg group. Median progression-free survival was 7·2 months (90% CI 3·7-10·9) with camizestrant 75 mg, 7·7 months (5·5-12·9) with camizestrant 150 mg, and 3·7 months (2·0-6·0) with fulvestrant. The hazard ratio for camizestrant 75 mg versus fulvestrant was 0·59 (90% CI 0·42-0·82; p=0·017), and the hazard ratio for camizestrant 150 mg versus fulvestrant was 0·64 (0·46-0·89; p=0·0090). Treatment-related adverse events occurred in 39 (53%) of 74 patients in the camizestrant 75 mg group, 49 (67%) of 73 patients in the camizestrant 150 mg group, 14 (70%) of 20 patients in the camizestrant 300 mg group, and 13 (18%) of 73 patients in the fulvestrant group. No single grade 3 or worse treatment-emergent adverse event occurred in more than two (3%) patients in any group. Serious treatment-emergent adverse events occurred in six (8%) patients in the camizestrant 75 mg group, seven (10%) patients in the camizestrant 150 mg group, two (10%) patients in the camizestrant 300 mg group, and four (5%) patients in the fulvestrant group. No treatment-related deaths occurred. Camizestrant at 75 and 150 mg showed a significant benefit in progression-free survival versus fulvestrant. These results support further development of camizestrant for the treatment of oestrogen receptor-positive, HER2-negative breast cancer. AstraZeneca.

Capivasertib and fulvestrant for patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer: analysis of the subgroup of patients from Japan in the phase 3 CAPItello-291 trial.

In CAPItello-291, capivasertib-fulvestrant significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) versus placebo-fulvestrant in the overall and PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered population with hormone receptor-positive (HR-positive)/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HER2-negative) advanced breast cancer. Capivasertib-fulvestrant is approved in Japan for the treatment of patients with one or more tumor biomarker alterations (PIK3CA, AKT1 or PTEN). Here, we report outcomes in the CAPItello-291 subgroup of patients from Japan. Adults with HR-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer whose disease had relapsed or progressed during or after treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, with or without previous cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 (CDK4/6) inhibitor therapy, were randomly assigned (1:1 ratio) to receive capivasertib or placebo, plus fulvestrant. The dual primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS in the overall andPIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered population. Safety was a secondary endpoint. Of 708 patients randomized in CAPItello-291, 78 were from Japan (37 randomized to capivasertib-fulvestrant and 41 to placebo-fulvestrant). In the Japan subgroup, PFS numerically favored the capivasertib-fulvestrant arm (hazard ratio 0.73; 95% CI 0.40-1.28), consistent with the analysis of PFS in the global population. Similarly, in the Japan subgroup of patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered tumors, PFS favored the capivasertib-fulvestrant arm (hazard ratio 0.65; 95% CI 0.29-1.39), consistent with the global population. The adverse event profile of capivasertib-fulvestrant in the Japan subgroup was broadly similar to that in the global population; no new safety concerns were identified. Outcomes in the Japan subgroup were broadly similar to those of the global population, supporting the clinical benefit of capivasertib-fulvestrant in treating HR-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer that has progressed on, or after, an endocrine-based regimen.

Ipatasertib plus Paclitaxel for Patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-Altered Locally Advanced Unresectable or Metastatic Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in the IPATunity130 Phase III Trial.

In the randomized phase II LOTUS trial, combining ipatasertib with first-line paclitaxel for triple-negative breast cancer (TNBC) improved progression-free survival (PFS), particularly in patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered tumors. We aimed to validate these findings in a biomarker-selected TNBC population. In Cohort A of the randomized double-blind placebo-controlled phase III IPATunity130 trial, taxane-eligible patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered measurable advanced TNBC and no prior chemotherapy for advanced disease were randomized 2:1 to ipatasertib (400 mg, days 1-21) or placebo, both plus paclitaxel (80 mg/m2, days 1, 8, and 15), every 28 days until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed PFS. Between February 2018 and April 2020, 255 patients were randomized (168 to ipatasertib, 87 to placebo). At the primary analysis, there was no significant difference between treatment arms in PFS [hazard ratio 1.02, 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.71-1.45; median 7.4 months with ipatasertib vs. 6.1 months with placebo]. The final analysis showed no difference in overall survival between treatment arms (hazard ratio 1.08, 95% CI, 0.73-1.58; median 24.4 vs. 24.9 months, respectively). Ipatasertib was associated with more grade ≥3 diarrhea (9% vs. 2%) and adverse events leading to dose reduction (39% vs. 14%) but similar incidences of grade ≥3 adverse events (51% vs. 46%). Exploratory subgroup analyses by PAM50 and Burstein gene expression showed inconsistent results. Adding ipatasertib to paclitaxel did not improve efficacy in PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN-altered advanced TNBC. Biomarkers for benefit from PI3K/AKT pathway inhibition in TNBC remain poorly understood.

Atezolizumab Combined With Platinum and Maintenance Niraparib for Recurrent Ovarian Cancer With a Platinum-Free Interval >6 Months: ENGOT-OV41/GEICO 69-O/ANITA Phase III Trial.

To evaluate atezolizumab combined with platinum-based chemotherapy (CT) followed by maintenance niraparib for late-relapsing recurrent ovarian cancer. The multicenter placebo-controlled double-blind randomized phase III ENGOT-OV41/GEICO 69-O/ANITA trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03598270) enrolled patients with measurable high-grade serous, endometrioid, or undifferentiated recurrent ovarian cancer who had received one or two previous CT lines (most recent including platinum) and had a treatment-free interval since last platinum (TFIp) of >6 months. Patients were stratified by investigator-selected carboplatin doublet, TFIp, BRCA status, and PD-L1 status in de novo biopsy and randomly assigned 1:1 to receive either atezolizumab or placebo throughout standard therapy comprising six cycles of a carboplatin doublet followed (in patients with response/stable disease) by maintenance niraparib until progression. The primary end point was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) per RECIST v1.1. Between November 2018 and January 2022, 417 patients were randomly assigned (15% BRCA-mutated, 36% PD-L1-positive, 66% TFIp >12 months, 11% previous poly [ADP-ribose] polymerase inhibitor after frontline CT, and 53% previous bevacizumab). Median follow-up was 28.6 months (95% CI, 26.6 to 30.5 months). Atezolizumab did not significantly improve PFS (hazard ratio, 0.89 [95% CI, 0.71 to 1.10]; P = .28). Median PFS was 11.2 months (95% CI, 10.1 to 12.1 months) with atezolizumab versus 10.1 months (95% CI, 9.2 to 11.2 months) with standard therapy. Subgroup analyses generally showed consistent results, including analyses by PD-L1 status. The objective response rate (ORR) was 45% (95% CI, 39 to 52) with atezolizumab and 43% (95% CI, 36 to 49) with standard therapy. The safety profile was as expected from previous experience of these drugs. Combining atezolizumab with CT and maintenance niraparib for late-relapsing recurrent ovarian cancer did not significantly improve PFS or the ORR.

FLAIR: A Phase II, Open Label, Randomized Study of Osimertinib Plus Bevacizumab Versus Osimertinib in Recurrent or Metastatic Treatment-Naïve NSCLC Patients Harboring EGFR 21L858R Mutation

IntroductionOsimertinib, the 3rd generation EGFR-TKI, has emerged as standard first-line treatment for patients with advanced EGFR mutated nonsmall cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Patients with exon 21 L858R mutation showed lower efficacy with EGFR-TKIs than those with 19Del mutation, even with osimertinib, it remains an unmet medical need to further improve the efficacy in L858R population. We present the rationale and design for FLAIR (NCT04988607), which will investigate the efficacy and safety of osimertinib plus bevacizumab versus osimertinib monotherapy in treatment-naïve recurrent or metastatic NSCLC patients harboring EGFR exon 21 L858R mutation. Materials and MethodsFLAIR is a prospective, multicenter, randomized, open label study, which is initiated by Chinese Thoracic Oncology Group (CTONG2002). Patients age ≥18 years with primary recurrent or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC who are treatment-naïve with documented EGFR exon 21 L858R mutation is eligible. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive osimertinib 80 mg once daily plus bevacizumab 15mg/kg every 3 weeks or osimertinib monotherapy 80 mg once daily until progression or another discontinuation criterion is met. The primary endpoint is investigator-assessed progression free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints include: overall survival rate at 24 months, time to treatment failure (TTF), overall response rate (ORR), disease control rate (DCR), duration of response (DoR), central nervous system (CNS) PFS, CNS ORR and safety. ResultsFLAIR has completed the enrollment, and results are expected in the fourth quarter of 2025 (depending on the actual event rate). ConclusionsThis study will offer better perspectives on the efficacy and safety of osimertinib plus bevacizumab combination therapy in treatment-naïve recurrent or metastatic NSCLC patients harboring EGFR exon 21 L858R mutation, providing valuable guidance for clinical practice.

Phase 2 dose-ranging study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of liposomal irinotecan (LY01610) as a second-line treatment for patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer

This was a multicenter, single-arm dose-ranging phase 2 study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of LY01610, a liposomal irinotecan, at various doses for patients with relapsed small cell lung cancer (SCLC). This study (NCT04381910) enrolled patients with relapsed SCLC at 10 hospitals across China, who have failed with previous platinum-based treatments. LY01610 was administered at doses of 60mg/m2, 80mg/m2, and 100mg/m2. Primary endpoints were investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR) and investigator-assessed duration of response (DoR). Secondary endpoints included investigator-assessed disease control rate (DCR), investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and safety. From September 3, 2020 to March 3, 2022, a total of 66 patients were enrolled, with 6, 30, and 30 allocated to the 60mg/m2, 80mg/m2, and 100mg/m2 dose groups, respectively, with 68% (45/66) having a chemotherapy-free interval <90 days. In all 66 patients, the ORR was 32% (21/66, 95% confidence interval [CI], 21-44), with a median DoR of 5.2 months (95% CI, 3.0-8.3). Median PFS and OS were 4.0 (95% CI, 2.9-5.5) and 9.7 (95% CI, 7.2-12.3) months, respectively. The ORR of 60mg/m2, 80mg/m2, and 100mg/m2 dose group were 33% (2/6), 33% (10/30), and 30% (9/30), respectively. The median DoR of 60mg/m2, 80mg/m2, and 100mg/m2 dose group were 4.2 (95% CI, 2.8-not reached), 6.9 (95% CI, 2.5-9.9), and 4.0 (95% CI, 2.7-6.8) months, respectively. The incidence of ≥ grade 3 treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs) in the 60mg/m2, 80mg/m2, and 100mg/m2 dose group were 33% (2/6), 47% (14/30), and 50% (15/30), respectively. Themost common≥grade 3 TRAEs of all 66 patients were neutropenia (27%), leukopenia (24%) and anemia (15%). LY01610 exhibited promising clinical efficacy and manageable safety profiles in patients with relapsed SCLC, the 80mg/m2 dose group had the best benefit-risk ratio. This study was supported by Luye Pharma Group Ltd.

Capivasertib and fulvestrant for patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer (CAPItello-291): patient-reported outcomes from a phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

CAPItello-291 is an ongoing phase 3 trial in which capivasertib-fulvestrant significantly improved progression-free survival versus placebo-fulvestrant in patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced breast cancer who had relapse or disease progression during or after aromatase inhibitor treatment, in both the overall population and in patients with PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN-altered tumours. This study further explored patient-reported health-related quality of life (HRQOL), functioning, symptoms, and symptom tolerability in CAPItello-291. This phase 3, randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, which was conducted across 193 hospitals and cancer centres in 19 countries, enrolled women with any menopausal status or men, aged ≥18 years (≥20 years in Japan), with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer who had relapse or disease progression during or after treatment with an aromatase inhibitor, with or without previous cyclin-dependent kinase (CDK) 4 or 6 inhibitor therapy. Patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group/WHO performance score of 0 or 1 and could have received up to two previous lines of endocrine therapy and up to one previous line of chemotherapy for advanced disease. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) using block randomisation (stratified according to the presence or absence of liver metastases, previous use of a CDK4/6 inhibitor [yes vs no], and geographical region) to receive oral capivasertib 400 mg (twice daily for 4 days, followed by 3 days off) plus intramuscular fulvestrant 500 mg (every 14 days for the first three injections, then every 28 days) or placebo with matching fulvestrant dosing. The dual primary endpoint of the trial was investigator-assessed progression-free survival assessed both in the overall population and among patients with PIK3CA, AKT1, or PTEN-altered tumours. The EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire 30-item core module (QLQ-C30) and breast module (QLQ-BR23), Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE), and Patient Global Impression of Treatment Tolerability (PGI-TT) questionnaires were used to assess patient-reported outcomes. Evaluation of EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC QLQ-BR23 were secondary endpoints and evaluation of PRO-CTCAE and PGI-TT were pre-defined exploratory endpoints, and these endpoints are the subject of analysis in this Article. Data were collected at baseline and prespecified timepoints. Patient-reported outcomes were analysed in all randomly assigned patients with an evaluable baseline assessment and at least one evaluable post-baseline assessment. Change from baseline was assessed using mixed model with repeated measures for EORTC QLQ-C30 and summarised for QLQ-BR23. Time to deterioration was described using the Kaplan-Meier method. PGI-TT and PRO-CTCAE responses were summarised at each treatment cycle. Patient-reported outcomes were not prospectively powered for statistical comparison. The trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04305496. Between June 2, 2020, and Oct 13, 2021, 901 patients were enrolled, of whom 708 patients were randomly assigned to receive capivasertib-fulvestrant (n=355) or placebo-fulvestrant (n=353). The median age of the patients was 59 years (IQR 51-67) in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group and 58 years (IQR 49-66) in the placebo-fulvestrant group. At data cutoff (Aug 15, 2022), the median duration of follow-up for progression-free survival in censored patients was 13·0 months (IQR 9·1-16·7) for capivasertib-fulvestrant and 12·7 months (IQR 2·0-16·4) for placebo-fulvestrant in the overall population. EORTC QLQ-C30 global health status/quality of life (GHS/QOL) scores were maintained from baseline and were similar between treatment groups throughout the study period (difference in mean change from baseline of -2·5 [95% CI -4·5 to -0·6] with capivasertib-fulvestrant vs -5·6 [-7·9 to -3·4] with placebo-fulvestrant; treatment difference 3·1 [95% CI 0·2 to 6·0]). Median time to deterioration in EORTC QLQ-C30 GHS/QOL was 24·9 months (95% CI 13·8 to not reached) in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group and 12·0 months (10·2 to 15·7) in the placebo-fulvestrant group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·70, 95% CI 0·53 to 0·92). Time to deterioration HRs for all EORTC QLQ-C30 and QLQ-BR23 subscale scores showed little difference between the treatment groups, except for diarrhoea, which was worse in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group than in the placebo-fulvestrant group (HR 2·75, 95% CI 2·01-3·81). In PRO-CTCAE symptom assessment, the proportion of patients reporting loose and watery stools "frequently" or "almost constantly" was 29% higher at cycle 1, day 15 in the capivasertib-fulvestrant group than in the placebo-fulvestrant group, decreasing at subsequent cycles. Other PRO-CTCAE-reported symptoms (rash, mouth or throat sores, itchy skin, and numbness or tingling in hands or feet) were absent or mild in most patients in both groups throughout treatment. According to the PGI-TT, most patients in both groups reported "not at all" or "a little bit" of bother from treatment side-effects. Patient-reported outcomes from CAPItello-291 demonstrated that capivasertib-fulvestrant delayed time to deterioration of GHS/QOL and maintained other dimensions of HRQOL (except symptoms of diarrhoea) similarly to fulvestrant. With the clinical efficacy and manageable safety profile, these exploratory results further support the positive benefit-risk profile of capivasertib-fulvestrant in this population. AstraZeneca.

A phase 3 study (PATHWAY) of palbociclib plus tamoxifen in patients with HR-positive/HER2-negative advanced breast cancer

Palbociclib combined with endocrine therapy is approved for treating patients with hormone-receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2−) advanced breast cancer; however, data on palbociclib combined with tamoxifen are limited. We investigated the efficacy and safety of palbociclib–tamoxifen in patients with HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer. This double-blind phase 3 study included 184 women who were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive palbociclib–tamoxifen or placebo–tamoxifen. Pre/perimenopausal women also received goserelin. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS) and safety. Median PFS was 24.4 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.1–32.4) with palbociclib–tamoxifen and 11.1 months (95% CI, 7.4–14.6) with placebo–tamoxifen (hazard ratio [HR], 0.60; 95% CI, 0.43–0.85; P = 0.002). Palbociclib–tamoxifen improved PFS in patients who were treated with first-line or second-line endocrine therapy and pre-, peri-, and postmenopausal patients. Though OS data are still immature (median not reached in both groups), an overall risk reduction of 27% (HR, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.44–1.21) with palbociclib–tamoxifen was observed at the time of PFS analysis. The most common grade 3/4 adverse event with palbociclib–tamoxifen was neutropenia (89.0% [none were febrile] versus 1.1% with placebo–tamoxifen). There were no deaths owing to adverse events in either group. Among patients with HR+/HER2− advanced breast cancer, palbociclib–tamoxifen resulted in significantly longer PFS than tamoxifen alone. Early OS data showed a trend favoring palbociclib–tamoxifen. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03423199. Study registration date: February 06, 2018.

US Food and Drug Administration Approval Summary: Capivasertib With Fulvestrant for Hormone Receptor-Positive, Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer With PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN Alterations.

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved capivasertib in combination with fulvestrant for adult patients with hormone receptor-positive, human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-negative, locally advanced, or metastatic breast cancer (MBC) who have received at least one previous endocrine therapy and whose tumors harbor one or more phosphatidylinositol 3-kinase (PIK3CA)/AKT Serine/Threonine Kinase 1 (AKT1)/phosphatase and tensin homolog (PTEN) alterations, as detected by an FDA-approved test. Approval was based on CAPItello-291, a randomized, double-blind, multicenter trial of 708 patients with hormone receptor-positive, HER2-negative advanced or MBC, including 289 patients with PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN tumor alterations. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to receive capivasertib 400 mg twice daily for 4 days per week with fulvestrant versus placebo with fulvestrant. Random assignment was stratified by presence of liver metastases, previous treatment with CDK4/6i, cyclin-dependent kinase four and six (CDK4/6) inhibitors, and geographical region. A statistically significant progression-free survival (PFS) benefit was demonstrated in the overall population (hazard ratio [HR], 0.6 [95% CI, 0.51 to 0.71]); this result was driven by 289 patients in the biomarker-positive population (HR, 0.5 [95% CI, 0.37 to 0.68]). An exploratory analysis of investigator-assessed PFS in the 313 (44%) patients in the biomarker-negative population showed uncertain benefit (HR, 0.78 [95% CI, 0.60 to 1.01]). With capivasertib, more patients had Grade ≥3 toxicities. Key concerns included hyperglycemia (18% all-grade, 2.8% Grade ≥3), cutaneous toxicity (58% all-grade, 17% Grade ≥3), and diarrhea (72% all-grade, 9% Grade ≥3). Capivasertib with fulvestrant was approved for patients whose tumors harbored PIK3CA/AKT1/PTEN alterations. Benefit-risk assessment in this subgroup was favorable based on a statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvement in PFS in the context of an acceptable safety profile including no evidence of a potential detriment in overall survival. By contrast, the benefit-risk was unfavorable in the biomarker-negative population.

REZILIENT3: Phase 3 study of zipalertinib plus chemotherapy in patients with previously untreated, advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) harboring epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) exon 20 insertions (ex20ins) mutations.

TPS219 Background: Despite recent advances, tolerable and effective treatments for patients with NSCLC harboring EGFR ex20ins mutations are needed, particularly in the first-line setting where platinum-based chemotherapy remains the standard of care. Zipalertinib (CLN-081/TAS6417), an oral tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) of EGFR with broad activity against EGFR mutations, showed encouraging antitumor activity in heavily pretreated patients with EGFR ex20ins–mutant NSCLC, leading to ‘Breakthrough Therapy’ designation by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in January 2022. Data suggest that combining EGFR TKIs with chemotherapy can improve antitumor efficacy versus chemotherapy or TKI treatment alone in patients with EGFR-mutated nonsquamous NSCLC. REZILIENT3 is a pivotal phase 3 study designed to compare the efficacy and safety of zipalertinib plus first-line standard-of-care platinum-based chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone in previously untreated patients with nonsquamous NSCLC harboring EGFR ex20ins mutations. Methods: This randomized, controlled, open-label, phase 3 study (NCT05973773) will be conducted in two parts. Part A (safety lead-in) will confirm the safety of zipalertinib 100 mg twice daily as the recommended dose in combination with chemotherapy in patients with locally advanced or metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC harboring EGFR ex20ins mutations or other uncommon single/compound EGFR mutations. In Part B (randomized part), patients with EGFR ex20ins mutations and at least one measurable lesion (per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours, version 1.1) will be randomized 1:1 to zipalertinib plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone, stratified by Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status (0/1), brain metastases (yes/no), and geography (Asia/rest of world). Zipalertinib will be administered orally at a starting dose of 100 mg twice daily (pending confirmation in Part A). Chemotherapy (pemetrexed 500 mg/m² plus cisplatin 75 mg/m² or carboplatin area under the curve 5 mg/mL/min) will be administered intravenously on Day 1 of each cycle (carboplatin/cisplatin for four cycles). Patients randomized to chemotherapy alone will be allowed to cross over to zipalertinib monotherapy after documented progressive disease. The primary endpoint in Part B is progression-free survival assessed by blinded independent central review. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, investigator-assessed progression-free survival, objective response rate, duration of response, disease control rate, safety, intracranial efficacy endpoints, and quality of life. Part A is anticipated to enroll between 6 and 12 patients, while Part B is estimated to enroll approximately 260 patients. Enrollment started in June 2023. Clinical trial information: NCT05973773 .

CHAPTER-GIST-101: A phase I study of pimitespib combined with imatinib in patients with imatinib-refractory gastrointestinal stromal tumor.

TPS97 Background: Gastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is soft-tissue sarcoma of the gastrointestinal tract. Most GISTs harbor mutations in KIT or PDGFRA, recognized as key drivers of GIST development and progression. Imatinib (IM), which inhibits KIT/PDGFRA tyrosine kinase, exerts significant clinical activity in GIST, but most GISTs develop resistance to IM, mainly due to secondary kinase-domain mutations in KIT. Therefore, standard therapies for patients (pts) with IM-refractory GIST have room for improvement. Heat shock protein 90 (HSP90) is one of the molecular chaperones. Many of HSP90's client proteins, such as KIT, PDGFRA, and BRAF, have been identified as cancer-related proteins required for tumor development, and their activation, especially in mutant forms, is dependent on HSP90.Therefore, HSP90 inhibitors have a potential to overcome IM-resistance. Pimitespib (PIMI) is a novel HSP90 inhibitor, approved in Japan for pts with fourth line GIST based on the results of the phase 3 study (CHAPTER-GIST-301). We reported at ESMO 2023 (1917MO) that PIMI effectively inhibited tumor growth in an IM-resistant xenograft model, and further enhanced the anti-tumor activity when given with IM, and that PIMI + IM was well tolerated with no dose-limiting toxicity and suggested preliminary efficacy in pts resistant to IM in a dose-escalation part (DEP) of CHAPTER-GIST-101 study. Methods: The CHAPTER-GIST-101 study (NCT05245968) is a global phase 1 study in pts with IM-refractory advanced GIST in the second-line setting, consisting of three parts: the DEP, its expansion part (ExP), and another DEP for Chinese pts. The DEP used a 3+3 design to determine the maximum tolerated dose of PIMI (120 mg/day or 160 mg/day, orally, on 5 days on/2 days off) in combination with IM (400 mg/day once daily) and the ExP is for the efficacy and safety with determined dose of 120 mg/day PIMI + IM. The ExP is a global, open-label, randomized, part evaluating the efficacy and safety of PIMI in combination with IM, PIMI monotherapy, and standard therapy sunitinib (SU) in each arm of 20 pts. Pts are randomized 1:1:1 to receive either PIMI 120 mg on 5 days on/2 days off with IM 400 mg once daily, PIMI 160 mg on 5 days on/2 days off followed by IM 400 mg once daily after discontinuation of PIMI, or SU 50 mg on 4 weeks on/2 weeks off. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS) by the independent radiological review. The secondary endpoints include investigator-assessed PFS, overall survival, objective response rate, disease control rate, duration of response, PK and safety. Exploratory pharmacogenomics analysis is also planned. After the DLT evaluation for the DEP, enrollment for the ExP began in March 2023 in Japan, Singapore, Taiwan and Australia, and for the DEP for Chinese pts is also ongoing in China to evaluate tolerability and efficacy of this combination. Clinical trial information: NCT05245968 .

Molecularly guided therapy versus chemotherapy after disease control in unfavourable cancer of unknown primary (CUPISCO): an open-label, randomised, phase 2 study

Patients with unfavourable subset cancer of unknown primary (CUP) have a poor prognosis when treated with standard platinum-based chemotherapy. Whether first-line treatment guided by comprehensive genomic profiling (CGP) can improve outcomes is unknown. The CUPISCO trial was designed to inform a molecularly guided treatment strategy to improve outcomes over standard platinum-based chemotherapy in patients with newly diagnosed, unfavourable, non-squamous CUP. The aim of the trial was to compare the efficacy and safety of molecularly guided therapy (MGT) versus standard platinum-based chemotherapy in these patients. This was to determine whether the inclusion of CGP in the initial diagnostic work-up leads to improved outcomes over the current standard of care. We herein report the primary analysis. CUPISCO was a phase 2, prospective, randomised, open-label, active-controlled, multicentre trial done at 159 sites in 34 countries outside the USA. Patients with central eligibility review-confirmed disease (acceptable histologies included adenocarcinoma and poorly differentiated carcinoma) and an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1, evaluated by CGP, who reached disease control after three cycles of standard first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned 3:1 via a block-stratified randomisation procedure to MGT versus chemotherapy continuation for at least three further cycles. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03498521, and follow-up is ongoing. From July 10, 2018, to Dec 9, 2022, 636 (42%) of 1505 screened patients were enrolled. Median follow-up in the treatment period was 24·1 months (IQR 11·6-35·6). Of 438 patients who reached disease control after induction chemotherapy, 436 were randomly assigned: 326 (75%) to the MGT group and 110 (25%) to the chemotherapy group. Median progression-free survival in the intention-to-treat population was 6·1 months (95% CI 4·7-6·5) in the MGT group versus 4·4 months (4·1-5·6) in the chemotherapy group (hazard ratio 0·72 [95% CI 0·56-0·92]; p=0·0079). Related adverse event rates per 100-patient-years at risk were generally similar or lower with MGT versus chemotherapy. In patients with previously untreated, unfavourable, non-squamous CUP who reached disease control after induction chemotherapy, CGP with subsequent MGTs resulted in longer progression-free survival than standard platinum-based chemotherapy. On the basis of these results, we recommend that CGP is performed at initial diagnosis in patients with unfavourable CUP. F Hoffmann-La Roche.

Predictors of long-term progression-free survival in patients with ovarian cancer treated with niraparib in the PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study

ObjectiveTo identify characteristics associated with long-term progression-free survival (≥2 years) in patients with advanced ovarian cancer treated with niraparib first-line maintenance therapy in the phase III PRIMA/ENGOT-OV26/GOG-3012 study.MethodsIn this post...

Alectinib Versus Crizotinib in Asian Patients With Treatment-Naïve Advanced ALK-Positive NSCLC: Five-Year Update From the Phase 3 ALESIA Study

IntroductionPrevious results from the phase 3 ALESIA study (NCT02838420) revealed that alectinib (a central nervous system [CNS]-active, ALK inhibitor) had clinical benefits in treatment-naïve Asian patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, consistent with the global ALEX study. We present updated data after more than or equal to 5 years of follow-up from the “last patient in” date. MethodsAdult patients with treatment-naïve, advanced ALK-positive NSCLC from mainland China, South Korea, and Thailand were randomized 2:1 to receive twice-daily 600 mg alectinib (n = 125) or 250 mg crizotinib (n = 62). The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival. Secondary or exploratory endpoints included overall survival, objective response rate, time to CNS progression, and safety. ResultsAt the data cutoff (May 16, 2022), the median survival follow-up was 61 and 51 months in the alectinib and crizotinib arms, respectively. Median progression-free survival was 41.6 months with alectinib versus 11.1 months with crizotinib (stratified hazard ratio = 0.33, 95% confidence interval: 0.23–0.49). Overall survival data remain immature; 5-year overall survival rates were 66.4% (alectinib arm) versus 56.1% (crizotinib arm). Objective response rate was 91.2% versus 77.4% with alectinib and crizotinib, respectively. CNS progression was delayed with alectinib versus crizotinib (cause-specific hazard ratio = 0.16, 95% confidence interval: 0.08–0.32). Median treatment duration was longer with alectinib versus crizotinib (42.3 versus 12.6 mo). No new safety signals were observed. ConclusionsWith four additional years of follow-up, these updated results confirm the clinical benefit and manageable safety of alectinib in Asian patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC, and confirm alectinib as a standard-of-care treatment for patients with advanced ALK-positive NSCLC.

Bemarituzumab plus mFOLFOX6 as first-line treatment in East Asian patients with FGFR2b-overexpressing locally advanced or metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal junction cancer: subgroup of FIGHT final analysis

BackgroundIn the FIGHT study (NCT03694522) bemarituzumab, a humanized monoclonal antibody selective for fibroblast growth factor receptor 2b (FGFR2b), plus mFOLFOX6 showed clinically meaningful efficacy in patients with FGFR2b-positive (2+/3+ membranous staining by immunohistochemistry) locally advanced unresectable/metastatic gastric/gastroesophageal cancer (G/GEJC). A meaningful proportion of patients in FIGHT were enrolled in East Asia, reflecting global epidemiology of G/GEJC.MethodsThis subgroup analysis of the global, phase 2, double-blind FIGHT study included all patients enrolled in East Asian sites. Patients were randomized 1:1 to bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 (15 mg/kg and one 7.5 mg/kg dose on cycle 1, day 8) or matching placebo-mFOLFOX6. The primary endpoint was investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), objective response rate, and safety. Efficacy was evaluated after a minimum follow-up of 24 months.ResultsThe East Asian subgroup comprised 89 patients (57% of overall study population); 45 were randomized to bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 and 44 to placebo-mFOLFOX6. Median PFS (95% confidence interval [CI]) was 12.9 months (8.8–17.9) with bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 and 8.2 months (5.6–10.3) with placebo-mFOLFOX6 (HR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29–0.87); median OS (95% CI) was 24.7 months (13.8–33.1) vs 12.9 months (9.3–21.4), respectively (HR 0.56, 95% CI 0.32–0.96). Treatment benefit was more pronounced in patients with FGFR2b-positive G/GEJC in ≥ 10% of tumor cells. No new safety signals were reported.ConclusionIn East Asian patients with FGFR2b-positive advanced/metastatic G/GEJC enrolled in the global FIGHT study, bemarituzumab-mFOLFOX6 showed clinically meaningful outcomes over placebo-mFOLFOX6.

Nanoliposomal irinotecan and fluorouracil plus leucovorin versus fluorouracil plus leucovorin in patients with cholangiocarcinoma and gallbladder carcinoma previously treated with gemcitabine-based therapies (AIO NALIRICC): a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial

There is an unmet need for effective therapies in pretreated advanced biliary tract cancer. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of nanoliposomal irinotecan and fluorouracil plus leucovorin compared with fluorouracil plus leucovorin as second-line treatment for biliary tract cancer. NALIRICC was a multicentre, open-label, randomised, phase 2 trial done in 17 German centres for patients aged 18 years or older, with an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1, metastatic biliary tract cancer, and progression on gemcitabine-based therapy. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to receive intravenous infusions of nanoliposomal irinotecan (70 mg/m2), fluorouracil (2400 mg/m2), and leucovorin (400 mg/m2) every 2 weeks (nanoliposomal irinotecan group) or fluorouracil (2400 mg/m2) plus leucovorin (400 mg/m2) every 2 weeks (control group). Randomisation was by permutated block randomisation in block sizes of four, stratified by primary tumour site. Investigator-assessed progression-free survival was the primary endpoint, which was evaluated in all randomly assigned patients. Secondary efficacy outcomes were overall survival, objective response rate, and quality of life. Safety was assessed in all randomly assigned patients who received at least one dose of the study treatment. Enrolment for this trial has been completed, and it is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03043547. Between Dec 4, 2017, and Aug 2, 2021, 49 patients were randomly assigned to the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 51 patients to the control group. Median age was 65 years (IQR 59-71); 45 (45%) of 100 patients were female. Median progression-free survival was 2·6 months (95% CI 1·7-3·6) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 2·3 months (1·6-3·4) in the control group (hazard ratio [HR] 0·87 [0·56-1·35]). Median overall survival was 6·9 months (95% CI 5·3-10·6) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 8·2 months (5·4-11·9) in the control group (HR 1·08 [0·68-1·72]). The objective response rate was 14% (95% CI 6-27; seven patients) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 4% (1-14; two patients) in the control group. The most common grade 3 or worse adverse events in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group were neutropenia (eight [17%] of 48 vs none in the control group), diarrhoea (seven [15%] vs one [2%]), and nausea (four [8%] vs none). In the control group, the most common grade 3 or worse adverse events were cholangitis (four [8%] patients vs none in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group) and bile duct stenosis (four [8%] vs three [6%]). Treatment-related serious adverse events occurred in 16 (33%) patients in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group (grade 2-3 diarrhoea in five patients; one case each of abdominal infection, acute kidney injury, pancytopenia, increased blood bilirubin, colitis, dehydration, dyspnoea, infectious enterocolitis, ileus, oral mucositis, and nausea). One (2%) treatment-related serious adverse event occurred in the control group (worsening of general condition). Median duration until deterioration of global health status, characterised by the time from randomisation to the initial observation of a score decline exceeding 10 points, was 4·0 months (95% CI 2·2-not reached) in the nanoliposomal irinotecan group and 3·7 months (2·7-not reached) in the control group. The addition of nanoliposomal irinotecan to fluorouracil plus leucovorin did not improve progression-free survival or overall survival and was associated with higher toxicity compared with fluorouracil plus leucovorin. Further research is necessary to define the role of irinotecan-based combinations in second-line treatment of biliary tract cancer. Servier and AIO-Studien.

GOG 3088: A randomized phase II study of letrozole versus observation in patients with newly diagnosed uterine leiomyosarcoma.

TPS5643 Background: Uterine leiomyosarcomas (uLMS) are rare, accounting for less than five percent of all malignant uterine neoplasms. Approximately 85% of women present with clinical stage I disease (i.e., disease limited to the uterus and cervix). NCCN guidelines for stage I uterine confined disease currently recommend observation; however, recurrence risk of uLMS overall is quite high at 50-70% within the first two years. The estrogen receptor (ER) is expressed in 40-87% of leiomyosarcomas. Because of this high expression, estrogen may act as a growth factor that stimulates cell proliferation and tumor growth. Subsequently, there have been several evaluations for the use of aromatase inhibitors as single agent therapy for uLMS. These trials have each shown varying degrees of clinical activity. We hypothesize that by decreasing systemic estrogen using an aromatase inhibitor we will prolong the time to recurrence for patients with this disease. Methods: This is a GOG Foundation led phase II randomized controlled trial comparing letrozole (2.5mg PO daily) to observation in newly diagnosed patients with uterine confined stage I uLMS. Forty patients will be randomized 1:1. Patients will be eligible post operatively if they have no measurable disease and will be required to be estrogen receptor (ER) positive, as defined by ³ 10% expression by immunohistochemistry (IHC). No stratification methods will be applied. The primary endpoint of the trial is investigator-assessed progression free survival. Exploratory translational evaluation will occur to 1) correlate response to letrozole based on IHC hormone receptor status, 2) evaluate gene expression signatures of hormone receptor activity, tumor biology, and tumor microenvironment in relation to response to letrozole, and 3) evaluate the contribution of single nucleotide polymorphism rs3820282 to tumor biology and response to letrozole. GOG 3088 activated in January of 2024 and expects to enroll across 20 US sites. Clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT05649956. Clinical trial information: NCT05649956 .