Progression-free Survival Hazard Ratio Research Articles

Trastuzumab deruxtecan versus trastuzumab emtansine in Asian patients with HER2-positive metastatic breast cancer.

The global phase 3 DESTINY-Breast03 study (ClinicalTrials.gov; NCT03529110) showed statistically significant and clinically meaningful improvements in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) with trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) over trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) in patients with human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-positive metastatic breast cancer (mBC) previously treated with trastuzumab and a taxane. Here, we report a subgroup analysis of Asian patients enrolled in DESTINY-Breast03. In total, 309 patients (149 in the T-DXd arm and 160 in the T-DM1 arm) from Asian countries and regions were randomized. At data cutoff (July 25, 2022), the median duration of follow-up in the Asian subpopulation was 29.0 months with T-DXd and 26.0 months with T-DM1. The PFS (determined by blinded independent central review) hazard ratio was 0.30 (95% confidence interval 0.22-0.41) favoring T-DXd over T-DM1 (median PFS 25.1 vs. 5.4 months). Median OS was not reached in the T-DXd arm and was 37.7 months in the T-DM1 arm. The median treatment duration was 15.4 months with T-DXd and 5.5 months with T-DM1. The incidence of grade ≥3 drug-related treatment-emergent adverse events was similar between both treatment arms (49.0% vs. 46.5%) and was consistent with the overall DESTINY-Breast03 population. Adjudicated drug-related interstitial lung disease or pneumonitis occurred in 12.9% of patients treated with T-DXd and 2.5% treated with T-DM1, with a higher incidence in Japanese patients; none of these were grade ≥4 events. These efficacy and safety data reinforce the favorable benefit-risk profile of T-DXd in HER2-positive mBC, including in the Asian subgroup.

Autologous transplant vs. CAR-T therapy in patients with DLBCL treated while in complete remission

In patients with relapsed DLBCL in complete remission (CR), autologous hematopoietic cell transplantation (auto-HCT) and CAR-T therapy are both effective, but it is unknown which modality provides superior outcomes. We compared the efficacy of auto-HCT vs. CAR-T in patients with DLBCL in a CR. A retrospective observational study comparing auto-HCT (2015–2021) vs. CAR-T (2018–2021) using the Center for International Blood & Marrow Transplant Research registry. Median follow-up was 49.7 months for the auto-HCT and 24.7 months for the CAR-T cohort. Patients ages 18 and 75 with a diagnosis of DLBCL were included if they received auto-HCT (n = 281) or commercial CAR-T (n = 79) while in a CR. Patients undergoing auto-HCT with only one prior therapy line and CAR-T patients with a previous history of auto-HCT treatment were excluded. Endpoints included Progression-free survival (PFS), relapse rate, non-relapse mortality (NRM) and overall survival (OS). In univariate analysis, treatment with auto-HCT was associated with a higher rate of 2-year PFS (66.2% vs. 47.8%; p < 0.001), a lower 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse (27.8% vs. 48% ; p < 0.001), and a superior 2-year OS (78.9% vs. 65.6%; p = 0.037). In patients with early (within 12 months) treatment failure, auto-HCT was associated with a superior 2-year PFS (70.9% vs. 48.3% ; p < 0.001), lower 2-year cumulative incidence of relapse (22.8% vs. 45.9% ; p < 0.001) and trend for higher 2-year OS (82.4% vs. 66.1% ; p = 0.076). In the multivariable analysis, treatment with auto-HCT was associated with a superior PFS (hazard ratio 1.83; p = 0.0011) and lower incidence of relapse (hazard ratio 2.18; p < 0.0001) compared to CAR-T. In patients with relapsed LBCL who achieve a CR, treatment with auto-HCT is associated with improved clinical outcomes compared to CAR-T. These data support the consideration of auto-HCT in select patients with LBCL achieving a CR in the relapsed setting.

Efficacy and safety of apatinib plus immune checkpoint inhibitors and transarterial chemoembolization for the treatment of advanced hepatocellular carcinoma

PurposeThe evidence of apatinib plus immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) and transarterial chemoembolization (TACE) for treating advanced hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is limited. This study aimed to compare the treatment efficacy and safety of apatinib plus ICIs and TACE with apatinib plus TACE in these patients.MethodsThis study retrospectively enrolled 90 patients with advanced HCC treated with apatinib plus TACE (A-TACE group, n = 52) or apatinib plus ICIs and TACE (IA-TACE group, n = 38).ResultsThe objective response rate was numerically higher in IA-TACE group compared with A-TACE group without statistical significance (57.9% vs. 36.5%, P = 0.055). Disease control rate was not different between groups (86.8% vs. 76.9%, P = 0.248). Progression-free survival (PFS) was improved in IA-TACE group compared with A-TACE group (P = 0.018). The median PFS (95% confidence interval) was 12.5 (8.7–16.3) months in IA-TACE group and 8.5 (5.6–11.4) months in A-TACE group. Overall survival (OS) was also prolonged in IA-TACE group compared with A-TACE group (P = 0.007). The median OS (95% confidence interval) was 21.1 (15.8–26.4) months in IA-TACE group and 14.3 (11.5–17.1) months in A-TACE group. By multivariate Cox regression model, IA-TACE was independently associated with prolonged PFS (hazard ratio = 0.539, P = 0.038) and OS (hazard ratio = 0.447, P = 0.025). Most adverse events were not different between groups. Only the incidence of reactive cutaneous capillary endothelial proliferation was higher in IA-TACE group compared with A-TACE group (10.5% vs. 0.0%, P = 0.029).ConclusionApatinib plus ICIs and TACE may be an effective and safe treatment for patients with advanced HCC, but further large-scale studies are needed for verification.

Alectinib vs. Lorlatinib in the Front-Line Setting for ALK-Rearranged Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer (NSCLC): A Deep Dive into the Main Differences across ALEX and CROWN Phase 3 Trials.

Various next-generation ALK TKIs are available as first-line options for ALK-positive NSCLC, with alectinib and lorlatinib being commonly preferred. However, no direct comparison between them has been conducted, making it impossible to pick a winner. We performed an analytic, 'non-comparative' assessment of the two phase 3 pivotal clinical trials showing superiority of alectinib (ALEX) and lorlatinib (CROWN) in comparison to crizotinib. Overall, the two studies were very similar in the study design and patient characteristics, with the exception of the selection and evaluation of brain metastases. PFS hazard ratios numerically favored lorlatinib, both according to the investigator and to BICR. Notably, the 3-year PFS rate was numerically higher with lorlatinib (64%) than with alectinib (46.4%). Despite similar response rates and overall intracranial response, the rate of complete intracranial response was higher with lorlatinib, with a cumulative incidence risk of CNS disease progression at 12 months of 9.4% with alectinib and 2.8% with lorlatinib. The peculiar toxicities of lorlatinib were related to lipidic profile alterations, peripheral oedema and cognitive effects, with no impact on cardiovascular risk nor impairment in quality of life versus crizotinib. Furthermore, the rate of permanent treatment discontinuation due to adverse events was numerically higher with alectinib (26%) than with lorlatinib (7%). In conclusion, despite the immature OS data for both drugs, the efficacy of lorlatinib appears higher than alectinib while maintaining a manageable toxicity profile.

Prognostic Impact of the Administration of Antibiotics and Proton Pump Inhibitors in Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Combination Therapy for Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

The prognostic impact of the administration of antibiotics and proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) in immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) therapy for advanced cancer has recently been documented. However, how these drugs affect the outcomes of first-line ICI combination therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains unclear. We retrospectively evaluated the data of 128 patients with RCC who received first-line ICI combination therapy. The patients were grouped according to their history of antibiotics and PPIs use one month before the initiation of ICI combination therapy. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) after ICI combination therapy were compared between patients treated with and without antibiotics or PPIs. Of the 128 patients, 30 (23%) and 44 (34%) received antibiotics and PPIs, respectively. Patients treated with antibiotics exhibited shorter PFS and OS compared to those who did not receive antibiotics (median PFS: 4.9 vs. 16.1 months, p<0.0001; OS: 20.8 vs. 49.0 months, p=0.0034). Multivariate analyses showed that antibiotic administration was an independent predictor of shorter PFS (hazard ratio: 2.54: p=0.0002) and OS (hazard ratio: 2.56: p=0.0067) after adjusting for other covariates. In contrast, there were no significant differences in either PFS or OS between patients who received PPIs and those who did not. (PFS: p=0.828; OS: p=0.105). Antibiotics administration before ICI combination therapy was negatively associated with outcomes of first-line ICI combination therapy for advanced RCC. Therefore, careful monitoring is required for potentially high-risk patients undergoing ICI combination therapy.

Clinical Association Between Immune-related Adverse Events and Treatment Efficacy in Patients With Non-small-cell Lung Cancer Treated With Nivolumab-Ipilimumab-based Therapy.

Nivolumab and ipilimumab combination therapy has been extensively explored for the treatment of advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) through the pivotal phase III trials CheckMate 227 and CheckMate 9LA. However, the relationship between immune-related adverse events (irAEs) and the effectiveness of nivolumab plus ipilimumab-based therapy in a real-world clinical setting remains uncertain. We performed a retrospective analysis of 28 patients with advanced or recurrent NSCLC who underwent treatment with nivolumab plus ipilimumab, with or without platinum-doublet chemotherapy, from February 2021 to January 2023. The primary objective was to elucidate the clinical association between irAEs and treatment efficacy associated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab-based therapy. Among the 28 patients, 22 (78.6%) experienced irAEs. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer for patients with irAEs than for those without (p=0.0158), as was overall survival (OS) (p=0.000394). The severity of irAEs had no significant influence on PFS or OS. The objective response rate tended to be higher in patients with irAEs than in those without (50.0% versus 0.0%, respectively; p=0.0549). Multivariate analysis indicated that irAE occurrence was an independent factor for improved PFS (hazard ratio=0.2084, p=0.01383) and OS (hazard ratio=0.0857, p=0.001588). Interstitial lung disease was inferior to other irAE profiles for both PFS and OS. Patients with advanced NSCLC experiencing irAEs demonstrated superior clinical outcomes when treated with nivolumab plus ipilimumab-based therapy compared with those without irAEs. However, immune-related interstitial lung disease may be less linked with PFS and OS than other irAE profiles.

Dynamic changes of serum α-fetoprotein predict the prognosis of bevacizumab plus immunotherapy in hepatocellular carcinoma.

Alpha-fetoprotein (AFP) has been established as a biomarker for hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC); however, whether its dynamic changes could predict the response to systemic therapy remains elusive. This study explored the AFP trajectory and the association with survival in patients received bevacizumab plus immunotherapy. We retrospectively enrolled 536 HCC patients received bevacizumab plus immunotherapy between February 2021 and February 2023. Patients were divided into two groups according to AFP values before treatment (400ng/ml). Dynamic changes of AFP were fitted using a latent class model to generate the AFP trajectories. Multivariable Cox models were utilized to compute hazard ratios (HRs) for survival. Inverse-probability-of-treatment weighted analyses were conducted to mitigate the influence of unmeasured confounding variables. The primary endpoint is progression free survival (PFS). The second endpoint is overall survival (OS). Three distinct trajectories were identified for AFP-low and AFP-high patients, respectively. In AFP-low group, compared with the high-rising class (25%; n=69), HRs of PFS were 0.39 and 0.2 for the low-stable class (59.1%; n=163) and sharp-falling class (15.9%; n=44), after adjusting by tumor diameter, tumor number, and extra-hepatic metastasis. In AFP-high group, compared with the high-stable class (18.5%; n=48), HRs of PFS were 0.3 and 0.04 for the middle-stable class (56.5%; n=147) and sharp-falling class (25%; n=65), after adjusting by tumor diameter, tumor number, and extra-hepatic metastasis. Furthermore, the AFP trajectories exhibited the utmost relative importance among all covariates regarding PFS and OS in the multivariable regression models. The AFP trajectories in HCC patients receiving bevacizumab and immunotherapy, constituted an independent biomarker indicative of clinical outcomes. Findings from this study hold potential clinical utility in dynamically forecasting the prognosis of systemic therapy in HCC patients and facilitating clinical decision-making. Rapid reduction of AFP post-treatment can lead to favorable patient prognoses.

Gustave Roussy Immune score as a prognostic biomarker in patients with platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma treated with pembrolizumab: YUSHIMA study.

This study aimed to investigate the prognostic value of the Gustave Roussy Immune score (GRIm-score) in platinum-refractory metastatic urothelial carcinoma (UC) treated with pembrolizumab. This multicenter retrospective study (YUSHIMA study) evaluated 331 patients with metastatic UC treated with pembrolizumab after platinum-based chemotherapy between January 2018 and June 2023 at 13 institutions. We collected pretreatment variables, including the GRIm-score based on serum albumin, lactate dehydrogenase, and neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio. The patients were divided into low and high GRIm-score groups. Prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) were determined using the multivariate Cox proportional hazard model. During the median follow-up period of 7.3months, 278 (84%) patients showed disease progression, and 223 (67%) died from any cause. Multivariate analysis revealed that the high GRIm-score group was an independent and significant adverse prognostic factor of both OS and PFS (hazard ratio, 1.65 and 1.82, respectively; both p < 0.001) along with Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Performance Status of ≥ 2 (both p < 0.001), presence of visceral metastasis (both p < 0.001), and hemoglobin of < 9.2g/dL (p = 0.030 and p = 0.038). C-reactive protein of > 42mg/L was a significant prognostic factor for OS (p = 0.001). The GRIm-score is an independent prognostic marker for survival outcomes in patients with platinum-refractory metastatic UC treated with pembrolizumab.

The Effect of Age and Other Patient Characteristics on Outcomes Among Nontransplanted Patients Who Were Treated With First-Line Lenalidomide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone: Results From the ConnectⓇ MM Registry

BackgroundLenalidomide (R), bortezomib (V), and dexamethasone (d) is a standard-of-care regimen in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM); however, characteristics and outcomes for nontransplanted patients receiving frontline RVd are not well understood. PatientsThe ConnectⓇ MM Registry is a large, US, multicenter, prospective observational cohort study of NDMM patients. MethodsThis analysis investigated characteristics and outcomes of patients who received RVd alone or followed by Rd or R (RVd ± Rd/R) who did not undergo frontline autologous stem cell transplantation. ResultsAs of August 2021, 314 of 1979 nontransplanted patients received RVd ± Rd/R as initial therapy. Of these, 135 were aged ≤ 65 years and 179 were > 65 years. 108 patients had time to relapse (TTR) of ≤ 12 months and 182 had TTR > 12 months. Baseline characteristics were comparable regardless of TTR and age group except renal function, which was more commonly impaired in older patients. Among patients aged ≤ 65 and > 65 years, median duration of first-line treatment was 6.3 and 9.0 months, median time to next line for those who received second-line therapy was 15.5 and 15.2 months, median progression-free survival (PFS) was 19.3 and 23.0 months, and median overall survival was 60.0 and 59.1 months, respectively. High-risk disease (per IMWG criteria) and high serum calcium were associated with higher hazard of progression or death; the adjusted PFS hazard ratio with respect to age (≤ 65 vs. > 65 years) based on multivariable analysis was 1.18 (0.89-1.57; P = .25). ConclusionThese results indicate RVd is active across age groups and provide a better understanding of outcomes with RVd in NDMM.

Surrogate endpoints and outcomes in modern small cell lung cancer trials.

8091 Background: Overall Survival (OS) may not always be a feasible primary endpoint. Endpoints such as Overall Response Rate (ORR), Disease Control Rate (DCR=CR+PR+SD), Progression Free Survival (PFS), are frequently used in the assessment of treatments. However, improvements in DCR, ORR, PFS may not translate into OS benefit. Resilient trial showed a doubling of ORR to PEGylated liposomal irinotecan1 compared to control but no improvement in PFS/OS. Furthermore, these associations may differ between 1st line (1L) and relapsed (2L) disease settings. This study analyzes the relationship between ORR, DCR, PFS, and OS in extensive-stage SCLC. Methods: MEDLINE, Embase, ClinicalTrials.gov were searched to identify randomized, phase III trials between 2014-2024. PRISMA guideline was followed. DCR, ORR, OS, PFS data were extracted. Weighted linear regression models investigated the association between treatment effects on DCR, ORR, OS, PFS. Weighted Pearson correlation analyses were performed under logarithmic transformation of DCR/ORR odds ratio besides DCR/ORR difference between treatment arms, with weights equal to the inverse of variance of DCR/ORR associated with the log PFS HR and the log OS HR. Logistic regression models were used to derive DCR/ORR odds ratios. Hazard ratios (HR) estimated from Cox proportional hazards regression models were used. All tests are two-sided; p-value &lt; 0.05 is significant. Results: 115 trials were identified. 22 met the criteria. DCR: 1) 1L and 2L: DCR difference between arms and the log odds ratio and log PFS HR were strongly correlated: –0.63 (P = 0.001) for the DCR difference model; –0.64 (P = 0.0008) for the log odds ratio model. No correlation was found between DCR and OS; 2) 1L: No correlation between DCR and PFS &amp; OS was found; 3) 2L: DCR difference between arms and the log odds ratio and log PFS HR were correlated: –0.84 (P = 0.01) for the DCR difference model; –0.84 (P = 0.01) for the log odds ratio model. ORR:1) 1L and 2L: ORR difference between arms and the log odds ratio and log PFS HR were correlated: –0.43 (P = 0.036) for the ORR difference model; –0.51 (P = 0.011) for the log odds ratio model; 2) 1L: No correlation between ORR and PFS &amp; OS was found; 3) 2L: No correlation between ORR and PFS &amp; OS was found. PFS:1)1L and 2L: The Pearson correlation coefficients between log HR of PFS and log HR of OS: 0.6 (p = 0.002); 2) 1L: The Pearson correlation coefficient between log HR of PFS and log HR of OS: 0.77 (p = 0.0005) 3) 2L: The Pearson correlation coefficients between log HR of PFS and log HR of OS: -0.14 (p = 0.732). Conclusions: In the 1L setting, neither DCR nor ORR predict PFS and OS. However, PFS predicts OS. In the 2L, ORR does not predict either OS or PFS; however, DCR predicts PFS and shows a trend with OS. Unlike in the frontline setting, PFS does not predict OS in the second-line setting. Reference: 1 Rudin CM, Dowlati A, Chen Y, et al.161O RESILIENT part 2: A randomized, open-label phase III study of liposomal irinotecan versus topotecan in adults with relapsed SCLC.

The subgroup analysis by age and geriatric assessment in a phase III study comparison of trastuzumab emtansine with trastuzumab, pertuzumab, and docetaxel in older patients with advanced stage HER2-positive breast cancer (JCOG1607 HERB TEA study).

1031 Background: The JCOG1607, HERB TEA Study, is a phase III trial that compared trastuzumab emtansine (T-DM1) with the HPD regimen (trastuzumab, pertuzumab, docetaxel) in older patients with advanced HER2-positive breast cancer. The primary objective was to confirm the non-inferiority of T-DM1 to HPD in overall survival (OS), with a margin of 1.35 for hazard ratio (HR). The trial was terminated early due to futility at the planned first interim analysis. T-DM1 didn't show non-inferiority to HPD in OS (HR 1.263; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.677-2.357). Median progression-free survival (PFS) was 11.3 months for T-DM1 and 15.6 months for HPD (HR 1.373; 95% CI, 0.917-2.056). However, the condition of older patients varies widely, and we conducted a subgroup analysis to investigate the subgroup that could benefit from T-DM1 with fewer side effects as a first-line treatment. Methods: Subgroup analysis for OS and PFS involved 148 patients enrolled in JCOG1607, considering age and PS (&lt;75 years old and PS 0,1 or &lt;75 years old and PS 2 or ≥75 years old), Geriatric 8 (G8) score (≥15 or &lt;15), Instrumental Activity of Daily Living (IADL) score (8 or &lt;8), visceral/brain metastasis presence (with or without), and other factors. Results: Subgroup of &lt;75 and PS 2 was not evaluable. For OS, HR of T-DM1 arm to HPD arm was 0.749 (95% CI: 0.310-1.808) in the group aged &lt;75 years, while 2.867 (95%CI: 1.018-8.069) in the group aged ≥75 years (Table). G8 score and the IADL score did not show significant differences in HR for OS, although low G8 score group and low IADL score group tended to have higher OS in HPD arm than T-DM1 arm: HR of T-DM1 arm to HPD arm of 1.541 (95% CI: 0.755-3.142) in low G8 score group and 2.147 (95% CI: 0.656-7.025) in low IADL score group. For PFS, patients with visceral/brain metastasis had HR of T-DM1 arm to HPD arm of 1.794 (95% CI: 1.092-2.948). No other subgroup showed a significant difference in HR for PFS. Conclusions: No subgroups benefiting from T-DM1 as first-line treatment were identified. HPD remains the standard for advanced HER2-positive breast cancer, regardless of age (even in ≥75 years) G8 score, or IADL. Clinical trial information: UMIN000030783. [Table: see text]

Exploratory biomarker analysis for predicting treatment effects of aflibercept in the VELOUR trial.

3592 Background: Second-line treatment with aflibercept and FOLFIRI in patients with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (mCRC) previously treated with oxaliplatin improved overall survival (OS) versus placebo [Hazard ratio (HR), 0.81; 95% CI, 0.71–0.93; P=0.003]1. However, colorectal cancer (CRC) is a heterogenous disease and the new intrinsic consensus molecular (iCMS) allows for tumours to be subtyped into unique genetic and transcriptional features2. We present a post hoc analysis of VELOUR patient data, to assess the impact of KRAS or BRAF mutation status and iCMS on efficacy parameters. Methods: Patient samples were classified as either KRAS or BRAF mutant or wild-type (WT) via a targeted mutation panel1. Gene expression data was used to classify samples as either iCMS2 or iCMS3 using a modified classifier based on iCMS signatures which are specifically up-regulated in tumour samples2. Results: Of the 439 patients with available RNA data, 54.9% (241/439) were classified as iCMS2; 45.1% (198/439) as iCMS3; 48.3% (212/439) as RAS mutant and 8.4% (37/439) as RAF mutant. A favourable aflibercept treatment effect was observed for patients within the KRAS WT group (Median OS from 11 to 17.7 months; HR 0.87; 95% CI 0.79-0.96, P=0.005), particularly for patients with KRAS WT iCMS2 tumours (Median OS from 15.5 to 30.4 months; HR 0.81; 95% CI 0.70-0.94, P=0.004). This is in comparison to the KRAS WT iCMS3 patients where no treatment benefit was seen (HR 0.97; 95% CI 0.82-1.14, P=0.683). In addition, no treatment benefit was seen in the KRAS mutant group (OS HR 1.03; 95% CI 0.96-1.12, P=0.405). Progression-free survival (PFS) data followed the same trend. Aflibercept seemed to also strongly benefit the 37 patients with BRAF-mutated tumours, (PFS HR 0.46, 95% CI 0.20-1.09; OS HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.29-1.48), although differences were not statistically significant. Irrespective of treatment, improved OS (HR 0.60; 95% CI 0.48-0.75, P&lt; 0.001) and PFS (HR 0.75; 95% CI 0.60-0.94, P=0.011) were observed in all patients with iCMS2 versus iCMS3 tumours, as expected. Treatment-by-mutation status interaction tests (OS P=0.40, PFS P=0.33) indicated that the aflibercept benefit was not statistically different among the mutation sub-groups, although the small sample size limited the analysis. Conclusions: In the VELOUR study, the benefit of the addition of aflibercept to FOLFIRI appears to be primarily in patients with KRAS WT tumours, especially those with KRAS WT iCMS2. The improved OS and PFS seen in all patients with iCMS2 tumours in comparison to iCMS3 is prognostic but not predictive of aflibercept treatment response in addition to FOLFIRI. On the contrary, the addition of aflibercept to FOLFIRI provided a numerical benefit in BRAF-mutated tumours, however the P-values were not statistically significant.

NRG-LU002: Randomized phase II/III trial of maintenance systemic therapy versus local consolidative therapy (LCT) plus maintenance systemic therapy for limited metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

8506 Background: First line therapy options for advanced NSCLC without actionable molecular alterations include immunotherapy (IO) -/+ chemotherapy or chemotherapy alone. NRG-LU002 was a randomized phase II/III study assessing the benefits of local consolidative therapy (LCT) when added to systemic therapy as maintenance in management of oligometastatic NSCLC. Methods: Eligible patients had metastatic NSCLC with 3 or fewer extracranial metastatic sites (excluding primary) exhibiting at least stable disease after 4 cycles of 1st line systemic therapy. Patients were randomized 1:2 to maintenance systemic therapy or LCT (radiation and/or surgery) followed by maintenance systemic therapy until progression, death, or intolerable toxicity. Stratification factors included histology and IO use. In the randomized phase II (RPhII) portion of the study, the primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) with a planned decision analysis after 216 patients were enrolled and 138 PFS events observed. Secondary endpoints included overall survival (OS), quality of life, and toxicity. The RPhII portion was designed to provide at least 95% power to detect a PFS hazard ratio (HR) of 0.60 at 1-sided significance level of 0.15, and the phase III portion warranted only if the estimated HR was less than 0.83. Results: NRG-LU002 accrual was initiated in 4/2017 and suspended in 11/2021 when the RPhII portion sample size was met. Following the planned interim analysis, the study was closed in 12/2023. Overall, 215 patients (81 -LCT arm, 134 +LCT arm) were enrolled from 68 sites with a median age of 65 years (40-86), 77% white, 95% PS 0/1, 78% non-squamous histology, and 90% having received IO-based systemic therapy. Median follow-up among all/surviving patients were 21.9/29.4 months, respectively. With 138 PFS events from both arms, estimated 1-yr and 2-yr PFS rates were 48% (95% CI: 35.9, 59.0) and 36% (95% CI: 24.8, 47.2) in the maintenance systemic therapy arm and 52% (95% CI: 42.5, 59.8) and 40% (95% CI: 31.5, 48.6) in the LCT + maintenance systemic therapy arm, respectively (2-sided log-rank test p-value = 0.66). Corresponding HR was 0.93 (95% CI: 0.66, 1.31). Of 185 patients treated with IO-containing regimens, the PFS HR was 0.90 (95% CI: 0.61, 1.32). OS HR between two arms was 1.05 (0.70, 1.56) among all patients and 1.05 (0.68, 1.63) among IO-treated patients. For adverse events reported as definitely, probably or possibly related to treatment, there were more LCT + maintenance systemic therapy patients with overall grade 2 or higher toxicities (73% vs 84%) and grade 3 or higher pneumonitis (1% vs 10%). Conclusions: LCT added to IO-based 1st line systemic therapy was associated with a PFS HR of 0.90. Reducing toxicity and increasing biologically-driven patient selection may optimize this therapeutic ratio. Clinical trial information: NCT03137771 .

The value of blinded independent central review (BICR) in recent trials in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).

e23000 Background: Progression free survival (PFS) is an endpoint that has been increasingly used to obtain approval of new cancer drugs and strategies. However, there are a number of issues that can complicate assessment of PFS. One of these is the potential for investigator bias. This has been addressed by the use of blinded independent central review (BICR). However, BICR increases costs and complexity. Methods: The current study evaluated the results of BICR versus investigator assessment (IA) for phase III randomized clinical trials in thoracic oncology with initial publication from 1.01.2013-12.31.2023. Trials were included if they involved targeted agents, antibody drug conjugates or immunotherapy. Studies with &lt; 100 pts or comparing only cytotoxic chemotherapy or maintenance strategies were excluded. Studies with cytotoxic chemotherapy as part of therapy or within the control arm were included. A search of clinicaltrials.gov with the terms “phase III”, “non-small cell lung cancer” for completed studies was done, supplemented by a bibliographic search. Publications were then reviewed for whether a BICR was utilized and whether both BICR and IA were reported. Hazard Ratios (HR) for PFS between IA vs BICR were compared. Results: 49 randomized phase III trials were identified of which 34 describe BICR of which 21 reported both IA and BICR results. Six studies evaluated immunotherapy and enrolled 3337 pts, 15 evaluated targeted agents and enrolled 6531 pts. All immunotherapy studies were significantly positive for the experimental arm and 14 of 15 of the targeted therapies were positive. PFS data was reported for 17 of the studies (not reached for experimental arms in 2 and not reported in 2 others). HRs were directionally similar in all studies, though were lower (more favorable) in IA vs BICR in 5 of 6 immunotherapy studies and 11 of 15 targeted therapy studies. The mean % difference for immunotherapy studies was 8.9% and the median 10%, range 2-23.5%. For the positive targeted therapies studies the mean/median differences were 14.6%/15.6%, range 1.5-42%. The largest % differences were seen at the lowest HRs (e.g..19 vs .27; 42%). For immunotherapy studies, the median PFS difference was 0.2 and 0.28 months for the control and experimental arms, respectively. For targeted therapy studies, median PFS differences were 0.4 and 0.95 months for the control and experimental arms, respectively. The studies were performed in multiple countries including the United States, European Union, China and Japan. Conclusions: Despite a wide range of agents and settings, no trial for which information is publicly available comparing BICR to IA has demonstrated any qualitative difference in outcome nor more than a marginal numerical difference.

Genomic profiling in a subgroup analysis of patients (pts) with diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) and extranodal (EN) sites of involvement in the phase 3 Pola-R-CHP versus R-CHOP (POLARIX) study.

7061 Background: The prognosis and survival outcomes of pts with EN involvement remain a challenge for DLBCL management. In the Phase 3 POLARIX study (NCT03274492), Pola-R-CHP demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) compared with R-CHOP in previously untreated DLBCL (Tilly et al. 2022). This retrospective analysis assessed clinical outcomes and genomic patterns of pts with DLBCL and EN disease. Methods: POLARIX methods were previously described (Tilly et al. 2022). Using a data cutoff of June 15, 2022, this analysis assessed pts with EN involvement as determined by investigators. Additional outcomes and genomics analyses were performed on pts whose EN status was confirmed from documented radiographic lesions or bone marrow biopsy with denotation of EN disease sites. Hazard ratios (HRs) for investigator-assessed PFS were adjusted for age (≤60 vs &gt;60) and sex. Cell of origin (COO) by NanoString, mutation analysis by whole exome sequencing, and global gene expression profiling by RNAseq were performed centrally. Results: In POLARIX, 616/879 pts (70%) had identified EN involvement. After a median follow-up of 39.7 months, pts showed improved PFS with Pola-R-CHP vs R-CHOP (HR 0.72, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.55–0.96), with a 2-year PFS of 75% vs 66%. A total of 556 pts (Pola-R-CHP, n=279; R-CHOP, n=277) had confirmed sites of EN involvement, defined as pts with EN radiographic lesions or bone marrow disease. In these pts, PFS favored Pola-R-CHP vs R-CHOP but the difference was not statistically significant (HR 0.84, 95% CI: 0.63–1.13). Of pts with confirmed EN disease, 429 had COO results (activated B-cell, 145 [34%]; germinal center B-cell, 223 [52%]; unclassified DLBCL, 61 [14%]). Mutation data and frequencies of select clinically relevant mutations (Ptashkin, 2023) across EN sites were available for 364 pts (Table). Gene expression data were available for 418 pts; genes involved in proliferation (E2F or PI3K signaling targets and checkpoint genes) and regulated by IRF4, OCT2 and XBP1, were commonly upregulated in pts with EN disease. Conclusions: Results in pts with DLBCL with EN involvement suggest superior PFS with Pola-R-CHP vs R-CHOP. Ongoing analyses will further assess the independent impact of EN status on outcome. POLARIX represents the largest cohort of pts with annotated EN disease and systematic genomic analysis, providing new insights into the genomics of these pts. Clinical trial information: NCT03274492 . [Table: see text]

Cancer associated macrophages in blood correlates with poor outcomes in patients with clinically resectable disease in gastrointestinal cancers.

e15052 Background: Gastrointestinal (GI) cancers, i.e., pancreatic (PC), colorectal (CC), and esophageal (EC), are known to be both highly aggressive and clinically underdiagnosed, resulting in high rates of relapse after standard neoadjuvant therapy with curative intent resection. While cancer biomarkers (i.e. CEA, CA19-9) can aid in identifying early relapse post-resection, they lack accuracy and do not aid in identifying underdiagnosed patients. Recently, a circulating phagocytic macrophage engorged to ≥50 µm, i.e. cancer-associated macrophage-like cells (CAMLs), were identified in GI cancers and associated with highly aggressive cancer subtypes. However, monitoring CAMLs pre- and post-surgery and their clinical value in minimal residual disease remains unexplored. In this pilot study, we prospectively evaluated the blood of n = 133 patients with GI cancer pre- and post-surgery to assess CAMLs in resectable disease, and their association with progression free survival (PFS), relapse free survival (RFS), and overall survival (OS). Methods: In a single-blind multi-institutional prospective pilot study, we recruited n = 133 GI patients with newly diagnosed clinically resectable disease (n = 118), or with metastatic disease scheduled for curative resection post systemic therapy (n = 15). Whole peripheral blood (7.5mL) was drawn prior to neoadjuvant chemotherapy and/or radiation therapy at T1, and a post-surgery sample (T2) was obtained. CAMLs were filtered, stained with cytokeratin &amp; CD45, and enumerated for CAML engorgement of ≥50 µm, as previously described. Cox proportional regression hazard ratios for PFS, RFS &amp; OS using univariate and multivariate analyses were run over 96 months. Results: Of the patients with clinically resectable EC (n = 36/133), PC (n = 75/133) or CC (n = 22/133), 32% of patients (n = 43/133) did not undergo curative resection. T1 samples drawn pre-surgery were available from n = 105 patients and T2 samples drawn post-surgery were available from = 52 patients. Engorged ≥50 µm CAMLs were found in 51% (n = 53/105) of T1 patients and were significantly associated with worse PFS (HR = 3.4 CI95% 2.0-5.8, p &lt; 0.001) and worse OS (HR = 63.5 CI95% 2.0-6.1, p &lt; 0.001), compared to patients with &lt; 50 µm CAMLs. Additionally, engorged ≥50 µm CAMLs were found in 60% (n = 31/52) of T2 patient samples and were associated with significantly worse RFS (HR = 5.7, CI95% 2.4-13.2, p &lt; 0.001) and OS (HR = 5.3, CI95% 2.2-13.3, p &lt; 0.001) compared to patients with &lt; 50 µm CAMLs. Conclusions: These data suggest that GI cancer patients with CAMLs ≥50µm prior to curative intent resection have high rates of progression, and their presence post surgery may identify patients with residual disease that are likely to relapse. Given these results, more refined studies should evaluate CAMLs ability to identify such at risk patients who may benefit from alternative therapeutic approaches.

Open-label, randomized, multicenter, phase 3, ELAINE 3 study of the efficacy and safety of lasofoxifene plus abemaciclib for treating ER+/HER2-, locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer with an ESR1 mutation.

TPS1127 Background: Patients with estrogen receptor-positive (ER+) metastatic breast cancer (mBC) may develop resistance to endocrine therapy (ET), particularly following treatment with a cyclin-dependent kinase 4/6 inhibitor (CDK4/6i), potentially driven by a mutation in the ERa-coding gene, ESR1. Lasofoxifene (LAS), an oral, next-generation ET and ER breast antagonist, was evaluated in two phase 2 studies of women with ER+/HER2- mBC and an ESR1 mutation who had disease progression on previous ET and CDK4/6i. The ELAINE 1 trial showed numerically greater progression-free survival (PFS, median ~6 vs 4 mos; P=0.138), objective response rate (ORR, 13% vs 3%; P=0.124), and clinical benefit rate (CBR, 37% vs 22%; P=0.117) with LAS monotherapy versus the ER degrader fulvestrant (fulv), with a favorable safety profile (1). The single-arm, ELAINE 2 trial demonstrated that LAS plus abemaciclib (Abema) was well tolerated with a median PFS of ~13 mos, ORR of 56%, and CBR of 66% (2). Based on these data, the phase 3, registrational, ELAINE 3 trial was initiated. Methods: ELAINE 3 (NCT05696626) is an open-label, phase 3, multicenter study evaluating the efficacy, safety, and tolerability of LAS plus Abema versus fulv plus Abema. Key inclusion criteria are pre- and postmenopausal women and men aged ≥18 yrs; ER+/HER2-, locally advanced and/or mBC (measurable and/or non-measurable disease); ≥1 acquired ESR1 mutation; progression on an aromatase inhibitor plus palbociclib or ribociclib as their first hormonal treatment for advanced/mBC; and ≤1 line of chemotherapy in the advanced/metastatic setting. Patients will be randomized 1:1 to receive LAS 5 mg/day plus Abema 150 mg BID, or fulv 500 mg IM on days 1, 15, and 29, then once monthly plus Abema 150 mg BID. Treatment will continue until progression, death, unacceptable toxicity, or withdrawal from the study. The primary endpoint is PFS; key secondary endpoints are ORR, overall survival, CBR, duration of response, and time to response. Time to cytotoxic chemotherapy, quality of life, and safety will also be evaluated. Blood samples for circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) will be collected for genomic analyses at screening, at weeks 4 and 8 and every 8 weeks thereafter, and at the final visit. Outcomes with LAS/Abema and fulv/Abema will be compared using a stratified Cox proportional hazards model and stratified logrank test. Expected PFS is ≥10.3 mos for LAS/Abema and 7 mos for fulv/Abema (PFS hazard ratio of 0.68 at final analysis). The target sample size is 400, to achieve 90% power with a one-sided type I error rate of 0.025 after 285 PFS events. Full recruitment is expected to occur over 18 mos at approximately 125 global sites. 1. Goetz MP, et al. Ann Oncol. 2023;34:1141-1151. 2. Damodaran S, et al. Ann Oncol. 2023;34:1131-1140. Clinical trial information: NCT05696626 .

Survival Impact of Glucocorticoid Administration for Adverse Events During Immune Checkpoint Inhibitor Combination Therapy in Patients with Previously Untreated Advanced Renal Cell Carcinoma.

The impact of glucocorticoid administration for adverse events (AEs), including immune-related AEs, on the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitor (ICI) combination therapy for advanced renal cell carcinoma (RCC) remains unknown. To clarify the prognostic impact of glucocorticoid use for AEs during first-line ICI combination therapy for advanced RCC. We retrospectively evaluated data from 194 patients who received dual ICI combination therapy [i.e., immunotherapy (IO)-IO] or combinations of ICIs with tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) as first-line therapy. The patients were divided into two groups according to the history of glucocorticoid administration in each treatment group. Survival based on glucocorticoid administration was assessed. A total of 101 (52.0%) and 93 (48.0%) patients received IO-IO and IO-TKI combination therapy, respectively. Glucocorticoids were administered to 46 (46%) and 22 (24%) patients in the IO-IO and IO-TKI groups, respectively. In the IO-IO group, progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were significantly longer in patients with glucocorticoid administration than in those without administration (median PFS: 14.4 versus 3.45 months, p = 0.0005; median OS: 77.6 versus 33.9 months, p = 0.0025). Multivariable analysis showed that glucocorticoid administration was an independent predictor of longer PFS (hazard ratio: 0.43, p = 0.0005) and OS (hazard ratio: 0.35, p = 0.0067) after adjustment for covariates. In the IO-TKI group, neither PFS nor OS significantly differed between patients treated with and without glucocorticoid administration (PFS: p = 0.0872, OS: p = 0.216). Glucocorticoid administration did not negatively impact the effectiveness of ICI combination therapy for RCC, prompting glucocorticoid treatment use when AEs develop.

Absolute lymphocyte count after BCMA CAR-T therapy is a predictor of response and outcomes in relapsed multiple myeloma

AbstractB-cell maturation antigen (BCMA)–targeting chimeric antigen receptor T cells (CAR-Ts) used in multiple myeloma (MM) are rapidly becoming a mainstay in the treatment of relapsed/refractory (R/R) disease, and CAR-T expansion after infusion has been shown to inform depth and duration of response (DoR), but measuring this process remains investigational. This multicenter study describes the kinetics and prognostic impact of absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) in the first 15 days after CAR-T infusion in 156 patients with relapsed MM treated with the BCMA-targeting agents ciltacabtagene autoleucel and idecabtagene vicleucel. Patients with higher maximum ALC (ALCmax) had better depth of response, progression-free survival (PFS), and DoR. Patients with ALCmax >1.0 × 103/μL had a superior PFS (30.5 months vs 6 months; P < .001) compared with those with ≤1.0 × 103/μL, whereas patients with ALCmax ≤0.5 × 103/μL represent a high-risk group with early disease progression and short PFS (hazard ratio, 3.4; 95% confidence interval, 2-5.8; P < .001). In multivariate analysis, ALCmax >1.0 × 103/μL and nonparaskeletal extramedullary disease were the only independent predictors of PFS and DoR after accounting for international staging systemic staging, age, CAR-T product, high-risk cytogenetics, and the number of previous lines. Moreover, our flow cytometry data suggest that ALC is a surrogate for BCMA CAR-T expansion and can be used as an accessible prognostic marker. We report, to our knowledge, for the first time the association of ALC after BCMA CAR-T infusion with clinical outcomes and its utility in predicting response in patients with R/R MM.

Cost-effectiveness of treating relapsed or refractory 3L+ follicular lymphoma with axicabtagene ciloleucel vs mosunetuzumab in the United States

IntroductionNovel therapies for 3L+ relapsed/refractory (r/r) follicular lymphoma (FL) have been approved recently by the US Food and Drug Administration including anti-CD19 CAR-T therapies such as axicabtagene ciloleucel (axi-cel) and CD20 × CD3 T-cell-engaging bispecific monoclonal antibodies such as mosunetuzumab (mosun). The objective of this study was to assess the cost-effectiveness of axi-cel compared to mosun in 3L+ r/r FL patients from a US third-party payer perspective.MethodsA three-state (progression-free, progressed disease, and death) partitioned-survival model was used to compare two treatments over a lifetime horizon in a hypothetical cohort of US adults (age ≥18) receiving 3L+ treatment for r/r FL. ZUMA-5 and GO29781 trial data were used to inform progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS). Mosun survival was modeled via hazard ratios (HRs) applied to axi-cel survival curves. The PFS HR value was estimated via a matching-adjusted indirect comparison (MAIC) based on mosun pseudo-individual patient data and adjusted axi-cel data to account for trial populations differences. One-way sensitivity analysis (OWSA) and probabilistic sensitivity analyses (PSA) were conducted. Scenario analyses included: 1) the mosun HRs were applied to the weighted (adjusted) ZUMA-5 24-month data to most exactly reflect the MAIC, 2) mosun HR values were applied to axi-cel 48-month follow-up data, and 3) recent axi-cel health state utility values in diffuse large B-cell lymphoma patients.ResultsThe analysis estimated increases of 1.82 LY and 1.89 QALY for axi-cel compared to mosun. PFS for axi-cel patients was 6.42 LY vs. 1.60 LY for mosun. Increase of $257,113 in the progression-free state was driven by one-time axi-cel treatment costs. Total incremental costs for axi-cel were $204,377, resulting in an ICER of $108,307/QALY gained. The OWSA led to ICERs ranging from $240,255 to $75,624, with all but two parameters falling below $150,000/QALY. In the PSA, axi-cel had an 64% probability of being cost-effective across 5,000 iterations using a $150,000 willingness-to-pay threshold. Scenarios one and two resulted in ICERs of $105,353 and $102,695, respectively.DiscussionThis study finds that axi-cel is cost-effective compared to mosun at the commonly cited $150,000/QALY US willingness-to-pay threshold, with robust results across a range of sensitivity analyses accounting for parameter uncertainty.