Overall Post-progression Survival Research Articles

Differential prognostic value of tumor and plasma T790M mutations in EGFR TKI-treated advanced NSCLC.

Substitution of methionine for threonine at codon 790 (T790M) of epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) represents the major mechanism of resistance to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors (TKIs) in EGFR-mutant non-small-cell lung cancer. We determined the prognostic impact and association of secondary T790M mutations with the outcomes of osimertinib and chemotherapy. Patients (n = 460) progressing from first-line EGFR-TKI treatment were assessed. Tissue and/or liquid biopsies were used to determine T790M status; post-progression overall survival (OS) was analyzed. Overall, 143 (31.1%) patients were T790M positive, 95 (20.7%) were T790M negative, and 222 (48.2%) had unknown T790M status. T790M status [T790M positive versus T790M negative: hazard ratio (HR) 0.48 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.32-0.70); p < 0.001, T790M unknown versus T790M negative: HR 1.97 (95% CI, 1.47-2.64); p < 0.001] was significantly associated with post-progression OS. T790M positivity rates were similar for tissue (90/168, 53.6%) and liquid (53/90, 58.9%) biopsies (Fisher's exact test, p = 0.433). Tumor T790M-positive patients had significantly longer post-progression OS than tumor T790M-negative patients (34.1 versus 17.1 months; log-rank test, p = 8 × 10-5). Post-progression OS was similar between plasma T790M-positive and -negative patients (17.4 versus not reached; log-rank test, p = 0.600). In tumor T790M-positive patients, post-progression OS was similar after osimertinib and chemotherapy [34.1 versus 29.1 months; log-rank test, p = 0.900; HR 1.06 (95% CI, 0.44-2.57); p = 0.897]. T790M positivity predicts better post-progression OS than T790M negativity; tumor T790M positivity has a stronger prognostic impact than plasma T790M positivity. Osimertinib and chemotherapy provide similar OS benefits in patients with T790M-positive tumors.

Predictors and Impact of Timing of Disease Progression Following Primary Therapy in Multiple Myeloma

In multiple myeloma (MM) significant variation in progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) is observed. We examined the outcomes of 1557 MM patients stratified into short (<2 years), medium (between 2 and 5 years) and long (>5 years) PFS. Short PFS occurred in 758 patients (48.7%), medium in 561 patients (36.2%), and long in 238 patients (15.3%). Median post-progression PFS was 9.2 months (95% CI: 8.1-11.0) in the short PFS and 33.1 months (95% CI: 29.0-42.1; P < .001) in the long PFS group. Median post-progression OS was 26.6 months (95% CI: 23.9-29.8) in the short PFS and 87.8 months (95% CI: 71.3- NR; P < .001) in the long PFS. Worse survival in the short PFS was irrespective of high risk (HR) fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) features, defined as deletion 17p and/or translocation t(4;14), t(14;16), t(14;20). In a multivariable analysis short PFS was associated with HR FISH, extramedullary plasmacytoma, plasma cell labeling index ≥2% at diagnosis, nonimmunoglobulin G isotype, treatment without autologous stem cell transplantation and achieving less than very good partial remission. In conclusion, the duration of the PFS significantly influences survival, regardless of HR cytogenetic features. Therefore, it should be considered an important parameter for risk stratification in patients experiencing a relapse.

Overall survival of patients with cHL who progress after autologous stem cell transplant: results in the novel agent era

AbstractIn the pre–novel agent era, the median postprogression overall survival (PPS) of patients with classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL) who progress after autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) was 2 to 3 years. Recently, checkpoint inhibitors (CPI) and brentuximab vedotin (BV) have improved the depth and durability of response in this population. Here, we report the estimate of PPS in patients with relapsed cHL after ASCT in the era of CPI and BV. In this multicenter retrospective study of 15 participating institutions, adult patients with relapsed cHL after ASCT were included. Study objective was postprogression overall survival (PPS), defined as the time from posttransplant progression to death or last follow-up. Of 1158 patients who underwent ASCT, 367 had progressive disease. Median age was 34 years (range, 27-46) and 192 were male. Median PPS was 114.57 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 91-not achieved) or 9.5 years. In multivariate analysis, increasing age, progression within 6 months, and pre-ASCT positive positron emission tomography scan were associated with inferior PPS. When adjusted for these features, patients who received CPI, but not BV, as first treatment for post-ASCT progression had significantly higher PPS than the no CPI/no BV group (hazard ratio, 3.5; 95% CI, 1.6-7.8; P = .001). Receipt of allogeneic SCT (Allo-SCT) did not improve PPS. In the era of novel agents, progressive cHL after ASCT had long survival that compares favorably with previous reports. Patients who receive CPI as first treatment for progression had higher PPS. Receipt to Allo-SCT was not associated with PPS in this population.

Overall survival (OS) by response to first-line (1L) induction treatment with atezolizumab (atezo) + platinum/gemcitabine (plt/gem) vs placebo + plt/gem in patients (pts) with metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC): Updated data from the IMvigor130 OS final analysis.

4503 Background: For pts without disease progression during 1L plt-based chemotherapy (chemo), maintenance immunotherapy is a new mUC treatment option. IMvigor130 was a global, randomized Phase III study evaluating 1L atezo + plt/gem (Arm A) vs atezo monotherapy (Arm B) and placebo + plt/gem (Arm C) in patients with mUC (Galsky Lancet 2020). The final analysis showed that improved OS in Arm A vs Arm C of the intention-to-treat (ITT) population did not reach statistical significance (Galsky ASCO GU 2023). Here we report a post hoc analysis examining OS outcomes by response during atezo/placebo + chemo “induction” based on the final OS analysis. Methods: For Arms A and C, per protocol, investigators pre-specified the type of chemo pts received (gem + either cisplatin [cis] or carboplatin [carbo]), which was also a randomization stratification factor. Pts without progressive disease (PD) were allowed to continue atezo or placebo after 4 to 6 cycles of plt/gem. This post hoc analysis evaluated post-induction (Wk 18) OS in pts who completed 4 to 6 cycles of chemo followed by ≥1 dose of atezo or placebo and who had a best response of at least stable disease (SD) without PD at any time (up to and including Wk 18 tumor assessment). Post-progression OS was evaluated in pts who had PD at any time (up to and including Wk 18 tumor assessment). OS analyses by type of chemo were also performed. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards models were used, with HRs adjusted for known prognostic factors (and response for non-PD pts) and stratified by enrollment stage. Results: The time from last pt randomized to the data cutoff (Aug 31, 2022) was 49 mo (overall ITT population). OS improvements favoring Arm A vs C appeared greater for pts treated with cis than with carbo. In the cis subgroup, OS rates at 36 mo were 47% (Arm A) and 34% (Arm C) for pts who achieved at least SD during induction. Additional efficacy data are shown. Conclusions: In this post hoc analysis, the initial response to induction therapy did not seem to impact OS outcomes. Consistent with prior analyses, these data suggest that cis-treated pts may derive a greater benefit from the addition of atezo than carbo-treated pts. Clinical trial information: NCT02807636 . [Table: see text]

Treatment with tebentafusp beyond radiographic progressive disease (PD) in metastatic uveal melanoma (mUM).

9585 Background: Tebentafusp (tebe) is the first T cell receptor therapeutic to demonstrate overall survival (OS) benefit in a randomized Phase 3 study vs investigator’s choice (IC) [ NCT03070392 ]. OS benefit was also observed in patients (pts) with best objective response (BOR) PD (HR 0.43), and in pts who had tumor growth ≥20% as best change in tumor size (HR 0.41), suggesting tebe-treated pts may exhibit atypical radiological responses and could benefit from treatment beyond radiographic progression (TBP), a well-established concept in immuno-oncology. Here we analyzed tumor kinetics and clinical benefit in pts treated with tebe beyond initial radiographic progression (TBP). Methods: 378 mUM pts were randomized 2:1 to tebe vs. IC. BOR was assessed by investigators using RECIST v1.1. TBP was permitted until: 1) additional ≥20% increase in tumor burden with absolute increase of ≥5 mm, or 2) unequivocal PD of non-target lesions; or 3) new non-measurable lesions. A Cox model adjusted for baseline covariates and for covariates at time of progression for TBP-eligible pts was used to compare survival post progression between those who did (TBP) and did not receive TBP (non-TBP). Stepwise selection of covariates (using p &lt; 0.1 as the entry and staying criterion) was applied. Analysis performed on data cut-off 13Oct2020. Results: 183 tebe pts were eligible for TBP per protocol; 60% (109/183) received TBP with median duration of 8 wks. 21% of all tebe doses were administered as TBP. The proportion of pts with new lesions at initial progression (44% vs 57%) and median time to initial progression (2.9 mo vs 2.9 mo) were similar between TBP and non-TBP pts. Pts receiving TBP were more likely to have favorable key prognostic factors at baseline or at time of progression. After adjusting for these differences, a numerical benefit in post-progression OS favoring TBP was observed (HR 0.67, 95% CI [0.38,1.19]). Serial review of radiographic time points identified initial progression of sum of target lesions followed by stabilization for &gt; 3 months after initial progression in some TBP pts. Safety profile during TBP was consistent with that expected for pts established on tebe and no pts experienced an AE leading to treatment discontinuation. Conclusions: An OS benefit observed for tebentafusp among mUM patients who have initial radiographic progression demonstrates that RECIST assessment underestimates benefit. In a post-hoc analysis of OS following initial radiographic progression, continued treatment with tebentafusp was associated with numerically longer OS after adjusting for key prognostic variables. Tebentafusp treatment beyond progression was tolerated without new safety signals and, in some patients, was associated with radiological stabilization of sum of target lesions for &gt; 3 months following the initial progression. Clinical trial information: NCT03070392.

The different overall survival between single-agent EGFR-TKI treatment and with bevacizumab in non-small cell lung cancer patients with brain metastasis

Comparison of epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor (EGFR-TKI) monotherapy or with bevacizumab in real-world non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients was lacking. 310 patients of advanced NSCLC with common EGFR mutation receiving first-generation EGFR-TKI monotherapy or with bevacizumab were included and propensity-score matched. Progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and secondary T790M mutation were analysed. Patients receiving EGFR-TKI and bevacizumab were significantly younger, had better performance status and with high incidence of brain metastasis (55.8%). In the propensity-score matched cohort, PFS (13.5 vs. 13.7 months; log-rank p = 0.700) was similar between the two groups. The OS (61.3 vs. 34.2 months; log-rank p = 0.010) and risk reduction of death (HR 0.42 [95% CI 0.20–0.85]; p = 0.017) were significantly improved in EGFR-TKI plus bevacizumab group. Analysis of treatment by brain metastasis status demonstrated EGFR-TKI plus bevacizumab in patients with brain metastasis was associated with significant OS benefit compared to other groups (log-rank p = 0.030) and these patients had lower early-CNS and early-systemic progressions. The secondary T790M did not significantly differ between EGFR-TKI plus bevacizumab and EGFR-TKI monotherapy groups (66.7% vs. 75.0%, p = 0.460). Forty-one (31.1%) and 31 (23.5%) patients received subsequent osimertinib and chemotherapy, respectively. The post-progression OS of osimertinib and chemotherapy were 22.1 and 44.9 months in EGFR-TKI plus bevacizumab group and were 10.0 and 14.1 months in EGFR-TKI monotherpay group, respectively. First-generation EGFR-TKI with bevacizumab improved treatment efficacy in real-world patients of NSCLC with EGFR mutation. Patients with brain metastasis received additional OS benefit from this treatment.

Abstract CT187: Overall survival (OS) by response during “induction” from the global, randomized Phase III IMvigor130 study of atezolizumab (atezo) + platinum/gemcitabine (plt/gem) vs placebo + plt/gem in patients (pts) with previously untreated metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC)

Abstract Background: IMvigor130 evaluated atezo + plt/gem (Arm A) vs placebo + plt/gem (Arm C) as 1L mUC treatment, allowing pts with at least SD to continue atezo or placebo “maintenance” after 4-6 cycles of plt/gem. The primary analysis showed statistically significant PFS benefit for Arm A vs C (Galsky Lancet 2020). The 1st interim OS data for Arm A vs C were encouraging but immature. This exploratory analysis used 2nd interim OS data (ITT median follow-up, 13.3 mo) to examine OS outcomes by response during atezo or placebo + chemo “induction” in Arm A vs C. Methods: Pts were randomized 1:1:1 to Arm A, B (atezo monotherapy) or C. In Arms A and C, chemo was gem + investigator's choice of cis or carbo. Co-primary EPs of PFS and OS in Arm A vs C (ITT) and OS in Arm B vs C (ITT and IC2/3) were tested hierarchically. This post hoc analysis evaluated post-induction (post-wk 18) OS in pts who completed 4-6 (but not &amp;gt;6) cycles of chemo without PD during induction (through wk 18), followed by ≥1 dose of atezo or placebo maintenance. Post-PD OS was evaluated in pts with PD during induction. HRs were adjusted to account for potential imbalances in known prognostic factors between arms. Results: Efficacy data are in the Table. Post-induction OS HR (95% CI) for pts with no PD was 0.86 (0.64, 1.16) (cis: 0.60 [0.35, 1.03], carbo: 0.97 [0.67, 1.41]). Post-progression OS HR for pts with PD was 0.74 (0.53, 1.03) (cis: 0.52 [0.28, 0.96], carbo: 0.78 [0.51, 1.18]). Conclusions: In this exploratory analysis from IMvigor130, OS benefit with atezo + plt/gem vs placebo + plt/gem in both pts with and without PD during induction was consistent with ITT results from the 1st interim analysis. Preliminary data suggest that cis-treated pts may derive greater OS benefit from adding atezo to chemo than carbo-treated pts, which warrants further investigation. OS follow-up is ongoing. IMvigor130 efficacy (second interim OS analysis)No PD during inductiona (post-induction OS)bPD during induction (post-progression OS)Arm A (n=166)Arm C (n=152)Arm A (n=91)Arm C (n=93)OS events, n (%)ITT97 (58.4)92 (60.5)82 (90.1)84 (90.3)Cisplatinc27/57 (47.4)35/59 (59.3)24/29 (82.8)30/33 (90.9)Carboplatinc70/109 (64.2)57/93 (61.3)58/62 (93.5)54/60 (90.0)Median OS (95% CI), moITT20.5 (17.6, 25.9)18.8 (14.4, 21.9)4.3 (3.5, 5.8)3.3 (2.5, 4.4)Cisplatin28.2 (19.8, NE)19.9 (11.0, 26.5)6.6 (4.8, 10.1)2.5 (1.6, 5.2)Carboplatin18.5 (12.9, 21.6)18.8 (12.9, 22.8)3.8 (3.2, 5.6)3.4 (2.6, 4.5)OS HR (95% CI)dITT0.86 (0.64, 1.16)0.74 (0.53, 1.03)Cisplatin0.60 (0.35, 1.03)0.52 (0.28, 0.96)Carboplatin0.97 (0.67, 1.41)0.78 (0.51, 1.18)Data cutoff: June 14, 2020. 1L, first-line; carbo, carboplatin; chemo, chemotherapy; cis, cisplatin; CR, complete response; EP, endpoint; HR; hazard ratio; ITT, intention to treat; mets, metastases; PD, progressive disease; PFS, progression-free survival; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease. a Pts who achieved at least SD (CR, PR, or SD without PD) during induction. b Post-week 18 OS. c Denominators refer to the number of pts in each chemotherapy subgroup/treatment arm. d Multivariable Cox proportional hazards model stratified by enrollment stage (1/2); adjusted for age, ECOG PS (0, 1, 2), cisplatin ineligibility (Y/N), liver mets (Y/N), lymph node mets only (Y/N), ≥3 metastatic sites (Y/N), renal impairment (Y/N), alkaline phosphatase ≥upper limit of normal (Y/N), glomerular filtration rate (&amp;lt;60 vs ≥60 mL/min), PD-L1 status (IC0/1, IC2/3), Bajorin risk score (0, 1, 2 and/or liver mets). For pts without PD, model was additionally adjusted for best response (CR, PR, SD) during induction. Citation Format: Enrique Grande, Aristotelis Bamias, Matthew D. Galsky, Eiji Kikuchi, Ian D. Davis, José Ángel Arranz, Arash Rezazadeh Kalebasty, Xavier Garcia del Muro, Se Hoon Park, Ugo De Giorgi, Boris Alekseev, Marina Mencinger, Kouji Izumi, Javier Puente, Jian-Ri Li, Xiaodong Shen, Beiying Ding, Qian Zhu, Jeremy Linsenmeier, Maria De Santis. Overall survival (OS) by response during “induction” from the global, randomized Phase III IMvigor130 study of atezolizumab (atezo) + platinum/gemcitabine (plt/gem) vs placebo + plt/gem in patients (pts) with previously untreated metastatic urothelial carcinoma (mUC) [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2021; 2021 Apr 10-15 and May 17-21. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2021;81(13_Suppl):Abstract nr CT187.

Relapsed/Refractory International Prognostic Index (R/R-IPI): An international prognostic calculator for relapsed/refractory diffuse large B-cell lymphoma.

Disease progression after frontline therapy for Diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL) is a clinically significant event. Patients who experience early progression or have refractory disease have especially poor outcomes. Simple, clinically applicable prognostic tools are needed for selecting patients for consideration for novel therapies and prognostication in the relapsed/refractory (R/R) setting. Model building was performed in patients from the Surrogate endpoints in aggressive lymphoma (SEAL) consortium with disease progression after frontline immunochemotherapy. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS) measured from date of progression. Validation was performed in the University of Iowa/Mayo Clinic SPORE Molecular Epidemiology Resource (MER) and Danish National Lymphoma Register (LYFO) cohorts. Model performance was assessed using time-dependent concordance indices (c-statistic) and calibration with metrics evaluated at 2 years from progression. Note, 1234 of 5112 patients treated with frontline immunochemotherapy in the SEAL consortium developed progressive disease. Time to progression on immunochemotherapy and age at progression were strongly associated with post-progression OS (both p < 0.001). A prognostic model was developed incorporating spline fit for both variables. The model had good concordance in the discovery (0.67) and validation sets (LYFO c = 0.64, MER c = 0.68) with generally good calibration. Time to progression on frontline therapy is strongly associated with post-progression OS in DLBCL. We developed and validated a simple to apply clinical prognostic tool in the R/R setting. The useful prediction of expected outcomes in R/R DLBCL and can inform treatment decisions such as considerations for CAR-T therapy as well as trial designs. The model is available in smartphone-based point of care applications.

Post-progression outcomes of NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% receiving first-line single-agent pembrolizumab in a large multicentre real-world study

BackgroundTreatment sequencing with first-line immunotherapy, followed by second-line chemotherapy, is still a viable option for NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50%. MethodsWe evaluated post-progression treatment pathways in a large real-world cohort of metastatic NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥ 50% treated with first-line pembrolizumab monotherapy. ResultsOverall, 974 patients were included. With a median follow-up of 22.7 months (95%CI: 21.6–38.2), the median overall survival (OS) of the entire population was 15.8 months (95%CI: 13.5–17.5; 548 events). At the data cutoff, among the 678 patients who experienced disease progression, 379 (55.9%) had not received any further treatment, and 359 patients (52.9%) had died. Patients who did not receive post-progression therapies were older (p = 0.0011), with a worse ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and were on corticosteroids prior to pembrolizumab (p = 0.0024). At disease progression, 198 patients (29.2%) received a switched approach and 101 (14.9%) received pembrolizumab ByPD either alone (64 [9.4%]) or in combination with local ablative treatments (37 [5.5%]) (LATs). After a random-case control matching according to ECOG-PS, CNS metastases, bone metastases, and (previous) best response to pembrolizumab, patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD plus LATs were confirmed to have a significantly longer post-progression OS compared to patients receiving pembrolizumab ByPD alone 13.9 months versus 7.8 months (p = 0.0179) 241 patients (35.5%) among the 678 who had experienced PD, received a second-line systemic treatment (regardless of previous treatment beyond PD). As compared to first-line treatment commencement, patients’ features at the moment of second-line initiation showed a significantly higher proportion of patients aged under 70 years (p = 0.0244), with a poorer ECOG-PS (p < 0.0001) and having CNS (p = 0.0001), bone (p = 0.0266) and liver metastases (p = 0.0148). ConclusionsIn the real-world scenario NSCLC patients with PD-L1 expression ≥50% treated with first-line single-agent pembrolizumab achieve worse outcomes as compared to the Keynote-024 trial. Poor post-progression outcomes are major determinants of the global results that should be considered when counselling patients for first-line treatment choices.

Cabozantinib (Cabo) beyond progression improves survival in advanced renal cell carcinoma patients: The CABEYOND study (Meet-Uro 21).

320 Background: The multikinase inhibitor cabozantinib (Cabo) is an effective treatment option for metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC). However, data on the optimal sequencing of Cabo and other available therapies are lacking. In particular, the strategy of continuing Cabo administration after disease progression (PD) has never been investigated yet. In light of its ability of inhibiting MET and AXL, which are implied in VEGFR acquired resistance, the hypothesis of a prolonged efficacy in slowing tumor growth, despite first radiological PD, is worth to be investigated. Methods: We conducted a retrospective multicenter study of mRCC patients (pts) treated with oral Cabo as second or subsequent line between 2014 and 2020 in 11 Italian Oncology units. Our study population included pts treated beyond RECIST first PD due to the clinical benefit and tolerance to therapy demonstrated. As a control group we analyzed pts treated with other therapies (thyrosin-kinase inhibitors (TKIs), everolimus, nivolumab or other) after first radiological PD with Cabo. Our aim was to evaluate the post-progression outcome according the two treatment strategies: Cabo beyond PD or other subsequent therapy. Results: 89 pts were included in the analysis: 45 pts received Cabo beyond PD and 44 another therapy: 22 pts nivolumab, 7 everolimus, 6 sorafenib and the others lenvatinib plus everolimus, sunitinib, HD-IL2, pazopanib or axitinib. The median age of all pts was 61.6 years (22.7-83.2) and 77.5% were male. 40.4% and 31.5% of pts had received one or two prior treatment lines, respectively; the remaining 28.1% received Cabo &gt; 3 line. At Cabo start, 83.9% were intermediate-poor risk according IMDC score (77.8% in CABO beyond PD and 90.5% in the control group) and the most common metastatic sites were lung (76.4%), lymph nodes (69.7%), bone (56.2%), liver (30.3%) and brain (14.8%). The objective response rate to Cabo before PD was significantly higher in pts continuing Cabo beyond PD than in those who were treated with other after first radiological PD (46.7% vs 25%, p = 0.03) and a longer but not statistically significant PFS was observed (median 8.1 vs 5.9 months, p = 0.377). Moreover, the median number of prior therapy lines was significantly higher for pts who were treated with Cabo beyond PD than other (2 vs 1, p = 0.016). Median duration of treatment with Cabo beyond PD was 6.4 months. In addition, continuing Cabo beyond PD was associated with a significantly better post-progression overall survival (OS) than switching to other therapy at PD (median OS 16.9 vs 13.2 months, Hazard Ratio 0.66, 95%CI 0.48 – 0.92, p = 0.011). Conclusions: This study showed a longer post-progression OS in pts continuing Cabo beyond PD than in those who switched to another therapy. With the limitations of a retrospective analysis, this is the first evidence suggesting that maintaining Cabo beyond PD is an effective strategy in pts with mRCC.

Impact of Clinical Versus Biochemical Progression on Post-Progression Survival in Multiple Myeloma

Background: Overall response rate and response duration in newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (ndMM) has increased in the last decade. However, majority of patients eventually progress and receive multiple lines of therapy. Progression in MM is defined by rise in monoclonal protein and/or clinical manifestations of end-organ damage. However, there is a lack of evidence on the prognostic implication of pattern of progression in the current era. We have hypothesized that patients with clinical manifestations of end-organ damage at first progression have an inferior post-progression overall survival (OS) compared to those with biochemical progression alone.Method: We evaluated all ndMM patients between 1/1/2008 and 12/31/2015 at the Cleveland Clinic. Key inclusion criterion was patients experiencing first progression requiring an additional line of therapy. Patients with primary refractory disease and those in continued 1st remission at latest follow-up were excluded. Progression was categorized into 2 groups: Biochemical Progression (BP) and Clinical Progression (CP; implying CRAB features). Patients with CP were further stratified based on the presence of extramedullary disease (EM): CP+EM and CP-EM. Progression-free survival (PFS) and OS from first progression were estimated with Kaplan-Meier curves and compared among groups with log-rank test. Cox analysis was used to identify prognostic factors for OS and PFS. Potential prognostic factors included progression pattern, age, gender, race, ISS stage at diagnosis, FISH cytogenetics at diagnosis, metaphase cytogenetics at diagnosis, time from diagnosis to first progression, best response at first remission, frontline autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), and whether progression occurred while on therapy.Results: A total of 527 patients with ndMM were evaluated, among which, 257 experiencing 1st progression were included in our analysis. The median age at progression was 64 years. The median time from diagnosis to first progression was 23 months. An autologous stem cell transplantation (ASCT) after induction therapy in 1st remission was performed in 26% of patients. At 1st progression, BP alone was noted in 52% (n=134), CP -EM in 34% (n=87) and CP+EM in 14% (n=36) of patients. In the CP-EM group, the most common mode of progression was development of new bone lesions (76%) followed by anemia (33%), renal insufficiency (18%) and hypercalcemia (13%), with ≥1 mode in approximately one-third of patients. In the CP+EM group, the most common mode of EM progression was development of new plasmacytomas (89%), followed by emergence of circulating plasma cells (14%), with 1 patient having both. A total of 84% of patients progressed on anti-myeloma therapy, which reflects the contemporary practice of continuous therapy in MM. After first progression, 68% received proteasome inhibitors (PIs), 64% received immunomodulatory drugs (IMiDs) and 11% received monoclonal antibodies (MoAbs). Salvage ASCT in 2nd remission was performed in 12% of patients.A total of 105 patients (41%) were alive at latest follow-up, with the median follow-up of survivors being 26 months from 1st progression. Median time from diagnosis to 1st progression was shorter in the CP+EM (12 months) compared to CP-EM (25 months) and BP (24 months) groups (P<0.001). There was no significant difference in the progression pattern by depth of 1st remission. The 2-year post-progression OS in BP, CP-EM and CP+EM groups was 81%, 40% and 12% respectively (P<0.001; Figure I). The 2-year post-progression PFS in the respective groups were 35%, 8% and 7% respectively (P<0.001). On multivariable analysis for OS, independent prognostic factors included progression pattern, age at 1st progression and high-risk FISH cytogenetics at diagnosis (Table I).Conclusion: In the era of PIs, IMiDs and MoAbs, the pattern of 1st progression in MM has a strong and independent prognostic impact on post-progression OS. Patients progressing with clinical manifestations of end-organ damage or extramedullary disease have an inferior PFS and OS compared to those progressing with biochemical criteria alone. These results should be further validated in large prospective studies with data on FISH cytogenetics at relapse. It has clinical implication at the individual level and can also inform the design of clinical trials in relapsed MM. [Display omitted] DisclosuresMajhail:Anthem, Inc.: Consultancy; Incyte: Honoraria; Atara: Honoraria.

Characterisation of Long-Term Responders to First-Line Myeloma Therapy - Results from the UK Myeloma IX and XI Trials

INTRODUCTION Features of high risk myeloma (MM) have been studied in detail but patients with longer term responses to first-line therapy are less well characterised. Identification of common features of this group may support optimised management. Here we analysed clinical and genetic characteristics of long-term responders of 4,249 trial patients from the UK MRC Myeloma IX (M-IX) and NCRI Myeloma XI (M-XI) trials. PATIENTS AND METHODS In M-IX patients were randomised between alkylating therapy (CVAD or MP) and thalidomide-based induction therapy (CTD). M-XI patients were randomised between thalidomide and lenalidomide based induction (CTD vs CRD) and a response-based bortezomib (CVD) intensification. Fitter patients received HD-Mel+ASCT consolidation. Patients were then randomised to thalidomide (M-IX) or lenalidomide (M-XI) maintenance or observation. Trials included symptomatic, newly diagnosed patients based on CRAB criteria. This analysis included 1,921 My-IX and 2,328 My-XI patients with median follow-up of 73 and 61 months (m), respectively. Genetic profiling was available for 1,866 patients. Patients with a long-term response post induction (PFS≥48m) were identified and their baseline characteristics, responses and treatment compared to those with PFS RESULTS In M-IX, 283 (25.8%) of transplant-eligible (TE) patients had PFS ≥48m whereas 58 (7%) of transplant non-eligible (TNE) patients reached PFS≥48m. In M-XI 410 (34.2%) patients had PFS≥48m for TE and 116 (10.2%) for TNE. Extended progression free survival translated to overall survival (OS) benefit with a median post progression OS of 36.9m for PFS≥48m vs 16.7m for PFS Clinical factors including ISS I (P The proportion of patients with a high risk lesion (Adverse translocation, Gain(1q) or Del(17p)) were lower in the PFS≥48m group than The majority of patients with PFS ≥48m showed ≥VGPR after induction +/- consolidation: 211 (76.4%) and 340 (84%) of PFS ≥48m patients in the TE arms and 26 (49.1%) and 87 (76.3%) in the TNE arms of M-IX and M-XI, respectively. 86.7% of patients who achieved a ≥VGPR had a PFS ≥48m in the absence of high risk lesions compared to 72.8% with any high risk lesion present (P=0.004). Some patients with PFS≥48m had only reached PR after induction; 56 (20.3%) and 57 (14.1%) of PFS ≥48m patients in the TE arm and 15 (28.3%) and 24 (21.1%) in the TNE arms of M-IX and M-XI, respectively. Baseline factors that were associated with still being able to achieve PFS≥48m from induction after only achieving a PR included the lack of high risk genetic lesions (P CONCLUSIONS Response assessment after induction+/-HD-Mel consolidation with baseline factors can define a patient group with superior outcomes in both TE and TNE patients and may influence future treatment strategies of MM patients undergoing first line therapy. Further analyses including modelling of predictors of response duration are ongoing and will be presented at the conference. Disclosures Shah:Celgene: Other: Travel, Accommodation expenses; Sanofi: Other: Travel and Accommodation expenses. Striha:Janssen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Celgene: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding. Hockaday:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Abbvie: Research Funding; Janssen: Research Funding; MSD: Research Funding; Millenium: Research Funding. Pawlyn:Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Janssen: Honoraria, Other: Travel support; Takeda Oncology: Consultancy, Other: Travel support. Jenner:Takeda: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Novartis: Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Honoraria, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees, Speakers Bureau. Drayson:Abingdon Health: Equity Ownership, Membership on an entity9s Board of Directors or advisory committees. Owen:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Takeda: Honoraria, Other: Travel Support; Janssen: Consultancy, Other: Travel Support. Gregory:Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding; Merck Sharp and Dohme: Research Funding; Janssen: Honoraria; Amgen: Research Funding. Morgan:Janssen: Research Funding; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding. Davies:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Abbvie: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria. Cook:Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Seattle Genetics: Honoraria; Glycomimetics: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Sanofi: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Honoraria; Celgene Corporation: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Cairns:Celgene: Research Funding; Amgen: Research Funding; Merck Sharp and Dohme: Research Funding. Jackson:Roche: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Merck Sharp and Dohme: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria, Speakers Bureau; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau; Takeda: Consultancy, Honoraria, Other: Travel Support, Research Funding, Speakers Bureau. Kaiser:Amgen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Takeda: Consultancy, Other: travel support; Janssen: Consultancy, Honoraria; Chugai: Consultancy; Bristol-Myers Squibb: Consultancy, Other: travel support; Celgene: Consultancy, Honoraria, Research Funding.

Bevacizumab for advanced cervical cancer: final overall survival and adverse event analysis of a randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial (Gynecologic Oncology Group 240)

On Aug 14, 2014, the US Food and Drug Administration approved the antiangiogenesis drug bevacizumab for women with advanced cervical cancer on the basis of improved overall survival (OS) after the second interim analysis (in 2012) of 271 deaths in the Gynecologic Oncology Group (GOG) 240 trial. In this study, we report the prespecified final analysis of the primary objectives, OS and adverse events. In this randomised, controlled, open-label, phase 3 trial, we recruited patients with metastatic, persistent, or recurrent cervical carcinoma from 81 centres in the USA, Canada, and Spain. Inclusion criteria included a GOG performance status score of 0 or 1; adequate renal, hepatic, and bone marrow function; adequately anticoagulated thromboembolism; a urine protein to creatinine ratio of less than 1; and measurable disease. Patients who had received chemotherapy for recurrence and those with non-healing wounds or active bleeding conditions were ineligible. We randomly allocated patients 1:1:1:1 (blocking used; block size of four) to intravenous chemotherapy of either cisplatin (50 mg/m2 on day 1 or 2) plus paclitaxel (135 mg/m2 or 175 mg/m2 on day 1) or topotecan (0·75 mg/m2 on days 1-3) plus paclitaxel (175 mg/m2 on day 1) with or without intravenous bevacizumab (15 mg/kg on day 1) in 21 day cycles until disease progression, unacceptable toxic effects, voluntary withdrawal by the patient, or complete response. We stratified randomisation by GOG performance status (0 vs 1), previous radiosensitising platinum-based chemotherapy, and disease status (recurrent or persistent vs metastatic). We gave treatment open label. Primary outcomes were OS (analysed in the intention-to-treat population) and adverse events (analysed in all patients who received treatment and submitted adverse event information), assessed at the second interim and final analysis by the masked Data and Safety Monitoring Board. The cutoff for final analysis was 450 patients with 346 deaths. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00803062. Between April 6, 2009, and Jan 3, 2012, we enrolled 452 patients (225 [50%] in the two chemotherapy-alone groups and 227 [50%] in the two chemotherapy plus bevacizumab groups). By March 7, 2014, 348 deaths had occurred, meeting the prespecified cutoff for final analysis. The chemotherapy plus bevacizumab groups continued to show significant improvement in OS compared with the chemotherapy-alone groups: 16·8 months in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab groups versus 13·3 months in the chemotherapy-alone groups (hazard ratio 0·77 [95% CI 0·62-0·95]; p=0·007). Final OS among patients not receiving previous pelvic radiotherapy was 24·5 months versus 16·8 months (0·64 [0·37-1·10]; p=0·11). Postprogression OS was not significantly different between the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab groups (8·4 months) and chemotherapy-alone groups (7·1 months; 0·83 [0·66-1·05]; p=0·06). Fistula (any grade) occurred in 32 (15%) of 220 patients in the chemotherapy plus bevacizumab groups (all previously irradiated) versus three (1%) of 220 in the chemotherapy-alone groups (all previously irradiated). Grade 3 fistula developed in 13 (6%) versus one (<1%). No fistulas resulted in surgical emergencies, sepsis, or death. The benefit conferred by incorporation of bevacizumab is sustained with extended follow-up as evidenced by the overall survival curves remaining separated. After progression while receiving bevacizumab, we did not observe a negative rebound effect (ie, shorter survival after bevacizumab is stopped than after chemotherapy alone is stopped). These findings represent proof-of-concept of the efficacy and tolerability of antiangiogenesis therapy in advanced cervical cancer. National Cancer Institute.

P2.02-010 Prognosis Impact of Oligoprogression Following Definitive Chemo-Radiotherapy in Stage III Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

The influence of recurrence pattern on outcome in stage III NSCLC following definitive chemo-radiotherapy (CRT) has been scarcely addressed in the literature. Our aim was to analyze the relevance of oligoprogression (OP) in this clinical setting. Patients (pts) with stage III NSCLC who underwent concurrent CRT from 2010 to 2014 at the Catalan Institute of Oncology were retrospectively reviewed (n=170). Recurrence pattern at first progression was recorded. OP was defined as a single metastatic organ with up to 3 lesions. Overall Survival (OS) and Progression-Free Survival (PFS) were plotted using Kaplan Meier method, and multivariate Cox proportional hazards model was developed. Median age 64 (37-87); male 87%; ECOG-PS≤1 92%; histology: adenocarcinoma 34%, squamous 43%, NOS+large cell 23%; cN0-1 21%, cN2 60%, cN3 19%. Platinum doublet: cisplatin 62%, carboplatin 38%. RT between 60-70 Gy (2Gy/fr): 94%. At a median follow-up of 38 months (m), 108 of 170 pts relapsed (63%) and 66% died. mPFS was 13m (95% CI 10-16), mOS was 28m (95% CI 22-34). Twenty-five of pts who relapsed (23%) developed OP. Sites involved: visceral 17, brain 4, lymph nodes 3, bone 1. Treatments delivered: local therapy with curative intent 9; palliative intention 12; no treatment 4 (table 1). Among pts who relapsed, mOS was longer in those with OP (32m) compared to pts without OP (18m, p=0.007). Pts with OP who received treatment, mOS according to curative or palliative intention was 53m versus 32m (p=0.1), respectively. In the multivariate Cox analysis of post-progression OS, OP remained a favorable prognostic factor (HR=0.36, 95% CI 0.17-0.74) independently of age, PS, stage, histology, smoking history, and platinum doublet. OP was associated with substantial better prognosis in this cohort of pts treated with concurrent CRT. Local ablative therapies in the context of OP yielded promising results in terms of survival and warrants further investigation.

P3.02b-051 Outcome of Advanced EGFR-Mutated NSCLC Patients with MET-Driven Acquired Resistance to EGFR TKI. Results of the METEORE Study: Topic: EGFR Clinical

Several mechanisms of acquired resistance to EGFR TKIs have been described including the T790M mutation and MET amplification. Whereas the T790M mutation confers prolonged survival and sensitivity to 3rd generation TKIs, there is no data on outcome and treatment of MET-driven resistant EGFR-mutated NSCLC patients. Molecular and clinico-pathological data from patients with advanced EGFR-mutated NSCLC and MET overexpression or amplification on a post-progression (PP) sample obtained after treatment with EGFR TKI were retrospectively reviewed in 15 nationwide centers. MET overexpression was defined by MET immunochemistry (IHC) score 3+ and MET amplification was assessed by FISH and defined by MET/CEP7 ratio >2 or MET copy number >6 or MET clusters. 43 patients were included (24 del19, 16 L858R and 3 rare EGFR mutations). The median time between EGFR TKI initiation and PP biopsy was 13.8 months [2.1-61.3]. On PP biopsy, 20 tumors tested for FISH (53%) had MET amplification and all out of 37 samples tested for IHC were scored 3+. No epithelial to mesenchymal transformation was observed. A T790M mutation was found in 12/42 (29%) PP biopsies. 5 patients had both MET amplification and T790M mutation. The median overall survival (OS), and the median PP OS were 36.2 months [IC95% 27.3-45.6] and 18.5 months [IC95% 10.6-26.5], respectively. 16 patients received a MET TKI. Objective response was reported in 1 out of 12 evaluable patients treated with a MET TKI as single agent and in 1 of 2 patients treated with a combination of MET and EGFR TKIs. No significant difference was found according to the MET FISH status for OS and PP OS. 3 out of 9 evaluable T790M-positive patients had an objective response upon 3rd generation EGFR TKI. T790M-positive patients had a better OS (median 84.7 vs. 32.2 months, p=0.016) and PP OS (median 36.9 vs. 11 months, p=0.0141) than T790M-negative patients. Even when associated with MET-driven resistance to EGFR TKIs, the T790M mutation may be associated with relative sensitivity to 3rd generation EGFR TKIs and prolonged survival. MET TKIs alone yield low ORR, which emphasizes the need for further evaluation of combinations of EGFR and MET TKIs.