Primary Endpoint Of Overall Survival Research Articles

Abstract PO1-20-05: SURVIVE study – a multicenter, randomized, controlled phase 3 superiority trial, evaluating liquid biopsy guided intensified follow-up surveillance in women with intermediate-to high-risk early breast cancer

Abstract Background: Current guidelines limit routine breast cancer follow-up to clinical examinations and breast imaging. This is based on the results of two large cohort studies conducted in the 1980s that showed no improvement in overall survival (OS) by an intensified screening for distant metastases. Thus, imaging for distant metastases should currently only be performed in patients with specific symptoms. To detect distant relapse in a pre-symptomatic stage, we suggest the evaluation of a liquid biopsy-guided intensified surveillance, analyzing tumor markers (CA 27.29, CA 125 and CEA), circulating tumor cells (CTCs) and circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Trial design: Funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research, the SURVIVE study is the first large, randomized breast cancer surveillance trial to investigate the potential survival benefit of a liquid biopsy guided follow-up care in intermediate- to high-risk early breast cancer patients. The trial is a German multicenter, controlled phase 3 superiority study, in which 3500 patients are randomized in a 1:1 ratio to standard vs. liquid biopsy guided intensified follow-up care. At the time of writing 150 patients have been enrolled since December 2022. The total study duration is 144 months. Stratification factors are study site as well as HR-, HER2- and nodal status at surgery. Both study arms receive standard follow-up according to national guidelines. Additional blood samples (year 1-3 every 3 months, year 4-5 every 6 months) and standardized Quality of Life (QoL) questionnaires (EORTC-QLQ-C30/PA-F12, every 6 months) will be collected. While the standard surveillance arm samples will only be stored in a biobank, samples collected in the intensive surveillance arm will be tested for standard tumor markers, CTCs and ctDNA. Pre-specified abnormal findings of any of the liquid biopsy markers indicative of minimal residual disease trigger complete staging. In the event of confirmed disease recurrence, guideline-based treatment follows, otherwise, liquid biopsy testing continues. If applicable, study participants may enter interventional trials. Eligibility criteria: Eligible patients are adult females or males with histologically confirmed primary invasive intermediate to high-risk early breast cancer, defined as an indication for (neo-)adjuvant chemotherapy, and/or large tumor size ( > 50 mm), and/or positive lymph nodes (≥ pN1mi), and/or high grade (≥ G3). Primary anti-tumor therapy (surgery, adjuvant chemo- or radiotherapy) must have been completed ≤ 24 months (≤ 60 months for luminal carcinoma) previously. Patient enrollment during adjuvant endocrine- or antibody-therapy, CDK4/6-/PARP- or PI3K-inhibitors and antibody-drug conjugates is allowed. Statistical methods: The two primary objectives are to determine whether intensified, liquid biopsy-guided surveillance leads to better OS or an overall lead-time effect, compared to standard surveillance. The primary endpoint OS will be analyzed in the ITT population using Kaplan Meier methods and cox regression models, the overall lead time effect is a purely descriptive composite measure. Secondary objectives include invasive disease-free survival (IDFS), distant disease-free survival (DDFS), distant recurrence free survival (DRFS), breast cancer-specific survival (BCSS) and quality of life (QoL). Specific aims: To improve OS and the QoL during breast cancer follow-up, we propose a liquid biopsy guided follow-up method, with high sensitivity and specificity for the earlier detection of distant (oligo-)metastases, to enable earlier initiation of therapy. Conclusion: The SURVIVE-study is a long-awaited trial in early breast cancer follow-up, based on promising liquid biopsy markers. If successful, the results will lead to a paradigm shift in current follow-up care of intermediate to high-risk early breast cancer survivors. Clinical trial information: NCT05658172 Citation Format: Franziska Mergel, Sophia Huesmann, Thomas Friedl, Kerstin Pfister, Tatjana Braun, Angelina Fink, Forca Mehmeti, Tanja Fehm, Volkmar Müller, Klaus Pantel, Andreas Hartkopf, Elisabeth Wiesmüller, Brigitte Rack, Wolfgang Janni. SURVIVE study – a multicenter, randomized, controlled phase 3 superiority trial, evaluating liquid biopsy guided intensified follow-up surveillance in women with intermediate-to high-risk early breast cancer [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO1-20-05.

RESILIENT Part 2: A Randomized, Open-Label Phase III Study of Liposomal Irinotecan Versus Topotecan in Adults With Relapsed Small Cell Lung Cancer.

The phase III RESILIENT trial compared second-line liposomal irinotecan with topotecan in patients with small cell lung cancer (SCLC). Patients with SCLC and progression on or after first-line platinum-based chemotherapy were randomly assigned (1:1) to intravenous (IV) liposomal irinotecan (70 mg/m2 every 2 weeks in a 6-week cycle) or IV topotecan (1.5 mg/m2 daily for 5 consecutive days, every 3 weeks in a 6-week cycle). The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Key secondary end points included progression-free survival (PFS) and objective response rate (ORR). Among 461 randomly assigned patients, 229 received liposomal irinotecan and 232 received topotecan. The median follow-up was 18.4 months. The median OS was 7.9 months with liposomal irinotecan versus 8.3 months with topotecan (hazard ratio [HR], 1.11 [95% CI, 0.90 to 1.37]; P = .31). The median PFS per blinded independent central review (BICR) was 4.0 months with liposomal irinotecan and 3.3 months with topotecan (HR, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.77 to 1.20]; nominal P = .71); ORR per BICR was 44.1% (95% CI, 37.6 to 50.8) and 21.6% (16.4 to 27.4), respectively. Overall, 42.0% and 83.4% of patients receiving liposomal irinotecan and topotecan, respectively, experienced grade ≥3 related treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs). The most common grade ≥3 related TEAEs were diarrhea (13.7%), neutropenia (8.0%), and decreased neutrophil count (4.4%) with liposomal irinotecan and neutropenia (51.6%), anemia (30.9%), and leukopenia (29.1%) with topotecan. Liposomal irinotecan and topotecan demonstrated similar median OS and PFS in patients with relapsed SCLC. Although the primary end point of OS was not met, liposomal irinotecan demonstrated a higher ORR than topotecan. The safety profile of liposomal irinotecan was consistent with its known safety profile; no new safety concerns emerged.

Curative effect of percutaneous microwave ablation therapy on hepatocellular carcinoma survival: a 15-year real-world study

Objective: To evaluate the long-term efficacy of percutaneous microwave ablation (MWA) therapy for hepatocellular carcinoma. Methods: 2054 cases with Barcelona Clinic Liver Cancer (BCLC) stage 0~B at the Fifth Medical Center of the Chinese People's Liberation Army General Hospital from January 2006 to September 2020 were retrospectively collected. All patients were followed up for at least 2 years. The primary endpoint of overall survival and secondary endpoints (tumor-related survival, disease-free survival, and postoperative complications) of patients treated with ultrasound-guided percutaneous MWA were analyzed. Kaplan-Meier method was used for stratified survival rate analysis. Fine-and-Gray competing risk model was used to analyze overall survival. Results: A total of 5 503 HCC nodules [mean tumor diameter (2.6±1.6) cm] underwent 3 908 MWAs between January 2006 and September 2020, with a median follow-up time of 45.6 (24.0 -79.2) months.The technical effectiveness rate of 5 375 tumor nodules was 97.5%. The overall survival rates at 5, 10, and 15-years were 61.6%, 38.8%, and 27.0%, respectively. The tumor-specific survival rates were 67.1%, 47.2%, and 37.7%, respectively. The free tumor survival rates were 25.8%, 15.7%, and 9.9%, respectively. The incidence rate of severe complications was 2.8% (108/3 908). Further analysis showed that the technical effectiveness and survival rate over the passing three time periods from January 2006-2010, 2011-2015, and 2016-September 2020 were significantly increased, with P < 0.001, especially for liver cancer 3.1~5.0 cm (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Microwave ablation therapy is a safe and effective method for BCLC stage 0-B, with significantly enhanced technical efficacy and survival rate over time.

Survival and Quality of Life after Isolated Hepatic Perfusion with Melphalan as a Treatment for Uveal Melanoma Liver Metastases - Final Results from the Phase III Randomized Controlled Trial SCANDIUM.

To investigate overall survival (OS) and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) of first-line isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) compared to best alternative care (BAC) for patients with uveal melanoma liver metastases. Approximately half of patients with uveal melanoma develop metastatic disease, most commonly in the liver and systemic treatment options are limited. Isolated hepatic perfusion (IHP) is a locoregional therapy with high response rates but with unclear effect on overall survival (OS). In this phase III randomized controlled multicenter trial (the SCANDIUM trial) patients with previously untreated isolated uveal melanoma liver metastases were included between 2013-2021, with at least 24 months of follow-up. The planned accrual was 90 patients randomized 1:1 to receive a one-time treatment with IHP or BAC. Crossover to IHP was not allowed. The primary endpoint was the 24-month OS rate, with the hypothesis of a treatment effect leading to a 50% OS rate in the IHP group compared to 20% in the control group. HRQOL was measured by the EuroQol 5-domains 3-levels (EQ-5D-3L) questionnaire over 12 months. The intention-to-treat (ITT) population included 87 patients randomized to the IHP group (43 patients; 41 [89%] received IHP) or the control group (44 patients). The control group received chemotherapy (49%), immunotherapy (39%), or localized interventions (9%). In the ITT population, the median PFS was 7.4 months in the IHP group compared with 3.3 months in the control group, with a hazard ratio of 0.21 (95% CI, 0.12-0.36). The 24-month OS rate was 46.5% in the IHP group versus 29.5% in the control group (P=0.12). The median OS was 21.7 months versus 17.6 months, with a hazard ratio of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.37-1.10). EQ-5D-3L showed a sustained high health status for the IHP group over 12 months, compared to a deteriorating trend in the control group. For patients with liver metastases from uveal melanoma, IHP offers high response rates translating to a benefit in PFS including a trend of better HRQOL compared to the control group. However, the primary endpoint of OS at 24 months was not met.

Evaluating intermediate endpoints (IE) for overall survival (OS) in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC) treated with immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICI): An IMDC study.

400 Background: In Ph3 trials, assessment for primary endpoint of OS necessitates extended follow-up (f/u) periods, larger pool of events, and higher associated costs. We sought to determine if shorter IEs like Time to Treatment Failure (TTF) and Time to Next Therapy (TTNT) are associated with OS in patients (pts) receiving ICI-based trt. Methods: We included all International mRCC Database Consortium (IMDC) pts who received contemporary approved first line(1L) ICI from 2013 to 2023. IEs were defined from ICI start until drug cessation or death for TTF, and initiation of next line or death for TTNT, or censored at date of last f/u. Associations of OS with TTF and TTNT status at 6-mo landmark were assessed using Cox regression adjusting for IMDC risk groups, metastatic sites, histology, age, and prior nephrectomy, stratified by treatment (trt) and yrs of ICI start. Endpoint associations across all f/u time were evaluated using Kendall’s Tau (KT) correlation by Clayton copula. A KT &gt;0.49 indicates a strong correlation ( Wicklin R., 2023). Results: The cohort consisted of 1667 pts with a median f/u of 15.4 mo (IQR: 7.1-28.6). Median age at 1L start was 63 yrs (IQR: 56-70), with 73% being male and 65% undergoing nephrectomy before starting 1L. 1132 patients received dual ICI, while 535 received an ICI+TKI combination. Pts who discontinued their 1L regimen within the 6-mo landmark demonstrated poor OS, with a hazard ratio (HR) of 2.74 (95% CI: 2.15-3.49). Additionally, those who transitioned to a 2L therapy within the first 6 mo showed worse OS, reflected by an HR of 2.82 (2.22-3.59). KT correlation with OS across all follow up was 0.49 (0.45, 0.52) for TTF and 0.67 (0.64, 0.69) for TTNT. Consistent results were seen across all subgroups with the strongest association in the ICI+TKI group (Table). Conclusions: TTNT demonstrated the strongest association with OS, particularly in the ICI+TKI subgroup, making it a potentially clinically meaningful intermediate endpoint for evaluating efficacy in ICI-based regimens.[Table: see text]

Rivoceranib, a VEGFR-2 inhibitor, monotherapy in previously treated patients with advanced or metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction cancer (ANGEL study): an international, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

BackgroundRivoceranib is an oral, selective tyrosine kinase inhibitor of vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-2. ANGEL (NCT03042611) was a global, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, phase 3 study evaluating rivoceranib as 3rd-line or ≥4th-line therapy in patients with advanced/metastatic gastric or gastroesophageal junction (GEJ) cancer.MethodsPatients had failed ≥2 lines of chemotherapy and were randomized 2:1 to rivoceranib 700 mg once daily or placebo with best supportive care. Primary endpoint: overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat population. Secondary endpoints: progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and disease control rate (DCR) by blinded independent central review (BICR).ResultsIn total, 460 patients (rivoceranib n = 308, placebo n = 152) were enrolled. OS was not statistically different for rivoceranib versus placebo (median 5.78 vs. 5.13 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.93, 95% CI 0.74–1.15; p = 0.4724). PFS by BICR (median 2.83 vs. 1.77 months; HR 0.58, 95% CI 0.47–0.71; p < 0.0001), ORR (6.5% vs. 1.3%; p = 0.0119), and DCR (40.3 vs. 13.2%; p < 0.0001) were improved with rivoceranib versus placebo. In patients receiving ≥4th-line therapy, OS (median 6.34 vs. 4.73 months; p = 0.0192) and PFS by BICR (median 3.52 vs. 1.71 months; p < 0.0001) were improved with rivoceranib versus placebo. The most common grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events with rivoceranib were hypertension (17.9%), anemia (10.4%), aspartate aminotransferase increased (9.4%), asthenia (8.5%), and proteinuria (7.5%).ConclusionsThis study did not meet its primary OS endpoint. Compared to placebo, rivoceranib improved PFS, ORR, and DCR. Rivoceranib also improved OS in a prespecified patient subgroup receiving ≥4th-line therapy.

Canakinumab in combination with docetaxel compared with docetaxel alone for the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer following platinum-based doublet chemotherapy and immunotherapy (CANOPY-2): A multicenter, randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial

ObjectivesCanakinumab, an interleukin-1 beta inhibitor, previously showed reduced lung cancer incidence and mortality (CANTOS). Here, we compare the efficacy/safety of canakinumab versus placebo in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who had progressed after platinum-based doublet chemotherapy (PDC) and immunotherapy. Materials and methodsCANOPY-2, a randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial, enrolled adult patients with stage IIIB/IV NSCLC, without EGFR or ALK alterations, who had received one prior PDC regimen and one prior programmed death-1/programmed death-ligand 1 inhibitor and experienced subsequent disease progression. Patients were randomized to canakinumab plus docetaxel or placebo plus docetaxel. ResultsA total of 237 patients were randomly allocated: 120 (51 %) to canakinumab and 117 (49 %) to placebo, stratified by histology and prior lines of therapy. Three patients in the placebo arm did not receive study treatment. The trial did not meet its primary endpoint of overall survival: median 10.6 months (95 % confidence interval [CI], 8.2–12.4) for the canakinumab arm and 11.3 months (95 % CI, 8.5–13.8) for the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 1.06 [95 % CI, 0.76–1.48]; one-sided P-value = 0.633). AEs (any grade) were reported in 95 % of patients in the canakinumab group and in 98 % of patients in the placebo group. Grade 3–4 AEs were experienced by 62 % and 64 % of patients in the canakinumab and placebo groups, respectively, and grade 5 AEs were experienced by 8 % and 5 %. Prespecified, post-hoc subgroup analyses showed that patients with undetected circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) and/or lower levels (< 10 mg/L) of C-reactive protein (CRP) achieved longer progression-free and overall survival than those with detected ctDNA or higher (≥ 10 mg/L) CRP levels. There was no association with treatment arm. ConclusionAdding canakinumab to docetaxel did not provide additional benefit for patients with advanced NSCLC who had progressed after PDC and immunotherapy.Clinical registration: NCT03626545.

Decider-2: Prospective Randomized Multicenter Phase III Trial of Decitabine and Venetoclax Administered in Combination with All- Trans Retinoic Acid (ATRA) or Placebo in Patients with Acute Myeloid Leukemia Who Are Ineligible for Induction Chemotherapy

Background and Significance DNA-hypomethylating agent (HMA) based therapy is the treatment backbone for older, medically non-fit AML/MDS pts, and studies have been performed with multiple combination partners over the last years (reviewed by Stomper et al., Leukemia 2021). Recently, the combination of azacitidine or decitabine (DEC) with venetoclax (VEN) has become the novel standard for many of these pts. Based on preclinical evidence of priming of AML cells to all- trans retinoic acid (ATRA) by DEC, we have conducted a randomized phase II trial in 200 elderly and medically non-fit AML pts on the effect of ATRA as add-on to DEC (DECIDER-1, Lübbert et al., J. Clin. Oncol 2020). Median overall survival (OS) was 8.2 months with ATRA v 5.1 months without ATRA (hazard ratio, 0.65; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.89; P = .006). Notably, ATRA did not add toxicity, the combination was active also in AML with adverse genetics, and it appeared to prolong time to secondary treatment resistance. A randomized open-label phase II trial (DEC -/+ ATRA) is also being conducted in higher-risk MDS pts (Zhou et al., ASH 2021, 539). Investigating a triple combination of HMA+VEN+ATRA is a logical next step. We could demonstrate cooperativity between these 3 drugs in AML cell lines irrespective of TP53 mutation status on cell growth inhibition and apoptosis (Bresser et al., ASH 2022, 11537). Study Design and Methods This academic study is a randomized, prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel group, multicenter trial. It is planned to randomize 256 pts in a ratio of 1:1 to the treatment arms at ~35 sites in Germany. The primary objective is to compare the efficacy of ATRA v placebo as add-on to the standard treatment DEC+VEN with respect to OS. Secondary objectives are to compare ATRA v placebo as add-on to DAC+VEN with respect to objective best response (i.e. CR/CRi/MLFS/PR), CR with negative measurable residual disease (MRD), probability of survival with objective best response, health-related quality of life and safety. Sample size calculation is based on the primary endpoint OS. The study should have a power of 80% to demonstrate superiority of ATRA vs. placebo with respect to OS at one-sided level alpha of 2.5% under the assumption of a hazard ratio of 0.67. This requires the observation of 191 deaths. With a recruitment period of 3 years and an additional one year follow-up period, it is necessary to include 230 pts. To account for the possibility of up to 10% of the pts with incomplete follow-up, 230/0.9 = 256 pts will be randomized in total (ratio 1:1). Interim safety analyses will be performed after the 2nd cycle of the 10th randomized pt, and after the 3rd cycle of the 50th, the 100th and the 150 th randomized pt, and monitored by an Independent Data Monitoring Committee. Key inclusion criteria are: age ≥18 years; previously untreated AML (WHO 2016); ineligibility for standard induction chemotherapy; ECOG ≤ 2; WBC &amp;lt;25×109/L (prior cytoreduction allowed). Key exclusion criterion is: acute promyelocytic leukemia. Treatment All pts will be treated with DAC+VEN as standard treatment and will additionally either receive ATRA or placebo (Fig. 1). Study treatment is continued until relapse/progression, hematopoietic cell transplantation, death or unacceptable toxicity (whichever occurs first). Correlative investigations include serial MRD measurement, NGS profiling and apoptosis studies. Registration EUDRACT 2020-005495-36; DRKS 00023646 (P001516). Funding Funded by the German Research Foundation (DFG, project no. 367848349/LU 429/13-1); ATRA is provided free of charge by Cheplapharm (Germany). Figure 1 Overview of the study treatment

Nivolumab plus chemotherapy in first-line metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer: results of the phase III CheckMate 227 Part 2 trial

In CheckMate 227 Part 1, first-line nivolumab plus ipilimumab prolonged overall survival (OS) in patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) and tumor programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression ≥1% versus chemotherapy. We report results from CheckMate 227 Part 2, which evaluated nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic NSCLC regardless of tumor PD-L1 expression. Seven hundred and fifty-five patients with systemic therapy-naive, stage IV/recurrent NSCLC without EGFR mutations or ALK alterations were randomized 1 : 1 to nivolumab 360 mg every 3 weeks plus chemotherapy or chemotherapy. Primary endpoint was OS with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC. OS in all randomized patients was a hierarchically tested secondary endpoint. At 19.5 months' minimum follow-up, no significant improvement in OS was seen with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC [median OS 18.8 versus 15.6 months, hazard ratio (HR) 0.86, 95.62% confidence interval (CI) 0.69-1.08, P= 0.1859]. Descriptive analyses showed OS improvement with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in all randomized patients (median OS 18.3 versus 14.7 months, HR 0.81, 95.62% CI 0.67-0.97) and in an exploratory analysis in squamous NSCLC (median OS 18.3 versus 12.0 months, HR 0.69, 95% CI 0.50-0.97). A trend toward improved OS was seen with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy, regardless of the tumor mutation status of STK11 or TP53, regardless of tumor mutational burden, and in patients with intermediate/poor Lung Immune Prognostic Index scores. Safety with nivolumab plus chemotherapy was consistent with previous reports of first-line settings. CheckMate 227 Part 2 did not meet the primary endpoint of OS with nivolumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in patients with metastatic nonsquamous NSCLC. Descriptive analyses showed prolonged OS with nivolumab plus chemotherapy in all-randomized and squamous NSCLC populations, suggesting that this combination may benefit patients with untreated metastatic NSCLC.

Predictive models of long-term survival outcomes following radical cystectomy.

Identifying the likelihood of life-threatening recurrence after radical cystectomy by reliable and user-friendly predictive models remains an unmet need in the clinical management of invasive bladder cancer. A total of 204 consecutive patients undergoing open radical cystectomy (ORC) for bladder cancer were retrospectively enrolled between May 2005 and August 2020. Clinicopathological and peri-ORC therapeutic data were extracted from clinical records. We explored predictive factors that significantly affected the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS) and secondary endpoints of cancer-specific survival (CSS) and recurrence-free survival (RFS). During a median follow-up of 3.9 years, 42 (20.6%) and 10 (4.9%) patients died due to bladder cancer and other causes, respectively. Five-year RFS, CSS, and OS were 66.5%, 77.6%, and 75.4%, respectively. Pathological T and N categories and lymphovascular invasion (LVI) significantly affected RFS by Cox regression analysis. Accordingly, clinical T and pathological N categories and LVI significantly affected CSS. Clinical T and pathological N categories, LVI, age, and ORC tumor grade significantly affected OS. Based on the assessment score for each independent risk factor, we developed the Gunma University Oncology Study Group (GUOSG) score, which predicts RFS, CSS, and OS. The GUOSG score classified four groups for RFS, three for CSS, and five for OS, with statistically significant distribution for nearly all comparisons. The GUOSG model is helpful to show individualized prognosis and functions as a risk-stratified historical cohort for assessing the lifelong efficacy of new salvage treatment regimens.

Randomized Phase 2 Clinical Trial of Olaratumab in Combination with Gemcitabine and Docetaxel in Advanced Soft Tissue Sarcomas.

Gemcitabine plus docetaxel is an effective treatment regimen for advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STSs). However, the prognosis for patients remains poor, and thus there is an urgent medical need for novel and effective therapies to improve long-term outcomes. The aim of the ANNOUNCE 2 trial was to explore the addition of olaratumab (O) to gemcitabine (G) and docetaxel (D) for advanced STS. Adults with unresectable locally advanced/metastatic STS, ≤2 prior lines of systemic therapy, and ECOG PS 0-1 were eligible. In Phase 2, patients were randomized 1:1 from two cohorts (O-naïve and O-pretreated) to 21-day cycles of olaratumab (20 mg/kg Cycle 1 and 15 mg/kg other cycles, Days 1 and 8), gemcitabine (900 mg/m2, Days 1 and 8), and docetaxel (75 mg/m2, Day 8). The primary objective was overall survival (OS) in the O-naïve population (α level = 0.20). Secondary endpoints included OS (O-pretreated), other efficacy parameters, patient-reported outcomes, safety, pharmacokinetics, and immunogenicity. A total of 167 and 89 patients were enrolled in the O-naïve and O-pretreated cohorts, respectively. Baseline patient characteristics were well balanced. No statistically significant difference in OS was observed between the investigational vs. control arm for either cohort (O-naïve cohort: HR = 0.95 (95% CI: 0.64-1.40), p = 0.78, median OS, 16.8 vs. 18.0 months; O-pretreated cohort: HR = 0.67 (95% CI: 0.39-1.16), p = 0.15, median OS 19.8 vs. 17.3 months). Safety was manageable across treatment arms. There was no statistically significant difference in the primary endpoint of OS between the two arms in the O-naïve population, and therefore based on hierarchical evaluation no other outcomes in this study can be considered statistically significant. No new safety signals were observed.

Intraoral Gavage of Second-Generation Probiotic Lactobacillus Reuteri Releasing IFN-β (LR-IFN-β) Mitigates Intestinal Irradiation Toxicity and Improves Survival During Whole Abdomen Irradiation (WAI)

We sought to establish a method by which to overcome the toxicity of WAI to facilitate clinical application in Ovarian Cancer patients. We irradiated C57BL/6J mice to 19.75 Gy WAI and assessed the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS). In a separate experiment, mice were irradiated to 12 Gy WAI and intestinal barrier integrity was compared between groups: control (0 Gy), irradiation only, 12 Gy + LR, 12 Gy + IFN-β, and 12 Gy + LR-IFN-β. Luminex assay of plasma and intestinal cells were also assayed at day 5 after WAI for radiation-induced inflammatory cytokines, and fecal matter was analyzed for LR-IFN-β clearance and levels of the LR-derived IFN-β gene from day 1 to 5 in control non-irradiated mice. Moreover, fluorescent beads were intraorally administered three hours prior to sacrifice at days 2 or 5 after WAI, and blood was assayed for beads. Mice receiving LR-IFN-β (109 bacteria in 100 mL of saline) 24-hours following a single fraction of 19.75 Gy WAI showed improved OS compared to control irradiated mice (p = 0.03). LR-IFN-β gavage maintained intestinal barrier integrity (p < 0.05) by stimulating intestinal stem cells regenerations (improved levels of Lgr5+ cells, occludin, and I-CAM; p < 0.05), and reduced levels of intestinal pro-inflammatory cytokines, including IFN-γ (p = 0.0261), IL-3 (p < 0.0020) and IL-17 (p < 0.0070). There was no significant effect of control LR or intraperitoneal injection of IFN-β protein at 24 hours after WAI. Detectable levels of LR-IFN-β bacteria were also cleared from fecal matter by day three via colony assay and rt-PCR, with no detectable growth of LR-IFN-β in blood from gavaged irradiated mice (13.5 Gy WAI). LR-IFN-β is both a feasible and effective radiation mitigator that could potentially improve the management of ovarian cancer patients. Furthermore, the subsequent addition of platinum/taxane-based chemotherapy to the combination of WAI and LR-IFN-β should reduce tumor volume while protecting the intestine and thus improve overall survival in ovarian cancer patients.

Clinical and pathological factors and outcome of central nervous system metastasis in breast cancer.

In Switzerland, approximately 6000 new breast cancer cases and 1300 deaths are reported annually. Brain metastasis from breast cancer (BMBC) has a major effect on prognosis. This study aimed to identify prognostic factors for overall survival (OS) in a cohort of Swiss patients with BMBC. This study evaluated the prognosis on older BMBC, which has not been completely addressed in the literature. We performed a retrospective chart review analysis with the primary endpoint of OS after a diagnosis of BMBC. The study population was divided into 2 groups based on an OS cut-off value of 12 months after diagnosis. Univariate and multivariate analyses of several risk factors, including age, were performed. To evaluate differences in OS according to age, we performed a secondary analysis to examine the prognostic value of clinical symptoms, metastatic pattern, and lymph node involvement in an older (≥65 years) vs. younger (<65 years) cohort. From 1989 to 2019, 55 patients were identified as having BMBC, among whom 47 patients were confirmed to be dead. The median patient age was 58 years (range 25-83 years). Comorbidities were present in 45 (81.8%) patients. The median survival in the OS <12 and OS ≥12 months groups was 4.3 and 30.7 months, respectively (p<0.001). Multivariate analysis revealed no significant differences in terms of comorbidities, medication use, M-stage, and symptomatology between the 2 groups. Additionally, there was no significant difference in OS in the 2 subgroups of patients aged <65 and ≥65 years. We concluded that age should not be a decisive factor in therapy planning for advanced breast cancer patients with BMBC.

Survival Benefit from Multimodal Treatment for Patients with Atypical Teratoid Rhabdoid Tumor in a Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results Database Analysis

Introduction: Atypical teratoid rhabdoid tumor (ATRT) is among the most aggressive central nervous system malignancies. Although rare, this tumor typically afflicts young children and results in mortality within months. Here, we aim to determine key clinical features and treatment options that impact the survival of patients with ATRT. Methods: From the year 2000 to 2019, 363 patients with ATRT were identified from the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. Univariate analysis was used to identify variables that had a significant impact on the primary endpoint of overall survival (OS). Multivariable analysis was then used to identify independent predictors of survival. Results: The median OS of the entire cohort was 13 months. Univariate analysis identified ages between 1 and 3 years, ages between 4 and 17 years, years of diagnosis between 2010 and 2019, and the receipt of treatment to have a significant impact on survival. In multivariable analysis, ages between 1 and 3 years and receipt of treatment were the only significant independent predictors of survival. The median OS was significantly greater in patients who received surgical treatment, chemotherapy, or radiation when compared to those who did not receive any treatment. In general, the receipt of any combination of therapies improved the median OS significantly. The receipt of triple therapy had the greatest impact on survival. Discussion: This study highlights the survival benefit of a multimodal approach in the treatment of ATRT. The use of triple therapy, including surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy, was found to have the greatest survival benefit for patients. Overall, these findings may guide future care for patients with ATRT.

Darolutamide: A Review in Metastatic Hormone-Sensitive Prostate Cancer.

Darolutamide (NUBEQA®) is an oral androgen receptor inhibitor (ARi) that is approved for the treatment of metastatic hormone-sensitive prostate cancer (mHSPC) in combination with androgen deprivation therapy (ADT) and docetaxel. In a pivotal trial, darolutamide plus ADT and docetaxel was superior to placebo plus ADT and docetaxel in prolonging the primary endpoint of overall survival, with improvements also reported in most secondary endpoints. Treatment with darolutamide plus ADT and docetaxel was associated with a manageable tolerability profile. Furthermore, the adverse events reported with darolutamide plus ADT and docetaxel were generally consistent with the safety profiles previously reported for ADT and docetaxel. Darolutamide expands the availability of treatment options in mHSPC and may be useful as a treatment for high-volume disease (typically defined as ≥ 4 bone metastases with spread outside of the pelvis and vertebral column).

Ombipepimut dosing emulsion (ODE) + bevacizumab (bev) vs bev alone in patients (pts) with recurrent or progressive glioblastoma (rGBM).

2022 Background: ODE is an investigational cancer vaccine derived from Wilms tumor 1. WIZARD was a randomized, adaptive, phase 3 study to test ODE + bev vs bev in rGBM pts (NCT03149003). Patients were stratified prior to randomization based upon KPS [60 or 70] vs [80 to 100] and extent of resection at initial diagnosis. Patients with low KPS (e.g., 60) are generally underrepresented in clinical trials. Methods: Pts ≥18 years with GBM at first recurrence were enrolled. Overall survival (OS) was the primary endpoint; the key secondary endpoint was the 12-month OS rate. The primary and the key secondary endpoints were tested using 1-sided test with an overall significance level 2.5%. The Lan-DeMets error spending function based upon O’Brien-Fleming stopping boundaries was used to adjust the significance level for the interim and final analyses. Results: From April 2018 to Aug 2021, 217 pts were randomized 1:1; 109 to ODE + bev and 108 to bev. OS was analyzed after 185 events with a median follow-up of 31.8 months (mo). Pts at baseline had a median age of 60 years, 45.2% reported corticosteroid use, 29% had KPS 60 or 70, 7.8% had tumors that harbored IDH1 or 2 mutations, and the median tumor volume was 10,532 mm3. Baseline characteristics between treatment arms were balanced in the ITT and KPS subgroups. Pts with KPS 60 or 70 had more corticosteroid use, worse NANO scores, and larger tumor burden than those with KPS 80-100. The study did not meet its primary endpoint of OS by ITT (ODE + bev: 10.2 mo vs bev: 9.4 mo, 1-sided p-value: 0.2159). Pts with KPS 60 or 70 had longer OS when treated with ODE + bev (8.2 vs 6.3 mo, 45% death risk reduction, 1-side p value: 0.0119). Grade 1 or 2 injection site reaction was the most common TEAE in the ODE + bev arm. No clinically significant difference in safety was noted between KPS subgroups. Conclusions: The data in pts with KPS 60 or 70 suggested benefit with ODE + bev that was consistent across different endpoints and that warrants further validation. Clinical trial information: NCT03149003 . [Table: see text]

A phase I dose escalation study of eryaspase in combination with modified FOLFIRINOX in locally advanced and metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma.

e16288 Background: The prognosis for advanced metastatic pancreatic adenocarcinoma remains dismal, highlighting the need for novel therapeutic agents. FOLFIRINOX (5-Fluorouracil + Oxaliplatin + Irinotecan) remains the standard of care frontline therapy for advanced disease, with historical objective response rate (ORR) of ~31%. Eryaspase is an investigational red blood cell product encapsulating L-asparaginase, which hydrolyzes and reduces asparagine levels in plasma, leading to cancer cell death. A phase III trial (Trybeca-1), which compared chemotherapy with or without eryaspase in the second line setting, did not reach its primary efficacy endpoint. However, there was a trend towards improved survival in the group receiving 5-fluorouracil and irinotecan plus eryaspase. We herein report the final results from our phase I front-line study of mFOLFIRINOX plus eryaspase. Methods: Patients with locally advanced or metastatic biopsy-proven pancreatic adenocarcinoma were treated with mFOLFIRINOX plus eryaspase in a standard 3 +3 dose escalation trial design. mFOLFIRINOX was given as 5-Fluorouracil 2400 mg/m2 over 46 hours, Oxaliplatin 85 mg/m2, Irinotecan 150 mg/m2 plus eryaspase 75 units/kg at dose level 0 or 100 units/kg at dose level 1. Key eligibility criteria included performance status of 0 or 1, locally advanced or metastatic disease, and adequate organ function. The primary objectives were to determine the maximum tolerated dose (MTD) and to determine the safety of this combination. Results: At completion of trial, eighteen patients were enrolled. Three patients were enrolled at dose level 0 and fifteen at dose level 1, with no dose limiting toxicities. Seventeen patients had imaging to evaluate best response: 24% (N=4) had partial response (PR), 65% (N=11) had stable disease (SD), and 11% (N=2) had progressive disease. The disease control rate (PR +SD) was 89%. Progression free survival (PFS) was 6.4 months (95% CI 3.21 – 16.79) and overall survival (OS) was 10.1 months (95% CI 7.18 – NR). There were select patients with very durable response (PFS&gt;12 months and OS &gt;18 months). There was one grade 5 (G5) sepsis adverse event (AE) and one G4 thromboembolic AE. G3 AEs were hypokalemia (22%), fatigue (11%), anemia (6%), hypotension (6%), diarrhea (6%), syncope (6%), and atrial fibrillation (6%). Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data are in process. Conclusions: The novel combination of mFOLFIRINOX plus eryaspase was well tolerated with no DLT and demonstrated signals of clinical activity in select patients. The MTD was declared with 5-FU 2400 mg/2, Oxaliplatin 85 mg/2, Irinotecan 150 mg/m2, and eryaspase 100 units/kg. Although the phase III Trybeca-1 trial did not meet the primary OS endpoint, both trials may suggest enhanced activity of eryaspase with regimens containing 5-Fluorouracil and Irinotecan. Clinical trial information: NCT04292743 .

Prognostic value of baseline immune suppressive biomarkers to select non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients (pts) likely to benefit from the plinabulin/docetaxel (Plin/Doc) combination.

e21018 Background: Baseline Neutrophil-to-Lymphocyte (L) ratio (NLR), Platelet-to-L ratio (PLR), and L-to-Monocyte ratio (LMR) are biomarkers that can predict anticancer outcomes. Plin, a novel small molecule immune-enhancing agent, exerts anticancer activity by GEF-H1-dependent activation of dendritic cells, and hence T-cells. We evaluated the correlation of Plin’s anticancer effects with NLR, PLR, LMR immune suppressive (IS) signature. We correlated baseline NLR, PLR, and LMR (broken down in quartiles [Q]) with overall survival (OS) in NSCLC pts from the DUBLIN-3 trial, which had met the primary OS endpoint in favor of Plin/Doc vs Doc alone (Han ESMO 2021). Methods: DUBLIN-3 (NCT02504489) was a global Phase 3 study in 2nd/3rd line EGFR-wild type, stage IIIB/IV NSCLC pts (N = 559) randomized 1:1 to Plin/Doc or Doc alone. Doc (75 mg/m2 on D1) and Plin (30 mg/m2 on D1/D8) were given by IV infusions. Baseline (i.e., prior to dexamethasone premedication, Doc and Plin) blood draws were taken from each pt within 28 days prior to any study medication given to obtain baseline NLR, PLR, and LMR. The survival duration of each pt was obtained. NLR, PLR, and LMR values for Plin/Doc and Doc were divided into Qs, and the corresponding median OS for each Q was calculated. Only 2nd line pts were included in this analysis to avoid confounding with multiple lines. Results: Increasing Qs of baseline NLR and PLR (thus with increasing IS signature) were associated with decreasing median OS for both Plin/Doc and Doc. Increasing Qs for LMR (thus with decreasing IS signature) were associated with increasing median OS in both Plin/Doc and Doc. Median OS in each Q was consistently higher with Plin/Doc vs Doc alone, except for Qs with an IS signature. With baseline NLR ≤3.6, PLR≤194, or LMR≥5.9, thus avoiding an IS signature, median OS was on average 2.5 Mo (range 0.6-4.5 Mo) longer with Plin/Doc vs Doc alone. For each of the Qs in the table, the n = 52 ± 2 pts. Conclusions: Baseline IS biomarkers were predictive of median OS with both Plin/Doc and Doc alone. Baseline NLR, PLR, and LMR, at cut-off levels to avoid IS levels, could serve as prognostic markers to identify likely responders to the immune-enhancing agent Plin in combination with Doc in NSCLC. Clinical trial information: NCT02504489 . [Table: see text]

Pembrolizumab in combination with gemcitabine and cisplatin compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin alone for patients with advanced biliary tract cancer (KEYNOTE-966): a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial

Biliary tract cancers, which arise from the intrahepatic or extrahepatic bile ducts and the gallbladder, generally have a poor prognosis and are rising in incidence worldwide. The standard-of-care treatment for advanced biliary tract cancer is chemotherapy with gemcitabine and cisplatin. Because most biliary tract cancers have an immune-suppressed microenvironment, immune checkpoint inhibitor monotherapy is associated with a low objective response rate. We aimed to assess whether adding the immune checkpoint inhibitor pembrolizumab to gemcitabine and cisplatin would improve outcomes compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin alone in patients with advanced biliary tract cancer. KEYNOTE-966 was a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial done at 175 medical centres globally. Eligible participants were aged 18 years or older; had previously untreated, unresectable, locally advanced or metastatic biliary tract cancer; had disease measurable per Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumours version 1.1; and had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0 or 1. Eligible participants were randomly assigned (1:1) to pembrolizumab 200 mg or placebo, both administered intravenously every 3 weeks (maximum 35 cycles), in combination with gemcitabine (1000 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; no maximum duration) and cisplatin (25 mg/m2 intravenously on days 1 and 8 every 3 weeks; maximum 8 cycles). Randomisation was done using a central interactive voice-response system and stratified by geographical region, disease stage, and site of origin in block sizes of four. The primary endpoint of overall survival was evaluated in the intention-to-treat population. The secondary endpoint of safety was evaluated in the as-treated population. This study is registered at ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT04003636. Between Oct 4, 2019, and June 8, 2021, 1564 patients were screened for eligibility, 1069 of whom were randomly assigned to pembrolizumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (pembrolizumab group; n=533) or placebo plus gemcitabine and cisplatin (placebo group; n=536). Median study follow-up at final analysis was 25·6 months (IQR 21·7-30·4). Median overall survival was 12·7 months (95% CI 11·5-13·6) in the pembrolizumab group versus 10·9 months (9·9-11·6) in the placebo group (hazard ratio 0·83 [95% CI 0·72-0·95]; one-sided p=0·0034 [significance threshold, p=0·0200]). In the as-treated population, the maximum adverse event grade was 3 to 4 in 420 (79%) of 529 participants in the pembrolizumab group and 400 (75%) of 534 in the placebo group; 369 (70%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and 367 (69%) in the placebo group had treatment-related adverse events with a maximum grade of 3 to 4. 31 (6%) participants in the pembrolizumab group and 49 (9%) in the placebo group died due to adverse events, including eight (2%) in the pembrolizumab group and three (1%) in the placebo group who died due to treatment-related adverse events. Based on a statistically significant, clinically meaningful improvement in overall survival compared with gemcitabine and cisplatin without any new safety signals, pembrolizumab plus gemcitabine and cisplatin could be a new treatment option for patients with previously untreated metastatic or unresectable biliary tract cancer. Merck Sharp & Dohme, a subsidiary of Merck & Co, Rahway, NJ, USA.

Abstract CT084: Targeted intra-arterial gemcitabine vs. continuation of IV gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel following Induction with sequential IV gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and radiotherapy for unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (TIGeR-PaC) - phase III trial interim analysis

Abstract Background: Treatment of locally advanced pancreatic cancer (LAPC) remains a clinical challenge with a median survival of 16-18 months1. Control of local disease, beyond systemic therapy, is part of the treatment paradigm being investigated in this patient population. Double balloon mediated local delivery of intra-arterial gemcitabine (IAG) into the tumor has been demonstrated to be safe in this patient population2. TIGeR-PaC is an ongoing Phase III clinical trial comparing the efficacy of this approach compared to standard of care IV gemcitabine/nab-paclitaxel (GN) for patients with LAPC. Methods: The trial is designed with an induction phase for all patients of upfront systemic chemotherapy and radiation prior to randomization to IAG or continuation of GN. ECOG 0-1 LAPC patients receive 3 cycles of GN and 1 cycle of radiation (SBRT, 33 Gy in 5 fractions). Following induction, patients with non-progressive disease are randomized to receive IAG (8 treatments bi-weekly for 16 weeks) or continuation of GN for 4 cycles over 16 weeks. After the 16 weeks of randomized therapy, patients with non-progressive disease receive continuation systemic therapy of GN or low-dose oral capecitabine, per investigator’s preference until disease progression and are followed for survival only. The primary endpoint is the overall survival (OS), and the study is powered at an 80% power to detect a hazard ratio of 0.6 between the two arms. It is assumed that the hazard functions are proportional only during the randomized treatment period, after which the two hazard functions become approximately identical during the continuing treatment period. The primary endpoint of OS for the two treatment arms will be compared using a 2-sided Wilcoxon test. The first interim analysis of the trial for the ITT population is performed after the 26th out of an expected 86 events have occurred in the trial (30%). Clinical Endpoint Analysis: The first interim analysis of the primary endpoint of OS was conducted on Feb 2nd, 2023. This was based on a data lock on survival status of all patients after the sponsor became aware that the 26th event in the trial occurred on Dec. 21st, 2022. As of that date, 45 patients had been randomized in the trial and the survival status of all 45 subjects was used as of the date for analysis. Of the 45 patients randomized, 23 were randomized to IAG and 22 to continuation of IV GN. There were equal number of primary events, 13, in each arm. The median survival in the control arm is 10 months, versus 16 months in the IAG arm. The p-values based on Wilcoxson non-proportional hazard ratio is 0.051 between the 2 arms. The study continues to accrue patients with a second interim analysis (after 52 events) expected at end of 2024. 1. Hammel P, Huguet F, van Laethem JL, et al. Effect of Chemoradiotherapy vs Chemotherapy on Survival in Patients With Locally Advanced Pancreatic Cancer Controlled After 4 Months of Gemcitabine With or Without Erlotinib. JAMA. 2016;315(17):1844. 2. Rosemurgy AS, Ross SB, Vitulli PL, et al. Safety Study of Targeted and Localized Intra-Arterial Delivery of Gemcitabine in Patients with Locally Advanced Pancreatic Adenocarcinoma. J Pancreat Cancer. 2017;3(1):58-65. Citation Format: Michael Pishvaian, Amer Zureikat, Charles Lopez, Kenneth Meredith, Emmanuel Zervos, Hassan Hatoum, Ki Chung, Daniel J. Berg, Antonio Ucar, Ripal Gandhi, Reza Nazemzadeh, Parikh Nainesh, Paula Novelli, Brian Kouri, Christopher Laing, Brian Boone, Thor Johnson, Susan Bates, Karyn Goodman, Ramtin Agah. Targeted intra-arterial gemcitabine vs. continuation of IV gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel following Induction with sequential IV gemcitabine plus nab-paclitaxel and radiotherapy for unresectable locally advanced pancreatic cancer (TIGeR-PaC) - phase III trial interim analysis [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the American Association for Cancer Research Annual Meeting 2023; Part 2 (Clinical Trials and Late-Breaking Research); 2023 Apr 14-19; Orlando, FL. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2023;83(8_Suppl):Abstract nr CT084.