Progression-free Survival Benefit Research Articles

Efficacy and safety of first- versus second-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors in chronic lymphocytic leukemia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

We conducted this first systematic review and meta-analysis to assess the competitive advantage of 2nd-generation Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitors (BTKi) compared to 1st-generation BTKi in chronic lymphocytic leukemia (CLL). The literature search was conducted from PubMed, Web of Science, Embase databases, and hematology annual conferences. Data of over response rate (ORR), progression-free survival (PFS), and overall survival (OS) were extracted to a pool meta-analysis of efficacy; adverse events (AEs) were also extracted to a pool meta-analysis of safety. Bias risk assessment and meta-analysis were performed by Review Manager 5.3 and STATA 14 software. A total of 3649 patients from 29 cohorts were included. The results showed that the benefits of ORR and 24-month PFS in 2nd-generation BTKi compared to 1st-generation BTKi were not significant in the whole population but only in the relapsed or refractory (R/R) CLL patient subgroup (ORR: 86.4% vs. 76.2%, p = 0.013; 24-month PFS: 76.9% vs. 67.9%, p = 0.004). Any-grade AEs were comparable between 1st- and 2nd-generation BTKi, but grade 3 or higher AEs were significantly less frequent with 2nd-generation BTKi versus 1st-generation BTKi (grade 3 or higher: 53.1% vs. 72.5%; p = 0.002). Headache was more frequent with 2nd-generation BTKi, while diarrhea and atrial fibrillation were more frequent with 1st-generation BTKi. Only for patients with relapsed or refractory CLL did 2nd-generation BTKi have a competitive advantage, while adverse effects still need to be considered. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO, Identifier 42022342488.

The Survival and Financial Benefit of Investigator-Initiated Trials Conducted by Korean Cancer Study Group.

The Korean Cancer Study Group (KCSG) is a nationwide cancer clinical trial group dedicated to advancing investigator-initiated trials (IITs) by conducting and supporting clinical trials. This study aims to review IITs conducted by KCSG and quantitatively evaluate the survival and financial benefits of IITs for patients. We reviewed IITs conducted by KCSG from 1998 to 2023, analyzing progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) gains for participants. PFS and OS benefits were calculated as the difference in median survival times between the intervention and control groups, multiplied by the number of patients in the intervention group. Financial benefits were assessed based on the cost of investigational products provided. From 1998 to 2023, KCSG conducted 310 IITs, with 133 completed and published. Of these, 21 were included in the survival analysis. The analysis revealed that 1,951 patients in the intervention groups gained a total of 2,558.4 months (213.2 years) of PFS and 2,501.6 months (208.5 years) of OS, with median gains of 1.31 months in PFS and 1.58 months in OS per patient. When analyzing only statistically significant results, PFS and OS gain per patients was 1.69 months and 3.02 months, respectively. Investigational drug cost analysis from 6 available IITs indicated that investigational products provided to 252 patients were valued at 10,400,077,294 won (approximately 8,046,481 US dollars), averaging about 41,270,148 won (approximately 31,930 US dollars) per patient. Our findings, based on analysis of published research, suggest that IITs conducted by KCSG led to survival benefits for participants and, in some studies, may have provided financial benefits by providing investment drugs.

Efficacy of Anti-VEGF Drugs Based Combination Therapies in Recurrent Glioblastoma: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Recurrent glioblastoma multiforme (rGBM) has a grim prognosis, with current therapies offering no survival benefit. Several combination therapies involving anti-VEGF agents have been studied with mixed results. A systematic search was performed using five electronic databases: PubMed, Scopus, ISI, Embase, and the Cochrane Library, without language limitations. The primary outcome of interest was progression-free survival (PFS). Secondary outcomes were overall survival (OS), objective response ratio (ORR), and grade ≥ 3 adverse events. Estimates for PFS and OS were calculated as random effects hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the generic inverse variance method. Estimates for ORR and grade ≥ 3 adverse events were calculated using a random-effects risk ratio (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Thirteen studies met the inclusion criteria and a total of 1994 patients were included in the analysis. There was no statistically significant improvement in PFS (HR 0.84; 95% CI (0.68, 1.03); I2=81%), OS (HR 0.99; 95% CI (0.88, 1.12); I2=0%), and ORR (RR 1.36; 95% CI (0.96, 1.92); I2=61%) in the combination therapy group when compared to the control group. Significantly higher grade ≥ 3 adverse events (RR 1.30; 95% CI (1.14, 1.48); I2=47%) were seen in the combination therapy when compared to the control group. Our analysis showed that the use of combination therapy with anti-VEGF agents did not offer any benefit in PFS, OS, or ORR. In contrast, it had significantly higher grade 3-5 adverse events. Further studies are needed to identify effective therapies in rGBM that can improve survival.

Real-world comparison of chemo-immunotherapy and chemotherapy alone in the treatment of extensive-stage small-cell lung cancer

Small cell lung cancer (SCLC) is a high-grade neuroendocrine carcinoma responsible for 200,000 deaths per year worldwide. Platinum-etoposide-based chemotherapy has been the standard of treatment for the past 40 years, with an overall survival of 10 months. Since 2019, the addition of immunotherapy (atezolizumab or durvalumab) to chemotherapy has become the standard of care for first-line treatment of extensive-stage SCLC following the demonstration of an improvement in overall survival in phase 3 studies. We aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of chemo-immunotherapy compared with chemotherapy alone in a "real-world" setting. Retrospective observational study including patients undergoing first-line treatment for extensive-stage SCLC between 2014 and 2022. We separated the study population into two arms (chemo-immunotherapy/chemotherapy). For each arm, progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS) and serious side effects were collected. Associations between treatments and survival outcomes were adjusted for potential confounders. Consolidative palliative thoracic radiotherapy was introduced in the models as a time-dependent variable. A total of 118 patients with a median age of 63 years were included. 65.2 % of patients were performance status 0 or 1. In univariate analysis, PFS and OS were not significantly different between the chemo-immunotherapy and chemotherapy alone groups (p = 0.70 and 0.24 respectively). In multivariate analysis, the addition of immunotherapy to chemotherapy was not significantly associated with better PFS (HR 0.76, IC (0.49 - 1.19), p = 0.23), but it was significantly associated with better OS (HR 0.61, IC (0.38 - 0.98), p = 0.04). Consolidative palliative thoracic radiotherapy (time-dependent variable), when applied (almost only in the chemotherapy alone group), was significantly associated with better PFS and OS. In this real-world study, chemo-immunotherapy was associated with slightly better OS compared to chemotherapy alone as a first-line treatment in ES-SCLC patients in multivariate analysis, which is not explained by a benefit in PFS. However, consolidative palliative thoracic radiotherapy seems to be significantly associated with better OS and PFS, suggesting that we should also consider using it in patients receiving chemo-immunotherapy.

Which Is More Suitable for First-Line Treatment of Extensive-Stage Small Cell Lung Cancer, PD-L1 Inhibitors Versus PD-1 Inhibitors? A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

In this network meta-analysis (NMA), the efficiency and safety of PD-1 inhibitors + chemotherapy and PD-L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy were compared in the first-line therapy of patients with extensive-stage small cell lung cancer (ES-SCLC). We searched research databases, conference abstracts, and trial registries and subsequently chose relevant studies and extracted dates. The NMA was conducted to estimate the efficiency and safety of the PD-1 inhibitors + chemotherapy and PD-L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy on overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), overall remission rate (ORR), and adverse events (AEs). Studies were assessed for quality. Subgroup analyses were used to evaluate study heterogeneity. We included six randomized trials with a total of 3163 patients. Direct comparisons showed that patients who received either PD-1 inhibitors + chemotherapy (HR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.57-0.87) or PD-L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy (HR: 0.74, 0.61-0.89) demonstrated significantly longer OS than those who received placebo + chemotherapy. The results of the NMA showed that no significant differences in OS (HR 0.96 95% CI: 0.72-1.3), PFS (HR 0.83, 95% CI: 0.51-1.4), and ORR (OR 1.3 95% CI: 0.66-2.5) were observed for PD-1 inhibitors + chemotherapy compared with PD-L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy, but the Bayesian ranking revealed that patients receiving PD-1 inhibitors + chemotherapy tended to have longer OS, PFS benefit, and better treatment response than patients receiving PD-L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy. In terms of safety, no significant difference was observed in their safety profiles. In comparison to placebo + chemotherapy, PD-L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy and PD-1 inhibitors + chemotherapy significantly improved survival for ES-SCLC. According to the available data, PD-L1 inhibitors + chemotherapy and PD-1 inhibitors + chemotherapy had equivalent efficacy and safety; however, the level of evidence of this type of comparison is limited.

PD-L1 expression from surgically resected lung tumors predictive of early progression in patients previously treated with targeted therapy for initially unresectable non-small cell lung cancer.

Recent evidences showed that resection of lung tumor post-targeted therapy has shown progression-free survival (PFS) benefits in initially unresectable patients. The aim of this study is to evaluate pathologic findings of resected lung tumor samples in patients who have undergone prior epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) and anaplastic lymphoma kinase (ALK) tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) treatment, and also to assess the prognostic factors related to outcomes after resection. The deidentified data of non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients admitted to seven university hospitals affiliated with the Catholic University of Korea were obtained from the Clinical Data Warehouse (CDW) database. Among screened patients, 40 individuals who had previously undergone targeted therapies and later received surgical resection of a primary lung tumor were evaluated for the study. All 40 patients were diagnosed with adenocarcinoma. Of these, 36 with EGFR mutations received prior EGFR TKI treatment. Only one postoperative complication, atrial fibrillation, was observed. At the time of resection, 19 patients showed primary lung tumor size regressing or unchanged, while 21 patients showed primary lung tumor regrowth or new lesions being developed before the resection. The group with no programmed death-ligand 1 (PD-L1) expression from resected samples showed significantly better post-resection PFS when compared to the other group (P=0.01). In the Model II multivariate analysis for post-resection PFS, PD-L1 detection from the resected sample was significantly associated with PFS [P=0.03; hazard ratio (HR) =5.465; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.200-24.885]. Furthermore, an increase in PD-L1 expression compared to the baseline value was associated with an increasing lung tumor burden at the time of resection (P=0.03). Resected specimen following targeted therapy can provide valuable clinical information that can be used to predict the prognosis of patients with initially unresectable NSCLC.

Elotuzumab plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma: Extended follow-up of a multicenter, retrospective real-world experience with 321 cases outside of controlled clinical trials.

The ELOQUENT-3 trial demonstrated the superiority of the combination of elotuzumab, pomalidomide, and dexamethasone (EloPd) in terms of efficacy and safety, compared to Pd in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM), who had received at least two prior therapies, including lenalidomide and a proteasome inhibitor. The present study is an 18-month follow-up update of a previously published Italian real-life RRMM cohort of patients treated with EloPd. This revised analysis entered 319 RRMM patients accrued in 41 Italian centers. After a median follow-up of 17.7months, 213 patients (66.4%) experienced disease progression or died. Median progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) were 7.5 and 19.2months, respectively. The updated multivariate analysis showed a significant reduction of PFS benefit magnitude both in advanced International Staging System (ISS) (II and III) stages and previous exposure to daratumumab cases. Instead, advanced ISS (II and III) stages and more than 2 previous lines of therapy maintained an independent prognostic impact on OS. Major adverse events included grade three-fourths neutropenia (24.9%), anemia (13.4%), lymphocytopenia (15.5%), and thrombocytopenia (10.7%), while infection rates and pneumonia were 19.3% and 8.7%, respectively. A slight increase in the incidence of neutropenia and lymphocytopenia was registered with longer follow-up. In conclusion, our real-world study still confirms that EloPd is a safe and possible therapeutic choice for RRMM. Nevertheless, novel strategies are desirable for those patients exposed to daratumumab.

Efficacy and safety of regorafenib in the treatment of metastatic colorectal cancer: a retrospective cohort study.

The majority of studies of regorafenib now were small-sample and single-arm, which potentially limits the strength of evidence. We conduct the study to identify the efficacy and safety of regorafenib for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in real-world applications. mCRC patients who underwent regorafenib second line or post-second line treatment with at least one assessable lesion were analyzed. Patients received different doses of regorafenib and different combination regimens. The patients were followed up with laboratory tests and imaging examinations every 3 months to evaluate the efficacy and adverse events (AEs). The primary endpoint of this study was median overall survival (mOS), and the secondary endpoints were median progression-free survival (mPFS), the objective response rate (ORR), the disease control rate (DCR), and AEs. A total of 77 patients (45 males and 32 females, aged 58.80±11.65 years) were enrolled in the study. Most primary tumors were located in the rectum (59.74%), and the vast majority of tumors (89.62%) had an adenocarcinoma histological type. The 77 patients had an mOS of 17.8 months, a progression-free survival (PFS) of 4.63 months, an ORR of 6.76%, and a DCR of 55.41%. Patients underwent regorafenib third-line therapy had significantly higher overall survival (OS) than those underwent regorafenib post- third-line treatment (P=0.03). The neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio (NLR) was an independent factor affecting the OS of the mCRC patients [hazard ratio (HR) =1.12, P=0.03]. In both univariate and multivariate analyses, discontinued use of regorafenib after progression reduced patients' PFS (HR =3.07, P<0.001; HR =2.78, P=0.007). In terms of the tolerated dose, patients receiving 120 mg regorafenib had the longest OS numbers, but there was no statistical difference. We analyzed the effect of the baseline NLR on the OS of patients receiving regorafenib combined with immunotherapy, and found that the NLR ratio cut-off value was 4.4, and patients with a NLR ratio ≤4.4 benefited significantly in terms of OS (P=0.03). The AEs included 21 (27.27%) cases of hand and foot skin reaction, 15 (19.48%) cases of fatigue, 9 (11.69%) cases of pain, 9 (11.69%) cases of nausea, 9 (11.69%) cases of fever, 9 (11.69%) cases of cough, and so on. Regorafenib is relatively effective and safe as a third-line and posterior treatment of mCRC. Patients underwent regorafenib third-line therapy had longer OS than those underwent regorafenib post- third-line treatment. Moreover, PFS benefits can still be obtained by continuing regorafenib treatment after progression. Grade 1-2 AEs were common, but these were usually tolerated by most patients.

Efficacy of Sacituzumab Govitecan in Hormone Receptor-Positive/Human Epidermal Growth Factor Receptor 2-Negative Advanced Breast Cancer: A Comprehensive Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

Breast cancer is the most diagnosed cancer in women, with hormone receptor-positive/human epidermal growth factor receptor 2-negative (HR+/HER2-) being the predominant subtype. Sacituzumab govitecan (SG), a novel antibody-drug conjugate, has emerged as a promising treatment for metastatic HR+/HER2- breast cancer. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate its efficacy and safety. Adhering to "Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses" guidelines, a comprehensive search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases up to December 2023. We included clinical trials and observational studies evaluating SG in patients with HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer. The primary outcome was progression-free survival (PFS). In contrast, the secondary outcomes included overall survival, objective response rate, clinical benefit rate, duration of response (DOR), and adverse event profiles. Review Manager (Version 5.4) was used for the statistical analysis. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria for systematic review; 2 were suitable for meta-analysis. The pooled analysis showed a hazard ratio of 0.53 (95% CI: 0.34-0.83; P= 0.005; I2 = 86%) for PFSl and a hazard ratio of 0.63 (95% CI: 0.36-1.11; P= 0.11; I2 = 92%) for overall survival. The pooled analysis of the duration of response showed significant results with a standard mean difference = 0.22 (95% CI: 0.03-0.42; P = 0.02; I2 = 61%). SG demonstrates significant benefit in PFS and duration of response in patients of HR+/HER2- advanced breast cancer.

The serum LDH level and KELIM scores are potential predictors of a benefit from bevacizumab first-line therapy for patients with advanced ovarian cancer.

The survival benefit of first-line treatment with bevacizumab in advanced ovarian cancer patients are multifaceted. In our study, we aimed to identify potential markers of bevacizumab efficacy to help predict which patients would experience survival benefits. This was a retrospective analysis of 114 patients examined from January 1, 2015, to March 1, 2023, and data on clinical, biological, and imaging variables, such as ascites, serum LDH, and CA125, were extracted from electronic medical records. We performed a correlation analysis and principal component analysis to investigate correlations among variables and reduce their dimensionality. Then, univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analyses were used to identify the predictors of progression-free survival. Favorable KELIM score (≥ 1, HR 0.376, 95% CI [0.202-0.700], p = 0.002), which indicated better chemosensitivity, and lower LDH levels (≤ 210 U/L, HR 38.73, 95% CI [6.108-245.6], p < 0.001) were found to be independent predictors of a treatment benefit with bevacizumab in patients with advanced ovarian cancer. Regardless of LDH level, patients with favorable KELIM scores had a higher progression-free survival (PFS) benefit (p = 0.18). Among patients with unfavorable KELIM scores, those with higher LDH levels had the lowest PFS benefit (median: 11.5months, p = 0.0059). Patients with poor chemosensitivity and low LDH levels are more likely to benefit from first-line bevacizumab treatment. The combination of the two markers can be a helpful predictor of patients who are most likely to benefit from treatment and a guide for treatment decisions-making. Retrospectively registered: 2020-MD-371, 2020.10.12.

Anti-PD-1/L1 antibody plus anti-VEGF antibody vs. plus VEGFR-targeted TKI as first-line therapy for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma: a network meta-analysis.

This article is based on our previous research, which was presented at the 2023 ASCO Annual Meeting I and published in Journal of Clinical Oncology as Conference Abstract (JCO. 2023;41:e16148. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2023.41.16_suppl.e16148). Both anti-programmed death 1/ligand-1 (PD-1/L1) antibody + anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) antibody (A + A) and anti-PD-1/L1 antibody + VEGF receptor (VEGFR)-targeted tyrosine kinase inhibitor (A + T) are effective first-line therapies for unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma. However, there lacks evidence from head-to-head comparisons between these two treatments. We conducted a network meta-analysis on the efficacy and safety of them. After a rigorous literature research, 6 phase III trials were identified for the final analysis, including IMbrave150, ORIENT-32, COSMIC-312, CARES-310, LEAP-002, and REFLECT. The experiments were classified into three groups: A + A, A + T, and intermediate reference group. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS), and secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and incidence of treatment-related adverse events (TRAEs). Hazard ratio (HR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for OS and PFS, odds ratio (OR) for ORR, and relative risk (RR) for all grade and grade ≥3 TRAEs were calculated. Under Bayesian framework, the meta-analysis was conducted using sorafenib as intermediate reference. With the rank probability of 96%, A + A showed the greatest reduction in the risk of death, without significant difference from A + T (HR: 0.82, 95% CI: 0.65-1.04). A + T showed the greatest effect in prolonging PFS and improving ORR with the rank probability of 77%, but there were no statistical differences with A + A. A + A was safer than A + T in terms of all grade of TRAEs (RR: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.82-1.00) and particularly in those grade ≥3 (RR: 0.65, 95% CI: 0.54-0.77). A + A had the greatest probability of delivering the longest OS, while A + T was correlated with larger PFS benefits at the cost of a lower safety rate.

Molecular Long-Term Analysis of the GMMG-HD4 Trial in Multiple Myeloma-Patterns of Association of Chromosomal Aberrations with Response and Proliferation Determining Survival in Selecting Treatments in View of Limited Resources in Low- and Middle-Income Countries.

Based on the lack of differences in progression-free and overall survival after a median follow-up of 93 months in our HOVON-65/GMMG-HD4 trial (German part; n = 395) randomizing VAD induction (vincristin/adriamycin/dexamthasone)/tandem-transplantation/thalidomide-maintenance vs. PAD induction (bortezomib/adriamycin/dexamethasone)/tandem transplantation/bortezomib maintenance, we discern how chromosomal aberrations determine long-term prognosis by different patterns of association with proliferation and treatment-dependent response, whether responses achieved by different regimens are equal regarding prognosis, and whether subpopulations of patients could be defined as treatable without upfront "novel agents" in cases of limited resources, e.g., in low- or middle-income countries. Serum parameters and risk factors were assessed in 395 patients. CD138-purified plasma cells were subjected to fluorescence in situ hybridization (n = 354) and gene expression profiling (n = 204). We found chromosomal aberrations to be associated in four patterns with survival, proliferation, and response: deletion (del) del17p13, del8p21, del13q14, (gain) 1q21+, and translocation t(4;14) (all adverse) associate with higher proliferation. Of these, del17p is associated with an adverse response (pattern 1), and 1q21+, t(4;14), and del13q14 with a treatment-dependent better response (pattern 2). Hyperdiploidy associates with lower proliferation without impacting response or survival (pattern 3). Translocation t(11;14) has no association with survival but a treatment-dependent adverse response (pattern 4). Significantly fewer patients reach a near-complete response or better with "conventional" (VAD) vs. bortezomib-based treatment after induction or high-dose melphalan. These patients, however, show significantly better median progression-free and overall survival. Molecularly, patients responding to the two regimens differ in gene expression, indicating distinct biological properties of the responding myeloma cells. Patients with normal renal function (89.4%), low cytogenetic risk (72.5%), or low proliferation rate (37.9%) neither benefit in progression-free nor overall survival from bortezomib-based upfront treatment. We conclude that response level, the treatment by which it is achieved, and molecular background determine long-term prognosis. Chromosomal aberrations are associated in four patterns with proliferation and treatment-dependent responses. Associations with faster and deeper responses can be deceptive in the case of prognostically adverse aberrations 1q21+ and t(4;14). Far from advocating a return to "outdated" treatments, if resources do not permit state-of-the-art-treatment, normal renal function and/or molecular profiling identifies patient subpopulations doing well without upfront "novel agents".

Tolerability and efficacy of BrECADD versus BEACOPP in advanced stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma: GHSG HD21, a randomized study.

LBA7000 Background: We hypothesized that therapy with the novel BrECADD regimen (brentuximab vedotin, etoposide, cyclophosphamide, doxorubicin, dacarbazine, dexamethasone) guided by positron emission tomography after two cycles (PET2) could improve the treatment of advanced-stage classical Hodgkin lymphoma (AS-cHL). The HD21 trial aimed at demonstrating superiority over the intensified BEACOPP regimen (bleomycin, etoposide, doxorubicin, cyclophosphamide, vincristine, procarbazine, prednisone) in terms of treatment-related morbidity (TRMB) and non-inferiority (NI) in terms of progression-free survival (PFS). This is the first report of the final confirmative analysis of the HD21 trial. Methods: HD21 is an international, open-label, randomized phase III trial including AS-cHL patients 18-60 years at diagnosis. Patients were randomized to receive individualized 4 or 6 cycles of either BEACOPP or BrECADD guided by PET2 results. The co-primary endpoints included TRMB and PFS, which had been successfully established recently. Testing for superiority was planned with mature follow-up of four years. An adjusted alpha level of 0.047 was required to cross the efficacy boundary for superiority. The trial was conducted in accordance with ICH-GCP (NCT02661503) and supported by a research grant from Takeda Oncology. Results: The ITT (intention-to-treat) cohort for the efficacy analysis consisted of 1482 patients, of which 742 were randomized to receive BrECADD and 740 to BEACOPP. Median age was 31.1 years (range 18 to 60), 44% were female. PET2 was negative in 424 (57.5%) and 426 (58.2%) patients for BrECADD or eBEACOPP, respectively, and these were scheduled for 4 treatment cycles. With median follow-up of 48 months, 4y-PFS was 94.3% for BrECADD (95%-CI 92.6-96.1), and 90.9% for BEACOPP (95%-CI 88.7-93.1). The hazard ratio was 0.66 [95% CI 0.45-0.97], p=0.035). PFS benefit of BrECADD was driven by a reduction in early treatment failures, i.e., primary progression within 3 months (5 vs. 15) or early relapse between months 3 and 12 (11 vs. 23) and observed across all investigated subgroups. PET2-negative patients in the BrECADD group showed a 4-year PFS of 96.5%. 4-year OS was 98.5% for BrECADD and 98.2% for BEACOPP. Analyses of gonadal function demonstrated significantly higher follicle stimulating hormone recovery rates after one year in both men (67% vs. 24%) and women (89% vs. 68%) with higher birth-rates in the BrECADD group (n=60 vs. n=43). Conclusions: BrECADD is significantly more effective than BEACOPP and is associated with an unprecedentedly high 4-year PFS, reducing the risk of progression, relapse or death by a third. Together with an abbreviated treatment duration of only 3 months for the majority of patients and a favorable tolerability, treatment with PET2-individualized BrECADD sets a new benchmark for the treatment of adult patients with AS-cHL. Clinical trial information: NCT02661503 .

Results from the randomized phase 3 DREAMM-8 study of belantamab mafodotin plus pomalidomide and dexamethasone (BPd) vs pomalidomide plus bortezomib and dexamethasone (PVd) in relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM).

LBA105 Background: Use of triplet/quadruplet therapies for 1L MM raises the need for novel combinations at first relapse, which belantamab mafodotin (belamaf) combos may address. In DREAMM-7, BVd led to a significant improvement in progression-free survival (PFS) and a strong trend in improved overall survival (OS) vs daratumumab-Vd in patients (pts) with ≥1 prior therapy. We report results from DREAMM-8 (NCT04484623), which tested a different belamaf combo (BPd) and met its primary endpoint of independent review committee–assessed PFS at a prespecified interim analysis. Methods: DREAMM-8 is a phase 3, open-label, randomized, multicenter trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of BPd vs PVd in RRMM pts who received ≥1 prior line of therapy (LoT), including lenalidomide. Pts were randomly assigned 1:1 to BPd (28-d cycles): belamaf 2.5 mg/kg IV (D1, C1), 1.9 mg/kg (D1, C2+) + pom 4 mg (D1-21, all C) + dex 40 mg (D1, QW, all C), or PVd (21-d cycles): pom 4 mg (D1-14, all C) + bortezomib 1.3 mg/m2 SC (D1, 4, 8, 11 [C1-8]; and D1, 8 [C9+]) + dex 20 mg (day of and 1 day after bortezomib dose). Results: 155 pts were randomly assigned to BPd and 147 to PVd. With a median (range) follow-up of 21.78 mo (0.03-39.23), median PFS (95% CI) was not reached (NR; 20.6-NR) with BPd vs 12.7 mo (9.1-18.5) with PVd (HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.37-0.73; P&lt;0.001). 12-month PFS rate (95% CI) was 71% (63-78%) with BPd vs 51% (42-60%) with PVd. ORR (95% CI) was 77% (70.0-83.7%) with BPd vs 72% (64.1-79.2%) with PVd; rate of complete response or better (95% CI) was 40% (32.2-48.2%) with BPd vs 16% (10.7-23.3%) with PVd. Median duration of response (95% CI) was NR (24.9-NR) with BPd vs 17.5 mo (12.1-26.4) with PVd. A positive trend favoring BPd was seen for OS (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.53-1.14); follow up for OS is ongoing. Adverse events (AEs) were reported in &gt;99% and 96% of pts in the BPd and PVd arms, respectively. Of pts treated with BPd, 89% had ocular AEs (CTCAE grade 3/4, 43%) vs 30% (grade 3/4, 2%) in the PVd arm. AEs were generally manageable, and broadly consistent with known safety profile of individual agents. Conclusions: The DREAMM-8 study demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful PFS benefit with BPd vs PVd in RRMM with &gt;1 prior LoT. BPd also led to deeper and more durable responses, showed a favorable OS trend, and had a manageable safety profile. Clinical trial information: NCT04484623 . [Table: see text]

Trastuzumab deruxtecan (T-DXd) vs physician’s choice of chemotherapy (TPC) in patients (pts) with hormone receptor-positive (HR+), human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2)-low or HER2-ultralow metastatic breast cancer (mBC) with prior endocrine therapy (ET): Primary results from DESTINY-Breast06 (DB-06).

LBA1000 Background: T-DXd is approved for HER2-low (IHC 1+ or 2+/ISH-negative) mBC after ≥1 line of chemotherapy (CT). DB-06 (NCT04494425) evaluated T-DXd in pts with HER2-low or -ultralow (IHC 0 with membrane staining), HR+ mBC after disease progression (PD) on endocrine-based therapy and no prior CT for mBC. Methods: Pts with HER2-low or -ultralow, HR+ mBC were randomized 1:1 to T-DXd 5.4 mg/kg or TPC. Pts had no prior CT for mBC, with ≥2 lines of ET for mBC, or 1 line of ET for mBC if PD occurred ≤24 months (mo) of adjuvant ET or ≤6 mo of ET+CDK4/6i for mBC. Primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS) by blinded independent central review (BICR) in HER2-low. Key secondary endpoints were PFS in intent-to-treat (ITT = HER2-low and -ultralow) and overall survival (OS). Other endpoints included objective response rate (ORR) and safety. Results: As of Mar 18, 2024, 866 pts (HER2-low, n=713; HER2-ultralow, n=153) were randomized; 90.4% had prior CDK4/6i. TPC group pts were selected for capecitabine (59.8%), nab-paclitaxel (24.4%) or paclitaxel (15.8%). T-DXd significantly improved PFS vs TPC in HER2-low (HR, 0.62 [95% CI 0.51, 0.74], P&lt;0.0001; median, 13.2 vs 8.1 mo). ITT and HER2-ultralow results were consistent with HER2-low (Table). Median treatment duration was 11.0 mo (T-DXd) vs 5.6 mo (TPC). OS was immature at first interim analysis (HER2-low HR, 0.83 [95% CI 0.66, 1.05], P=0.1181; median follow up, 18.6 mo). Grade (Gr) ≥3 drug-related adverse events occurred in 40.6% (T-DXd) vs 31.4% (TPC). Adjudicated interstitial lung disease / pneumonitis occurred in 49 (11.3%; 0.7% Gr 3/4, 0.7% Gr 5) vs 1 (0.2% Gr 2) pts receiving T-DXd vs TPC. Conclusions: T-DXd showed a statistically significant and clinically meaningful PFS benefit vs TPC (CT) in HER2-low mBC. HER2-ultralow results were consistent with HER2-low. Safety was in line with known profiles. DB-06 establishes T-DXd as a standard of care following ≥1 endocrine-based therapy for pts with HER2-low and -ultralow, HR+ mBC. Clinical trial information: NCT04494425 .[Table: see text]

Overall survival in patients with endometrial cancer treated with dostarlimab plus carboplatin–paclitaxel in the randomized ENGOT-EN6/GOG-3031/RUBY trial

Part 1 of the RUBY trial (NCT03981796) evaluated dostarlimab plus carboplatin-paclitaxel compared with placebo plus carboplatin-paclitaxel in patients with primary advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer (EC). At the first interim analysis, the trial met one of its dual primary endpoints with statistically significant progression-free survival benefits in the mismatch repair-deficient/microsatellite instability-high (dMMR/MSI-H) and overall populations. Overall survival (OS) results are reported from the second interim analysis. RUBY is a phase III, global, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Part 1 of RUBY enrolled eligible patients with primary advanced stage III or IV or first recurrent EC who were randomly assigned (1 : 1) to receive either dostarlimab (500 mg) or placebo, plus carboplatin-paclitaxel every 3 weeks for 6 cycles followed by dostarlimab (1000 mg) or placebo every 6 weeks for up to 3 years. OS was a dual primary endpoint. A total of 494 patients were randomized (245 in the dostarlimab arm; 249 in the placebo arm). In the overall population, with 51% maturity, RUBY met the dual primary endpoint for OS at this second interim analysis, with a statistically significant reduction in the risk of death [hazard ratio (HR)= 0.69, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.54-0.89, P= 0.0020] in patients treated with dostarlimab plus carboplatin-paclitaxel versus carboplatin-paclitaxel alone. The risk of death was lower in the dMMR/MSI-H population (HR= 0.32, 95% CI 0.17-0.63, nominal P= 0.0002) and a trend in favor of dostarlimab was seen in the mismatch repair-proficient/microsatellite stable population (HR= 0.79, 95% CI 0.60-1.04, nominal P= 0.0493). The safety profile for dostarlimab plus carboplatin-paclitaxel was consistent with the first interim analysis. Dostarlimab in combination with carboplatin-paclitaxel demonstrated a statistically significant and clinically meaningful OS benefit in the overall population of patients with primary advanced or recurrent EC while demonstrating an acceptable safety profile.

Relative efficacy of antibody-drug conjugates and other anti-HER2 treatments on survival in HER2-positive advanced breast cancer: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BackgroundNovel antibody-drug conjugates (ADCs) drugs present a promising anti-cancer treatment, although survival benefits for HER2-positive advanced breast cancer (BC) remain controversial. The aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the comparative effect of ADCs and other anti-HER2 therapy on progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) for treatment of HER2-positive locally advanced or metastatic BC.MethodsRelevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were retrieved from five databases. The risk of bias was assessed with the Cochrane Collaboration’s tool for RCTs by RevMan5.4 software. The hazard ratio (HR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were extracted to evaluate the benefit of ADCs on PFS and OS in HER2-positive advanced BC by meta-analysis.ResultsMeta-analysis of six RCTs with 3870 patients revealed that ADCs significantly improved PFS (HR: 0.63, 95% CI: 0.49–0.80, P = 0.0002) and OS (HR: 0.79, 95% CI: 0.72–0.86, P < 0.0001) of patients with HER2-positive locally advanced or metastatic BC. Subgroup analysis showed that PFS and OS were obviously prolonged for patients who previously received HER2-targeted therapy. Sensitivity analysis and publication bias suggested that the results were stable and reliable.ConclusionStatistically significant benefits for PFS and OS were observed with ADCs in HER2-positive locally advanced or metastatic BC, especially for those who received prior anti-HER2 treatment.

Efficacy and safety of PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy with or without endostatin for stage IV lung squamous cancer: a retrospective study.

The study aimed to analyze the efficacy and safety of PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy with or without endostatin for stage IV lung squamous cell carcinoma (LUSC). A total of 219 patients with stage IV LUSC were included. 120 received PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy with or without endostatin (IC ± A), of which 39 received endostatin (IC+A) and 81 did not receive endostatin (IC-A). 99 received chemotherapy with or without endostatin (C ± A). Endpoints included overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), adverse events (AEs), and immune-related adverse events (irAEs). The median PFS in the IC ± A group versus the C ± A group was 8 and 4 months (P < 0.001), and the median OS was 17 and 9 months (P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in any grade AEs between the IC ± A and C ± A groups (P > 0.05). The median PFS in the IC+A group versus the IC-A group was 11 and 7 months (P = 0.024), and the median OS was 34 and 15 months (P = 0.01). There was no significant difference between the IC+A group and the IC-A group for all grade AEs and irAEs (P > 0.05). The subgroup analysis showed that patients with LIPI = 0 had significant OS and PFS benefits in IC+A group, while for patients with LIPI = 1-2, there was no significant difference in OS and PFS benefits between the IC+A group and IC-A group. PD-1 inhibitors plus chemotherapy with endostatin might be first-line treatment for patients with stage IV LUSC.

Cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin compared with conventional chemotherapy for relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma in China

BackgroundRelapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma (RRcHL) associates with poor prognosis and heavy disease burden to patients. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of brentuximab vedotin (BV) in comparison to conventional chemotherapy in patients with RRcHL, from a Chinese healthcare perspective.MethodsThe lifetime cost and quality adjusted life years (QALYs) were estimated through a partitioned survival model with three health states (progression free, post progression, and death). Two cohorts for each BV arm and chemotherapy arm were built, representing patients with and without transplant after BV or chemotherapy, respectively. Clinical parameters were retrieved from BV trials and the literature. Resource utilization data were mainly collected from local expert surveys and cost parameters were reflecting local unit prices. Utility values were sourced from the literature. A discount rate of 5% was employed according to the Chinese guideline. A series of deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted to evaluate the robustness and uncertainty associated with the model.ResultsResults of the base case analysis showed that the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for BV versus chemotherapy was $2,867 (¥19,774). The main model driver was the superior progression-free and overall survival benefits of BV. The ICERs were relatively robust in a series of sensitivity analyses, all under a conventional decision threshold (1 time of Chinese per capita GDP). With this conventional threshold, the probability of BV being cost-effective was 100%.ConclusionsBrentuximab vedotin can be considered a cost-effective treatment versus conventional chemotherapy in treating relapsed or refractory classic Hodgkin lymphoma in China.

Comparative efficacy of immune checkpoint inhibitors versus chemotherapy alone in diffuse pleural mesothelioma.

This study aimed to investigate the effects of immune checkpoint inhibitors (ICIs) versus chemotherapy on the prognosis of real-world diffuse pleural mesothelioma patients in China. Clinical data of 90 patients with diffuse pleural mesothelioma from 2019 to 2022 were collected from Harbin Medical University Cancer Hospital. Patients were divided into two groups: the ICIs-treated group (n = 46) and the chemotherapy-only group (n = 44). The efficacy and safety of immunotherapy relative to chemotherapy at different treatment stages were explored. The median progression-free survival (PFS) was 10.0 and 7.0 months, and the median overall survival (OS) was 24.7 and 15.8 months in the ICIs-treated group and the chemotherapy group, respectively. The ICIs-treated group showed an 11% increase in objective response rate (ORR) (52.2% vs. 41.0%) and an 8.0% increase in disease control rate (DCR) (78.3% vs. 70.0%) compared to the chemotherapy group. The Kaplan-Meier curves demonstrated significant PFS (HR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.38-0.98; p = 0.038) and OS (HR: 0.47; 95% CI: 0.26-0.86; p = 0.011) benefits of receiving immunotherapy over chemotherapy alone. Subgroup analysis according to treatment timing showed the same trend. In patients with nonsurgical diffuse pleural mesothelioma, immunotherapy achieved better survival benefits compared to chemotherapy in both first- and second-/third-line treatments. The early addition of immunotherapy improved survival in patients with nonsurgical diffuse pleural mesothelioma.