Daratumumab,Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone versus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Chinese Patients With Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Updated Analysis of LEPUS

BackgroundIn the phase 3 LEPUS study, daratumumab, bortezomib, and dexamethasone (D-Vd) demonstrated significant clinical benefit versus Vd alone in Chinese patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM). Here, we report updated efficacy and safety results from LEPUS.Patients and MethodsChinese patients with ≥ 1 prior line of therapy were randomized 2:1 to bortezomib (1.3 mg/m²) and dexamethasone (20 mg) for eight cycles ± daratumumab (16 mg/kg) until disease progression. The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsIn total, 211 patients were randomized to D-Vd (n = 141) or Vd (n = 70). At a 25.1-month median follow-up, D-Vd prolonged PFS versus Vd (median, 14.8 vs. 6.3 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.35; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.24-0.51; P < .00001). PFS benefit of D-Vd versus Vd was maintained across prespecified subgroups, including patients with prior bortezomib (HR, 0.36; 95% CI, 0.25-0.53), patients who were refractory to last prior line of therapy (HR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.27-0.65), and patients with high-risk cytogenetics (HR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.23-0.71). Overall response rate (84.7% vs.66.7%; P = .00314) and rates of very good partial response or better (71.5% vs. 34.9%; P < .00001) and complete response or better (40.1% vs 14.3%; P = .00016) were higher with D-Vd versus Vd. No new safety concerns were identified.ConclusionsIn this updated analysis, D-Vd maintained significant efficacy benefits versus Vd alone and demonstrated a consistent safety profile, further supporting the use of D-Vd as a standard of care in Chinese patients with RRMM.     

Daratumumab,Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone Versus Bortezomib and Dexamethasone in Chinese Patients with Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Phase 3 LEPUS (MMY3009) Study

BackgroundDaratumumab plus bortezomib/dexamethasone (D-Vd) significantly improved outcomes versus Vd in patients with relapsed or refractory multiple myeloma (RRMM) in the phase 3 CASTOR study. We report the results of a prespecified interim analysis of the phase 3 LEPUS study of D-Vd versus Vd in Chinese patients with RRMM.Patients and MethodsChinese patients with ≥ 1 prior line of therapy were randomized 2:1 to receive 8 cycles (21 days/cycle) of bortezomib (1.3 mg/m² subcutaneously) and dexamethasone (20 mg orally/intravenously) ± daratumumab (16 mg/kg intravenously). The primary endpoint was progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsA total of 211 patients were randomized (D-Vd, 141; Vd, 70). After an 8.2-month median follow-up, D-Vd significantly prolonged PFS versus Vd (median, not reached vs. 6.3 months; hazard ratio, 0.28; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.47; P < .00001) and significantly improved the rates of overall response (83% vs. 65%; P = .00527), ≥ very good partial response (65% vs. 33%; P = .00002), ≥ complete response (33% vs. 11%; P = .00079), and minimal residual disease negativity (10^–5 sensitivity; 22% vs. 3%; P = .0002). The PFS benefit of D-Vd versus Vd was maintained across prespecified subgroups, including patients with prior bortezomib treatment and with high-risk cytogenetics. Thrombocytopenia (D-Vd, 51%; Vd, 37%), lymphopenia (44%; 29%), and lung infection (30%; 22%) were the 3 most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events. Although patients in both treatment groups experienced higher rates of grade 3/4 lymphopenia and infections versus patients in CASTOR, the safety profile was generally consistent with that of CASTOR.ConclusionThese data support the use of D-Vd in Chinese patients with RRMM.     

Comparison of Cilta-cel,an Anti-BCMA CAR-T Cell Therapy,Versus Conventional Treatment in Patients With Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma

BackgroundIn the single-arm, phase 1b/2 CARTITUDE-1 study, ciltacabtagene autoleucel (cilta-cel), an anti-B-cell maturation antigen chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) therapy, showed encouraging efficacy in US patients with multiple myeloma (MM) who previously received an immunomodulatory drug, proteasome inhibitor, and anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (triple-class exposed).Patients and MethodsA dataset of US patients refractory to an anti-CD38 monoclonal antibody (MAMMOTH) was used to identify patients who would meet eligibility for CARTITUDE-1 and received subsequent non-CAR-T therapy. The intent-to-treat (ITT) population in CARTITUDE-1 included patients who underwent apheresis (N = 113); the modified ITT (mITT) population was the subset who received cilta-cel (n = 97). Corresponding populations were identified from the MAMMOTH dataset: ITT population (n = 190) and mITT population of patients without progression/death within 47 days (median apheresis-to-cilta-cel infusion time) from onset of therapy (n = 122). Using 1:1 nearest neighbor propensity score matching to control for selected baseline covariates, 95 and 69 patients in CARTITUDE-1 ITT and mITT populations, respectively, were matched to MAMMOTH patients.ResultsIn ITT cohorts of CARTITUDE-1 vs. MAMMOTH, improved overall response rate (ORR; 84% vs. 28% [P < .001]) and longer progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR], 0.11 [95% confidence interval (CI), 0.05-0.22]) and overall survival (OS; HR, 0.20 [95% CI, 0.10-0.39]) were observed. Similar results were seen in mITT cohorts of CARTITUDE-1 vs. MAMMOTH (ORR: 96% vs. 30% [P < .001]; PFS: HR, 0.02 [95% CI, 0.01-0.14]; OS: HR, 0.05 [95% CI, 0.01-0.22]) and with alternative matching methods.ConclusionCilta-cel yielded significantly improved outcomes versus real-world therapies in triple-class exposed patients with relapsed/refractory MM.     

Atezolizumab in Combination With Carboplatin and Nab-Paclitaxel in Advanced Squamous NSCLC (IMpower131): Results From a Randomized Phase III Trial

IntroductionCytotoxic agents have immunomodulatory effects, providing a rationale for combining atezolizumab (anti-programmed death-ligand 1 [anti–PD-L1]) with chemotherapy. The randomized phase III IMpower131 study (NCT02367794) evaluated atezolizumab with platinum-based chemotherapy in stage IV squamous NSCLC.MethodsA total of 1021 patients were randomized 1:1:1 to receive atezolizumab+carboplatin+paclitaxel (A+CP) (n = 338), atezolizumab+carboplatin+nab-paclitaxel (A+CnP) (n = 343), or carboplatin+nab-paclitaxel (CnP) (n = 340) for four or six 21-day cycles; patients randomized to the A+CP or A+CnP arms received atezolizumab maintenance therapy until progressive disease or loss of clinical benefit. The coprimary end points were investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population. The secondary end points included PFS and OS in PD-L1 subgroups and safety. The primary PFS (January 22, 2018) and final OS (October 3, 2018) for A+CnP versus CnP are reported.ResultsPFS improvement with A+CnP versus CnP was seen in the ITT population (median, 6.3 versus 5.6 mo; hazard ratio [HR] = 0.71, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.60–0.85; p = 0.0001). Median OS in the ITT population was 14.2 and 13.5 months in the A+CnP and CnP arms (HR = 0.88, 95% CI: 0.73–1.05; p = 0.16), not reaching statistical significance. OS improvement with A+CnP versus CnP was observed in the PD-L1–high subgroup (HR = 0.48, 95% CI: 0.29–0.81), despite not being formally tested. Treatment-related grade 3 and 4 adverse events and serious adverse events occurred in 68.0% and 47.9% (A+CnP) and 57.5% and 28.7% (CnP) of patients, respectively.ConclusionsAdding atezolizumab to platinum-based chemotherapy significantly improved PFS in patients with first-line squamous NSCLC; OS was similar between the arms.     

A randomised phase II study of continuous versus stop-and-go S-1 plus oxaliplatin following disease stabilisation in first-line chemotherapy in patients with metastatic gastric cancer

ObjectivesWe compared continuous versus stop-and-go chemotherapy after disease stabilisation with induction chemotherapy in the first-line treatment of metastatic gastric cancer (MGC).MethodsMGC patients who achieved disease control after 6 cycles of S-1/oxaliplatin (SOX) were randomised to receive either continuous SOX until progression (continuous arm) or to have a chemotherapy-free interval followed by SOX reintroduction at progression (stop-and-go arm). The primary end-point was overall survival (OS).ResultsOf the 250 patients enrolled, 247 participated in the induction phase. Of these, 121 patients were randomised to the continuous arm (n = 59) or the stop-and-go arm (n = 62). Progression-free survival (PFS) was significantly longer in the continuous arm than in the stop-and-go arm (10.5 versus 7.2 months; hazard ratio [HR] 0.55, 95% CI, 0.37–0.81; P = 0.002). Duration of disease control (DDC) and OS, however, were comparable between the two arms: median DDC, 10.5 versus 11.3 months, HR 0.92 (95% CI, 0.62–1.36; P = 0.674); median OS, 22.6 versus 22.7 months, HR 0.78 (95% CI, 0.50–1.23; P = 0.284). Adverse events including grade ≥3 fatigue (28.8% versus 8.1%; P = 0.003) and sensory neuropathy (25.4% versus 9.7%; P = 0.022) occurred more frequently in the continuous arm than in the stop-and-go arm. Quality of life (QOL) including global health status, physical/role functioning and other symptom scores significantly favoured the stop-and-go arm.ConclusionCompared with the stop-and-go strategy, maintenance chemotherapy improved PFS but not DDC and OS and had a negative impact on QOL, suggesting the stop-and-go strategy may be an appropriate option in MGC patients following induction chemotherapy.     

Comparative Efficacy of Teclistamab Versus Physician's Choice of Therapy in the Long-term Follow-up of APOLLO,POLLUX, CASTOR,and EQUULEUS Clinical Trials in Patients With Triple-class Exposed Relapsed or Refractory Multiple Myeloma

BackgroundThe efficacy and safety of teclistamab in patients with RRMM who received ≥3 prior lines of therapy and were triple-class exposed (TCE) are being evaluated in the single-arm, multicohort, phase I/II MajesTEC-1 trial (NCT04557098). We evaluated the comparative effectiveness of teclistamab versus physician's choice (PC) of therapy in TCE RRMM patients.MethodsIndividual patient-level data from MajesTEC-1 patients who received teclistamab (1.5 mg/kg weekly; clinical cutoff March 16, 2022) were included. An external control arm was created from patients in long-term follow-up of 4 clinical trials of daratumumab who were treated with PC therapy after discontinuation of trial treatments. In the primary analysis, inverse probability of treatment weighting was used to adjust for imbalances in 9 baseline covariates. A fully adjusted model included 5 additional prognostic factors. Outcomes included overall response rate (ORR), very good partial response or better (≥VGPR) rate, overall survival (OS), progression-free survival (PFS), and time to next treatment (TTNT).ResultsAfter adjustment, baseline characteristics were balanced between cohorts. In the primary analysis, outcomes were significantly improved with teclistamab versus PC: ORR (OR [95% CI] 4.81 [3.04-7.72]; P < .0001); ≥VGPR rate (OR, 12.07 [6.91-22.11]; P < .0001); OS (HR, 0.54 [0.40-0.73]; P < .0001); PFS (HR, 0.59 [0.46-0.78]; P = .0001); and TTNT (HR, 0.32 [0.24-0.42]; P < .0001). Results of the fully adjusted model were consistent with the primary analysis.ConclusionTeclistamab showed significantly improved effectiveness versus PC on all outcomes, highlighting its clinical benefit in patients with TCE RRMM and limited treatment options.     

Sequential therapy for the locally advanced larynx and hypopharynx cancer subgroup in TAX 324: survival,surgery, and organ preservation

BackgroundLocally advanced laryngeal and hypopharyngeal cancers (LHC) represent a group of cancers for which surgery, laryngectomy-free survival (LFS), overall survival (OS), and progression-free survival (PFS) are clinically meaningful end points.Patients and methodsThese outcomes were analyzed in the subgroup of assessable LHC patients enrolled in TAX 324, a phase III trial of sequential therapy comparing docetaxel plus cisplatin and fluorouracil (TPF) against cisplatin and fluorouracil (PF), followed by chemoradiotherapy.ResultsAmong 501 patients enrolled in TAX 324, 166 had LHC (TPF, n = 90; PF, n = 76). Patient characteristics were similar between subgroups. Median OS for TPF was 59 months [95% confidence interval (CI): 31–not reached] versus 24 months (95% CI: 13–42) for PF [hazard ratio (HR) for death: 0.62; 95% CI: 0.41–0.94; P = 0.024]. Median PFS for TPF was 21 months (95% CI: 12–59) versus 11 months (95% CI: 8–14) for PF (HR: 0.66; 95% CI: 0.45–0.97; P = 0.032). Among operable patients (TPF, n = 67; PF, n = 56), LFS was significantly greater with TPF (HR: 0.59; 95% CI: 0.37–0.95; P = 0.030). Three-year LFS with TPF was 52% versus 32% for PF. Fewer TPF patients had surgery (22% versus 42%; P = 0.030).ConclusionsIn locally advanced LHC, sequential therapy with induction TPF significantly improved survival and PFS versus PF. Among operable patients, TPF also significantly improved LFS and PFS. These results support the use of sequential TPF followed by carboplatin chemoradiotherapy as a treatment option for organ preservation or to improve survival in locally advanced LHC.     

Angiogenic and Antiangiogenic VEGFA Splice Variants in Colorectal Cancer: Prospective Retrospective Cohort Study in Patients Treated With Irinotecan-Based Chemotherapy and Bevacizumab

BackgroundAlternative splicing of vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGFA) results in VEGFAxxxb antiangiogenic isoforms that fail to activate angiogenesis. Bevacizumab, widely used in patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (CRC), binds both VEGFA and VEGFAxxxb isoforms.Patients and MethodsFormalin-fixed, paraffin-embedded primary tumors from metastatic CRC patients treated with first-line FOLFIRI (leucovorin, 5-fluorouracil, irinotecan, and oxaliplatin) + bevacizumab (n = 285) or FOLFIRI only (n = 75) were collected. The relative expression of VEGFA121a, 121b, 145a, 145b, 165a, and 165b was assessed with custom TaqMan-MGB assays and quantitative PCR.ResultsAt a median follow-up of 101.5 months, left-sided primary CRC was a favorable prognosticator (median survival, 29.2 vs. 18.2 months; P = .015). Positive high VEGFA145b was an unfavorable factor for progression-free survival (PFS; hazard ratio [HR] = 1.66; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.13-2.44; P = .009) in patients who received FOLFIRI + bevacizumab, without prognostic significance in FOLFIRI-only patients (HR = 0.70; 95% CI, 0.34-1.44; P = .33). The adverse effect on PFS of 145b was more pronounced in patients with right-sided colon cancer (HR = 2.62; 95% CI, 1.35-5.12; P = .005), especially in those who received bevacizumab (HR = 2.85; 95% CI, 1.31-6.21; P = .008). In patients with right-sided colon primary tumors, isoform 121b correlated with inferior PFS (HR = 1.73; 95% CI, 0.94-3.18; P = .076) and overall survival (OS; HR = 2.0; 95% CI, 1.08-3.72; P = .028). In patients with left-sided primary tumors, positive high 165b correlated with superior PFS (HR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.59-0.99; P = .044) and OS (HR = 0.68; 95% CI, 0.52-0.90; P = .006). At multivariate analysis, right-sided primary tumor was associated with inferior PFS (HR = 1.28; 95% CI, 1.00-1.64), while 145b consistently retained predictive significance for lack of benefit in PFS with bevacizumab (HR = 1.71; 95% CI, 1.16-2.53). Multivariate analysis for OS showed that VEGFA165b expression was favorable in patients with left-sided but unfavorable in patients with right-sided primary tumors (P_interaction < .001).ConclusionThe antiangiogenic isoform VEGFA145b messenger RNA may predict resistance to bevacizumab. Differences in biological relevance and prognostic significance of various VEGFA isoforms were found for right- versus left-sided primary tumors.     

Final results of the CAVE trial in RAS wild type metastatic colorectal cancer patients treated with cetuximab plus avelumab as rechallenge therapy: Neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio predicts survival

BackgroundHigh neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR) is a poor prognostic factor in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC). Here we provide final results of CAVE mCRC trial, of cetuximab plus avelumab rechallenge in chemo-refractory mCRC patients and investigated the predictive role of NLR.MethodsAll the 77 patients enrolled were included in the analysis. A cut-off of 3 was used to correlate baseline NLR with with overall survival (OS) and with progression free survival (PFS), in intention to treat (ITT) and in circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA) RAS/BRAF Wild Type (WT) patients.ResultsIn ITT population, NLR <3 (49%) group had median overall survival (mOS) of 17.8 months, vs. 8.9 months in NLR ≥ 3 group (51%) [HR 0.50, (CI 95% 0.3-0.8), P = .006]. Median progression free survival (mPFS) was 3.9 months in NLR <3 group and 3.5 months in NLR≥3 [HR 0.79, (CI 95% 0.5-1.24), P = .3]. In ctDNA RAS/BRAF WT population, mOS was 22 months in NLR <3 group (48%), vs. 8.9 months in NLR ≥3 group (52%), [HR 0.38, (CI 95% 0.19-0.75), P = .005]. A trend towards increased mPFS was observed in patients with NLR <3 versus NLR ≥3: 5.3 vs. 3.6 months [HR: 0.79, (CI 95% 0.44-1.4), P = .43]. In contrast, NLR did not correlate either with PFS or OS in ctDNA RAS/BRAF mutated patients.ConclusionIn the exploratory analysis of the CAVE mCRC trial, baseline NLR <3 significantly correlated with improved survival and may represent a potential predictive biomarker of cetuximab plus avelumab rechallenge activity in ctDNA RAS/BRAF WT patients, that must be confirmed in randomized studies.     

Benefit Versus Risk Assessment of Melflufen and Dexamethasone in Relapsed/Refractory Multiple Myeloma: Analyses From Longer Follow-up of the OCEAN and HORIZON Studies

IntroductionMelphalan flufenamide (melflufen), a first-in-class alkylating peptide-drug conjugate, plus dexamethasone demonstrated superior progression-free survival (PFS) but directionally different overall survival (OS) favoring pomalidomide (hazard ratio [HR], 1.10) in OCEAN.MethodsThese analyses further investigated prognostic subgroups impacting survival in updated data from the randomized, phase 3 OCEAN study (NCT03151811; date: February 3, 2022) and the phase 2 HORIZON study (NCT02963493; date: February 2, 2022).ResultsIn OCEAN, subgroups prognostic for OS were age (P = .011; <65 years favored pomalidomide) and no previous autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT) or progression >36 months after ASCT (P = .001; favored melflufen). Overall, 245 of 495 (49%) patients randomized had received a previous ASCT, of which 202 (82%) had progressed within 36 months following their ASCT. When excluding patients who had progressed <36 months post-ASCT (melflufen group, n = 145; pomalidomide group, n = 148), median OS was 23.6 months with melflufen and 19.8 months with pomalidomide (HR, 0.83 [95% CI, 0.62-1.12]; P = .22). Among patients with triple-class refractory disease in HORIZON, patients who had progressed <36 months post-ASCT (n = 58) had a lower response rate and shorter duration of response and PFS than the remaining patients (n = 52). Safety was consistent with previous reports.ConclusionThese analyses demonstrate a consistent benefit for melflufen and dexamethasone in patients with relapsed/refractory multiple myeloma who have not received an ASCT or progressed >36 months after receiving an ASCT (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03151811).     

Tumor Infiltrating Lymphocytes Predict Survival in Solid Organ Transplant Recipients With Monomorphic Post-transplant Lymphoproliferative Disorders

IntroductionThe tumor microenvironment (TME) in post-transplant lymphoproliferative disorders (PTLDs) remains unexplored. Tumor infiltrating lymphocytes (TILs) are prognostic in other lymphomas. We assessed the prognostic impact of TILs in monomorphic B-cell PTLD.MethodsTIL density (CD3+ cells/mm²) was determined by CD3 immunohistochemistry in archived diagnostic biopsies from patients diagnosed with monomorphic B-cell PTLD.ResultsAmongst monomorphic PTLDs (N = 107), low TIL-count was associated with inferior 2-year progression-free survival (PFS) (41% versus 86%, P = .003) and 2-year overall survival (OS) (52% versus 93%, P = .003) by Kaplan-Meier analysis. Low TIL-count was significant on Cox univariate regression for inferior PFS (HR 4.5, 95% CI 2.0-9.9, P < .001) and OS (HR 4.6, 95% CI 1.8-11.8, P < .001). Multivariate analysis with clinical variables (age ≥60 years, high LDH, stage III/IV, CNS involvement) and TIL-count showed significance for PFS (HR 3.3, 95% CI 1.3-8.3, P = .010) and a non-significant trend for OS (HR 2.6, 95% CI 0.9-7.3, P = .064). A composite score including TILs and clinical variables (age ≥60 years, high LDH, stage III/IV, CNS involvement) effectively stratified monomorphic PTLD patients by PFS and OS (2-year OS: low-risk 93%, intermediate-risk 61%, high-risk 23%, P < .001).ConclusionsThe TME and TILs are prognostically relevant in monomorphic PTLD. Prognostic models including measures of the TME may improve risk stratification for patients with monomorphic PTLDs.     

Anti-NaPi2b antibody–drug conjugate lifastuzumab vedotin (DNIB0600A) compared with pegylated liposomal doxorubicin in patients with platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in a randomized,open-label,phase II study

BackgroundLifastuzumab vedotin (LIFA) is a humanized anti-NaPi2b monoclonal antibody conjugated to a potent antimitotic agent, monomethyl auristatin E, which inhibits cell division by blocking the polymerization of tubulin. This study is the first to compare an antibody–drug conjugate (ADC) to standard-of-care in ovarian cancer (OC) patients.Patients and methodsPlatinum-resistant OC patients were randomized to receive LIFA [2.4 mg/kg, intravenously, every 3 weeks (Q3W)] or pegylated liposomal doxorubicin (PLD) (40 mg/m², intravenously, Q4W). NaPi2b expression and serum CA-125 and HE4 levels were assessed. The primary end point was progression-free survival (PFS) in intent-to-treat (ITT) and NaPi2b-high patients.ResultsNinety-five patients were randomized (47 LIFA; 48 PLD). The stratified PFS hazard ratio was 0.78 [95% confidence interval (95% CI), 0.46–1.31; P = 0.34] with a median PFS of 5.3 versus 3.1 months (LIFA versus PLD arm, respectively) in the ITT population, and 0.71 (95% CI, 0.40–1.26; P = 0.24) with a median PFS of 5.3 months versus 3.4 months (LIFA versus PLD arm, respectively) in NaPi2b-high patients. The objective response rate was 34% (95% CI, 22% to 49%, LIFA) versus 15% (95% CI, 7% to 28%, PLD) in the ITT population (P = 0.03), and 36% (95% CI, 22% to 52%, LIFA) versus 14% (95% CI, 6% to 27%, PLD) in NaPi2b-high patients (P = 0.02). Toxicities included grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) (46% LIFA; 51% PLD), serious AEs (30% both arms), and AEs leading to discontinuation of drug (9% LIFA; 8% PLD). Five (11%) LIFA versus 2 (4%) PLD patients had grade ≥2 neuropathy.ConclusionLIFA Q3W was well tolerated and improved objective response rate with a modest, nonstatistically significant improvement of PFS compared with PLD in platinum-resistant OC. While the response rate for the monomethyl auristatin E-containing ADC was promising, response durations were relatively short, thereby highlighting the importance of evaluating both response rates and duration of response when evaluating ADCs in OC.Clinical trials.govNCT01991210     

A randomised,open label phase III trial with nimotuzumab,an anti-epidermal growth factor receptor monoclonal antibody in the treatment of newly diagnosed adult glioblastoma

PurposeA randomised, open label phase III trial was conducted to evaluate efficacy of nimotuzumab, a monoclonal antibody against epidermal growth factor receptor (EGF-R) added to standard therapy for newly diagnosed glioblastoma.Patients and methods149 glioblastoma patients stratified as with or without residual tumour were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous nimotuzumab 400 mg weekly added to standard radiochemotherapy followed by 400 mg biweekly after twelve weeks or standard radiochemotherapy. Progression status after 52 weeks (12moPFS) and progression-free survival (PFS) based on Macdonald criteria were co-primary and overall survival (OS), toxicity and quality of life secondary end-points.Results142 patients were evaluated for efficacy (per protocol cohort). 12moPFS was 25.6% in the experimental arm and 20.3% in the control group. In residual tumour patients (n = 81) median PFS was 5.6 versus 4.0 months, (hazard ratio (HR), 0.87; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.55–1.37), for patients without residual tumour (n = 61) it was 10.6 versus 9.9 months, (HR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.57–1.77). Median OS in patients with residual tumour was 19.5 versus 16.7 months, (HR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.52–1.57; P = 0.7061), for patients without 23.3 versus 21.0 months (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.41–1.44; P = 0.4068). A small cohort of MGMT non-methylated patients with residual tumour showed PFS of 6.2 versus 4.0 months (HR, 0.77; 95% CI, 0.35–1.67; P = 0.4997) and OS of 19.0 versus 13.8 months (HR, 0.66; 95% CI, 0.27–1.64; P = 0.3648). EGF-R amplification did not correlate with clinical efficacy of nimotuzumab. Nimotuzumab was well tolerated.ConclusionThis study, albeit negative, contains hypothesis generating signals supporting evaluation of correlative, efficacy-predicting tumour parameters for nimotuzumab in the treatment of glioblastoma.     

Daratumumab Plus Bortezomib,Melphalan, and Prednisone Versus Bortezomib,Melphalan, and Prednisone in Transplant-Ineligible Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: Frailty Subgroup Analysis of ALCYONE

BackgroundIn the phase 3 ALCYONE study, daratumumab plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (D-VMP) versus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (VMP) significantly improved progression-free survival (PFS) and overall survival (OS) in transplant-ineligible, newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. We present a subgroup analysis of ALCYONE by patient frailty status.Patients and MethodsFrailty assessment was performed retrospectively using age, Charlson comorbidity index, and baseline Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status score. Patients were classified as fit (0), intermediate (1), or frail (≥2); a nonfrail category combined fit and intermediate patients.ResultsAmong randomized patients (D-VMP, n = 350; VMP, n = 356), 391 (55.4%) were nonfrail (D-VMP, 187 [53.4%]; VMP, 204 [57.3%]) and 315 (44.6%) were frail (163 [46.6%]; 152 [42.7%]). After 40.1-months median follow-up, nonfrail patients had longer PFS and OS than frail patients, but benefits of D-VMP versus VMP were maintained across subgroups: PFS nonfrail (median, 45.7 vs. 19.1 months; hazard ratio [HR], 0.36; P < .0001), frail (32.9 vs. 19.5 months; HR, 0.51; P < .0001); OS nonfrail (36-month rate, 83.6% vs. 74.5%), frail (71.4% vs. 59.0%). Improved greater than or equal to complete response and minimal residual disease (10⁻⁵)-negativity rates were observed for D-VMP versus VMP across subgroups. The 2 most common grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events were neutropenia (nonfrail: 39.2% [D-VMP] and 42.4% [VMP]; frail: 41.3% and 34.4%) and thrombocytopenia (nonfrail: 32.8% and 36.9%; frail: 36.9% and 39.1%).ConclusionOur findings support the clinical benefit of D-VMP in transplant-ineligible NDMM patients enrolled in ALCYONE, regardless of frailty status.     

Atezolizumab Plus Chemotherapy for First-Line Treatment of Nonsquamous NSCLC: Results From the Randomized Phase 3 IMpower132 Trial

IntroductionWe report the final results of the phase 3 IMpower132 study evaluating atezolizumab plus carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed (APP) in patients with nonsquamous NSCLC.MethodsChemotherapy-naive patients with stage IV nonsquamous NSCLC without sensitizing EGFR or ALK genetic alterations were randomized in a one-to-one ratio to receive four or six cycles of carboplatin or cisplatin plus pemetrexed (PP) or APP every 3 weeks, followed by maintenance therapy with atezolizumab plus pemetrexed or pemetrexed alone. Co-primary end points were overall survival (OS) and investigator-assessed progression-free survival (PFS).ResultsThe intention-to-treat population included 578 patients (APP, n = 292; PP, n = 286). At the primary PFS analysis (May 22, 2018; median follow-up, 14.8 mo), APP exhibited significant PFS improvement versus PP (median = 7.6 versus 5.2 mo, stratified hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.49–0.72, p < 0.0001). OS for the APP group was numerically better but not statistically significant at the interim (May 22, 2018; median = 18.1 versus 13.6 mo, stratified HR = 0.81, 95% CI: 0.64–1.03, p = 0.0797) and final analyses (July 18, 2019; median = 17.5 versus 13.6 mo; stratified HR = 0.86, 95% CI: 0.71–1.06, p = 0.1546). The OS and PFS results favored APP versus PP across subgroups. Grade 3 or 4 treatment-related adverse events occurred in 54.6% (APP) and 40.1% (PP) of patients; grade 5 treatment-related events occurred in 3.8% and 2.9%, respectively.ConclusionsIMpower132 met its co-primary PFS end point but not its co-primary OS end point, with numerical improvement for OS in the APP arm. APP had a manageable safety profile, with no new or unexpected safety signals identified.     

Efficacy of Targeted Therapy for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma in the Elderly Patient Population

Introduction/BackgroundTargeted therapy has become the mainstay of treatment for mRCC. The efficacy of this therapy in the older population is poorly understood.Patients and MethodsData from patients with mRCC treated with first-line anti-VEGF therapy were collected through the International mRCC Database Consortium from 12 centers. Patient characteristics, data on second-line therapy, and outcomes including treatment duration and overall survival, were evaluated using summary statistics and multivariate analysis.ResultsAll patients (n = 1381) were treated with front-line targeted therapy; 144 (10%) were 75 years old or older. Six patients (4%) were favorable risk, 99 patients (69%) intermediate risk, and 39 patients (27%) poor risk according to Heng Journal of Clinical Oncology 2009 prognostic factors. The initial treatment for those ≥ 75 years of age was sunitinib (n = 98), sorafenib (n = 35), bevacizumab (n = 7), and AZD217 (n = 4). Twenty-three percent of older patients and 39% of the younger patients went on to receive second-line therapy (P < .0001). The overall response rate, median treatment duration, and overall survival for the older versus younger group were 18% versus 25% (P = .0975), 5.5 months versus 7.5 months (P = .1388), and 16.8 months versus 19.7 months (P = .3321), respectively. When adjusted for poor prognostic factors, age 75 years and older was not found to be associated with poorer overall survival (hazard ratio [HR], 1.002; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.781-1.285) or shorter treatment duration (HR, 1.018; 95% CI, 0.827-1.252). The retrospective study design was the primary limitation.ConclusionThe use of advanced age as a selection criterion for targeted therapy requires further study, with data suggesting no clinically meaningful differences in overall response rate, treatment duration, and overall survival between older and younger age groups.     

Long Term Survival With Regorafenib: REALITY (Real Life in Italy) Trial - A GISCAD Study

BackgroundRegorafenib is a key agent in metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC), but no validated factors predicting longer survival are available.Patients and MethodsREALITY was a retrospective multicenter trial in regorafenib-treated mCRC patients with overall survival (OS) ≥ 6 months. We aimed to assess the association between clinical parameters and outcome to define a panel identifying long term survivors among regorafenib candidates. Primary and secondary endpoints were OS and progression free survival (PFS), respectively. Statistical analysis was performed with MedCalc (survival distribution: Kaplan-Meier; survival comparison: log-rank test; independent role of significant variables at univariate analysis: logistic regression).ResultsHundred regorafenib-treated mCRC patients with OS ≥ 6 months were enrolled. Median OS was 11.5 m (95%CI:9.60-12.96); median PFS was 4.2 months (95% CI:3.43-43.03). The absence of liver progression and of dose and/or schedule changes during the first 4 cycles (mainly for good tolerability) were independently correlated at multivariate analysis with OS (Exp(b)1.8869, P= .0277and Exp(b)2.2000, P = .0313) and PFS (Exp(b)2.1583, P = .0065 and Exp(b)2.3036, P= .0169). Patients with neither of these variables had a significantly improved OS (n = 14, 20.8 months; 95% CI:12.967-55.267) versus others (n = 86, 10 months; 95% CI:8.367-12.167; HR = 0.4902, P = .0045) and PFS (11.3 months, 95%CI:4.267-35.8 vs. 3.9 months, 95% CI:3.167-43.033; HR = 0.4648, P = .0086).ConclusionThese 2 factors might allow clinicians to better identify patients more likely to benefit from regorafenib. Toxicity management remains crucial.     

Ixazomib Versus Placebo as Postinduction Maintenance Therapy in Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma Patients: An Analysis by Age and Frailty Status of the TOURMALINE-MM4 Study

BackgroundThe TOURMALINE-MM4 trial demonstrated a significant and clinically meaningful progression-free survival (PFS) benefit with ixazomib versus placebo as postinduction maintenance in nontransplant, newly-diagnosed multiple myeloma patients, with a manageable and well-tolerated toxicity profile.Materials and MethodsIn this subgroup analysis, efficacy and safety were assessed by age (< 65, 65-74, and ≥ 75 years) and frailty status (fit, intermediate-fit, and frail).ResultsIn this analysis, PFS benefit with ixazomib versus placebo was seen across age subgroups, including patients aged < 65 years (hazard ratio [HR], 0.576; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.299-1.108; P = .095), 65-74 years (HR, 0.615; 95% CI, 0.467-0.810; P < .001), and ≥ 75 years (HR, 0.740; 95% CI, 0.537-1.019; P = .064). PFS benefit was also seen across frailty subgroups, including fit (HR, 0.530; 95% CI, 0.387-0.727; P < .001), intermediate-fit (HR, 0.746; 95% CI, 0.526-1.058; P = .098), and frail (HR, 0.733; 95% CI, 0.481-1.117; P = .147) patients. With ixazomib versus placebo, rates of grade ≥ 3 treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs; 28-44% vs. 10-36%), serious TEAEs (15-29% vs. 3-29%), and discontinuation due to TEAEs (7-19% vs. 5-11%) were higher or similar across age and frailty subgroups, and generally somewhat higher in older age groups and intermediate-fit/frail patients in both arms. Treatment with ixazomib versus placebo did not adversely affect patient-reported quality-of-life scores across age and frailty status subgroups.ConclusionIxazomib is a feasible and effective maintenance option for prolonging PFS across this heterogeneous patient population.     

Real-world Outcomes With Cumulative Bortezomib Dose and Efficacy in the Treatment of Transplant-ineligible Multiple Myeloma With Cyclophosphamide,Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone

BackgroundHigher cumulative dose of bortezomib, a key component of Multiple Myeloma (MM) treatment regimens, has been shown to improve outcomes in MM patients, but must be balanced with toxicities including peripheral neuropathy. In this study, we studied the effect of cumulative bortezomib dose on survival, depth of response, and discontinuation rate in transplant ineligible MM patients.Patients and methodsData from 70 patients treated with Cyclophsophamide, Bortezomib, and Dexamethasone (CyBorD) in a single Canadian center were grouped according to above vs below median cumulative bortezomib dose and analyzed for progression-free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), depth of response, and discontinuation rate.ResultsThere was a trend for lower discontinuation rate (45.7% vs. 68.6%, P = .052) and significantly lower rate of neuropathy-related discontinuation (5.7% vs. 22.9%, P = .035) in patients who received higher than 43.1 mg/m² of bortezomib. The higher-dose group showed a trend for higher rate of complete response (14.3% vs. 5.7%, P = .225) and significantly higher rate of very good partial response or better (77.1% vs. 51.4%, P = .024). There was significantly longer PFS (24.3 vs. 9.1 months, P = .012) and a trend for longer OS (22.4 vs. 61.3 months, P = .061) in the higher-dose group. In landmark analysis after 180 days, PFS (23.5 vs. 24.3 months, P = .941) and OS were similar in both groups.ConclusionHigher cumulative bortezomib dose showed a lower rate of discontinuation, longer survival, and deeper response. Determining risk of treatment intolerance remains important for treatment.     

Bortezomib,Melphalan, and Prednisone With or Without Daratumumab in Transplant-ineligible Asian Patients With Newly Diagnosed Multiple Myeloma: The Phase 3 OCTANS Study

IntroductionIn the global phase 3 ALCYONE trial, daratumumab plus bortezomib/melphalan/prednisone (D-VMP) improved outcomes versus VMP in transplant-ineligible newly diagnosed multiple myeloma (NDMM) patients. Here, we report the primary analysis of the phase 3 OCTANS trial of D-VMP versus VMP in transplant-ineligible Asian NDMM patients.Patients and MethodsIn total, 220 patients were randomized (2:1) to receive 9 cycles of VMP (bortezomib 1.3 mg/m² subcutaneously twice weekly in Cycle 1 and weekly in Cycles 2 to 9; melphalan 9 mg/m² orally; and prednisone 60 mg/m² orally on Days 1 to 4 of each cycle) ± daratumumab 16 mg/kg intravenously weekly in Cycle 1, every 3 weeks in Cycles 2 to 9, and every 4 weeks thereafter until disease progression.ResultsAfter a median follow-up of 12.3 months, very good partial response or better rates (primary endpoint) were 74.0% versus 43.2% with D-VMP versus VMP (odds ratio, 3.57; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.99-6.43; P < .0001). Median progression-free survival (PFS) with D-VMP versus VMP was not reached versus 18.2 months (hazard ratio, .43; 95% CI, .24-.77; P = .0033); 12-month PFS rates were 84.2% versus 64.6%. The most frequent grade 3/4 treatment-emergent adverse events with D-VMP/VMP were thrombocytopenia (46.5%/45.1%), neutropenia (39.6%/50.7%), and leukopenia (31.3%/36.6%).ConclusionD-VMP demonstrated a favorable benefit/risk profile in transplant-ineligible Asian NDMM patients. This trial was registered at www.ClinicalTrials.gov as #NCT03217812.