Amivantamab plus Lazertinib in Previously Untreated EGFR-Mutated Advanced NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: Amivantamab plus lazertinib (amivantamab-lazertinib) has shown clinically meaningful and durable antitumor activity in patients with previously untreated or osimertinib-pretreated EGFR (epidermal growth factor receptor)-mutated advanced non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC). METHODS: In a phase 3, international, randomized trial, we assigned, in a 2:2:1 ratio, patients with previously untreated EGFR-mutated (exon 19 deletion or L858R), locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC to receive amivantamab-lazertinib (in an open-label fashion), osimertinib (in a blinded fashion), or lazertinib (in a blinded fashion, to assess the contribution of treatment components). The primary end point was progression-free survival in the amivantamab-lazertinib group as compared with the osimertinib group, as assessed by blinded independent central review. RESULTS: Overall, 1074 patients underwent randomization (429 to amivantamab-lazertinib, 429 to osimertinib, and 216 to lazertinib). The median progression-free survival was significantly longer in the amivantamab-lazertinib group than in the osimertinib group (23.7 vs. 16.6 months; hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.70; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.58 to 0.85; P<0.001). An objective response was observed in 86% of the patients (95% CI, 83 to 89) in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and in 85% of those (95% CI, 81 to 88) in the osimertinib group; among patients with a confirmed response (336 in the amivantamab-lazertinib group and 314 in the osimertinib group), the median response duration was 25.8 months (95% CI, 20.1 to could not be estimated) and 16.8 months (95% CI, 14.8 to 18.5), respectively. In a planned interim overall survival analysis of amivantamab-lazertinib as compared with osimertinib, the hazard ratio for death was 0.80 (95% CI, 0.61 to 1.05). Predominant adverse events were EGFR-related toxic effects. The incidence of discontinuation of all agents due to treatment-related adverse events was 10% with amivantamab-lazertinib and 3% with osimertinib. CONCLUSIONS: Amivantamab-lazertinib showed superior efficacy to osimertinib as first-line treatment in EGFR-mutated advanced NSCLC. (Funded by Janssen Research and Development; MARIPOSA ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04487080.).

D3S-001, a KRAS G12C inhibitor with rapid target engagement kinetics, overcomes nucleotide cycling and demonstrates robust preclinical and clinical activities.

First-generation KRAS G12C inhibitors, such as sotorasib and adagrasib, are limited by the depth and duration of clinical responses. One potential explanation for their modest clinical activity is the dynamic "cycling" of KRAS between its GDP- and GTP-bound states, raising controversy about whether targeting the GDP-bound form can fully block this oncogenic driver. We herein report D3S-001, a next generation GDP-bound G12C inhibitor with faster target engagement (TE) kinetics, depletes cellular active KRAS G12C at nanomolar concentrations. In the presence of growth factors, such as EGF and HGF, the ability of sotorasib and adagrasib to inhibit KRAS was compromised whereas the TE kinetics of D3S-001 was nearly unaffected, a unique feature differentiating D3S-001 from other GDP-bound G12C inhibitors. Furthermore, the high covalent potency and cellular TE efficiency of D3S-001 contributed to robust anti-tumor activity preclinically and translated into promising clinical activity in an ongoing phase 1 trial (NCT05410145).

Phase II study to determine the anti-tumor activity and safety of simlukafusp alfa (FAP-IL2v) combined with atezolizumab in esophageal cancer.

PURPOSE: Reported here are results from the esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (SCC) cohort of a Phase II, non-comparative, basket study, evaluating the anti-tumor activity and safety of FAP-IL2v plus atezolizumab in patients with advanced/metastatic solid tumors (NCT03386721). EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Eligible patients had an Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0-1; measurable metastatic, persistent, or recurrent esophageal SCC; progression on ≥1 prior therapy; and were checkpoint inhibitor naive. Patients received FAP-IL2v 10 mg plus atezolizumab 1200 mg intravenously every 3 weeks, or FAP-IL2v weekly for 4 weeks, then every 2 weeks, plus atezolizumab 840 mg intravenously every 2 weeks. Primary endpoint was investigator-assessed objective response rate (ORR). RESULTS: In the response-evaluable population (N=34), best confirmed ORR was 20.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 10.4-36.8) with a complete response (CR) seen in one patient and partial responses (PR) in six patients. Disease control rate was 44.1% (CR=2.9%; PR=17.6%; stable disease [SD]=23.5%) and median duration of response was 10.1 months (95% CI: 5.6-26.7). Median progression-free survival was 1.9 months (95% CI: 1.8-3.7). Analysis of response by PD-L1 expression (Ventana SP263) resulted in an ORR of 26.7 % for patients with PD-L1-positive tumors (tumor area positivity [TAP] cut-off ≥1%; n=15) and 7.1% for patients with PD-L1-negative tumors (TAP cut-off <1%; n=14). Overall, the treatment combination was tolerable and adverse events were consistent with the known safety profiles of each drug. CONCLUSIONS: FAP-IL2v plus atezolizumab demonstrated clinical activity and was tolerable in patients with previously treated esophageal SCC.

Five-Year Survival Outcomes From the PACIFIC Trial: Durvalumab After Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

PURPOSE: The phase III PACIFIC trial compared durvalumab with placebo in patients with unresectable, stage III non-small-cell lung cancer and no disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Consolidation durvalumab was associated with significant improvements in the primary end points of overall survival (OS; stratified hazard ratio [HR], 0.68; 95% CI, 0.53 to 0.87; P = .00251) and progression-free survival (PFS [blinded independent central review; RECIST v1.1]; stratified HR, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.65; P < .0001), with manageable safety. We report updated, exploratory analyses of survival, approximately 5 years after the last patient was randomly assigned. METHODS: Patients with WHO performance status 0 or 1 (any tumor programmed cell death-ligand 1 status) were randomly assigned (2:1) to durvalumab (10 mg/kg intravenously; administered once every 2 weeks for 12 months) or placebo, stratified by age, sex, and smoking history. Time-to-event end point analyses were performed using stratified log-rank tests. Medians and landmark survival rates were estimated using the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Seven hundred and nine of 713 randomly assigned patients received durvalumab (473 of 476) or placebo (236 of 237). As of January 11, 2021 (median follow-up, 34.2 months [all patients]; 61.6 months [censored patients]), updated OS (stratified HR, 0.72; 95% CI, 0.59 to 0.89; median, 47.5 v 29.1 months) and PFS (stratified HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.68; median, 16.9 v 5.6 months) remained consistent with the primary analyses. Estimated 5-year rates (95% CI) for durvalumab and placebo were 42.9% (38.2 to 47.4) versus 33.4% (27.3 to 39.6) for OS and 33.1% (28.0 to 38.2) versus 19.0% (13.6 to 25.2) for PFS. CONCLUSION: These updated analyses demonstrate robust and sustained OS and durable PFS benefit with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy. An estimated 42.9% of patients randomly assigned to durvalumab remain alive at 5 years and 33.1% of patients randomly assigned to durvalumab remain alive and free of disease progression, establishing a new benchmark for standard of care in this setting.

Four-Year Survival With Durvalumab After Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III NSCLC-an Update From the PACIFIC Trial.

INTRODUCTION: In the Phase 3, placebo-controlled PACIFIC trial of patients with unresectable, stage III NSCLC without disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy, consolidative durvalumab was associated with significant improvements in the primary end points of overall survival (OS) (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.53-0.87; p = 0.00251; data cutoff, March 22, 2018) and progression-free survival (PFS) (blinded independent central review; Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors version 1.1) (HR = 0.52; 95% CI: 0.42-65; p < 0.0001; February 13, 2017) with manageable safety. Here, we report updated analyses of OS and PFS, approximately 4 years after the last patient was randomized. METHODS: Patients with WHO performance status of 0 or 1 (and any tumor programmed death-ligand 1 status) were randomized (2:1) to intravenous durvalumab (10 mg/kg) or placebo, administered every 2 weeks (≤12 months), stratified by age, sex, and smoking history. OS and PFS were analyzed using a stratified log-rank test in the intent-to-treat population. Medians and 4-year OS and PFS rates were estimated by the Kaplan-Meier method. RESULTS: Overall, 709 of 713 randomized patients received durvalumab (n/N=473/476) or placebo (n/N=236/237). As of March 20, 2020 (median follow-up = 34.2 months; range: 0.2-64.9), updated OS (HR = 0.71; 95% CI: 0.57-0.88) and PFS (HR = 0.55; 95% CI: 0.44-0.67) remained consistent with the primary analyses. The median OS for durvalumab was reached (47.5 mo; placebo, 29.1 months). Estimated 4-year OS rates were 49.6% versus 36.3% for durvalumab versus placebo, and 4-year PFS rates were 35.3% versus 19.5% respectively. CONCLUSION: These updated exploratory analyses demonstrate durable PFS and sustained OS benefit with durvalumab after chemoradiotherapy. An estimated 49.6% of patients randomized to durvalumab remain alive at 4 years (placebo, 36.3%), and 35.3% remain alive and progression-free (placebo, 19.5%).

Efficacy of Selpercatinib in RET Fusion-Positive Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: RET fusions are oncogenic drivers in 1 to 2% of non-small-cell lung cancers (NSCLCs). In patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC, the efficacy and safety of selective RET inhibition are unknown. METHODS: We enrolled patients with advanced RET fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy and those who were previously untreated separately in a phase 1-2 trial of selpercatinib. The primary end point was an objective response (a complete or partial response) as determined by an independent review committee. Secondary end points included the duration of response, progression-free survival, and safety. RESULTS: In the first 105 consecutively enrolled patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received at least platinum-based chemotherapy, the percentage with an objective response was 64% (95% confidence interval [CI], 54 to 73). The median duration of response was 17.5 months (95% CI, 12.0 to could not be evaluated), and 63% of the responses were ongoing at a median follow-up of 12.1 months. Among 39 previously untreated patients, the percentage with an objective response was 85% (95% CI, 70 to 94), and 90% of the responses were ongoing at 6 months. Among 11 patients with measurable central nervous system metastasis at enrollment, the percentage with an objective intracranial response was 91% (95% CI, 59 to 100). The most common adverse events of grade 3 or higher were hypertension (in 14% of the patients), an increased alanine aminotransferase level (in 12%), an increased aspartate aminotransferase level (in 10%), hyponatremia (in 6%), and lymphopenia (in 6%). A total of 12 of 531 patients (2%) discontinued selpercatinib because of a drug-related adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Selpercatinib had durable efficacy, including intracranial activity, with mainly low-grade toxic effects in patients with RET fusion-positive NSCLC who had previously received platinum-based chemotherapy and those who were previously untreated. (Funded by Loxo Oncology and others; LIBRETTO-001 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT03157128.).

Overall Survival with Durvalumab after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III NSCLC.

BACKGROUND: An earlier analysis in this phase 3 trial showed that durvalumab significantly prolonged progression-free survival, as compared with placebo, among patients with stage III, unresectable non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who did not have disease progression after concurrent chemoradiotherapy. Here we report the results for the second primary end point of overall survival. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive durvalumab intravenously, at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight, or matching placebo every 2 weeks for up to 12 months. Randomization occurred 1 to 42 days after the patients had received chemoradiotherapy and was stratified according to age, sex, and smoking history. The primary end points were progression-free survival (as assessed by blinded independent central review) and overall survival. Secondary end points included the time to death or distant metastasis, the time to second progression, and safety. RESULTS: Of the 713 patients who underwent randomization, 709 received the assigned intervention (473 patients received durvalumab and 236 received placebo). As of March 22, 2018, the median follow-up was 25.2 months. The 24-month overall survival rate was 66.3% (95% confidence interval [CI], 61.7 to 70.4) in the durvalumab group, as compared with 55.6% (95% CI, 48.9 to 61.8) in the placebo group (two-sided P=0.005). Durvalumab significantly prolonged overall survival, as compared with placebo (stratified hazard ratio for death, 0.68; 99.73% CI, 0.47 to 0.997; P=0.0025). Updated analyses regarding progression-free survival were similar to those previously reported, with a median duration of 17.2 months in the durvalumab group and 5.6 months in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.63). The median time to death or distant metastasis was 28.3 months in the durvalumab group and 16.2 months in the placebo group (stratified hazard ratio, 0.53; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.68). A total of 30.5% of the patients in the durvalumab group and 26.1% of those in the placebo group had grade 3 or 4 adverse events of any cause; 15.4% and 9.8% of the patients, respectively, discontinued the trial regimen because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Durvalumab therapy resulted in significantly longer overall survival than placebo. No new safety signals were identified. (Funded by AstraZeneca; PACIFIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02125461 .).

Durvalumab after Chemoradiotherapy in Stage III Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Most patients with locally advanced, unresectable, non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) have disease progression despite definitive chemoradiotherapy (chemotherapy plus concurrent radiation therapy). This phase 3 study compared the anti-programmed death ligand 1 antibody durvalumab as consolidation therapy with placebo in patients with stage III NSCLC who did not have disease progression after two or more cycles of platinum-based chemoradiotherapy. METHODS: We randomly assigned patients, in a 2:1 ratio, to receive durvalumab (at a dose of 10 mg per kilogram of body weight intravenously) or placebo every 2 weeks for up to 12 months. The study drug was administered 1 to 42 days after the patients had received chemoradiotherapy. The coprimary end points were progression-free survival (as assessed by means of blinded independent central review) and overall survival (unplanned for the interim analysis). Secondary end points included 12-month and 18-month progression-free survival rates, the objective response rate, the duration of response, the time to death or distant metastasis, and safety. RESULTS: Of 713 patients who underwent randomization, 709 received consolidation therapy (473 received durvalumab and 236 received placebo). The median progression-free survival from randomization was 16.8 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 13.0 to 18.1) with durvalumab versus 5.6 months (95% CI, 4.6 to 7.8) with placebo (stratified hazard ratio for disease progression or death, 0.52; 95% CI, 0.42 to 0.65; P<0.001); the 12-month progression-free survival rate was 55.9% versus 35.3%, and the 18-month progression-free survival rate was 44.2% versus 27.0%. The response rate was higher with durvalumab than with placebo (28.4% vs. 16.0%; P<0.001), and the median duration of response was longer (72.8% vs. 46.8% of the patients had an ongoing response at 18 months). The median time to death or distant metastasis was longer with durvalumab than with placebo (23.2 months vs. 14.6 months; P<0.001). Grade 3 or 4 adverse events occurred in 29.9% of the patients who received durvalumab and 26.1% of those who received placebo; the most common adverse event of grade 3 or 4 was pneumonia (4.4% and 3.8%, respectively). A total of 15.4% of patients in the durvalumab group and 9.8% of those in the placebo group discontinued the study drug because of adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Progression-free survival was significantly longer with durvalumab than with placebo. The secondary end points also favored durvalumab, and safety was similar between the groups. (Funded by AstraZeneca; PACIFIC ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02125461 .).

Safety and efficacy of dacomitinib in korean patients with KRAS wild-type advanced non-small-cell lung cancer refractory to chemotherapy and erlotinib or gefitinib: a phase I/II trial.

INTRODUCTION: Dacomitinib (PF-00299804), an irreversible pan-human epidermal growth factor receptor ([HER]-1/EGFR, HER-2, and HER-4) tyrosine kinase inhibitor, demonstrated antitumor activity in Western patients with non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) at a dose of 45 mg once daily. We report data from a phase I/II, multicenter, open-label study of Korean patients with refractory KRAS wild-type adenocarcinoma NSCLC (defined as patients with evidence of disease progression during or within 6 months of treatment with chemotherapy and gefitinib or erlotinib). METHODS: The phase I dose-finding portion identified the recommended phase II dose (RP2D) in Korean patients, evaluated safety, and characterized the pharmacokinetics of dacomitinib. In the phase II portion, patients received dacomitinib at the RP2D. The primary end point was progression-free survival at 4 months (PFS4m). RESULTS: Twelve patients enrolled in phase I, and 43 patients enrolled in phase II at the RP2D of 45 mg once daily. In phase II, PFS4m was 47.2% (95% confidence interval [CI], 31.6-61.3; one-sided p-value = 0.0007). Median PFS was 15.4 weeks (95% CI, 9.7-17.6); median overall survival was 46.3 weeks (95% CI, 32.7-not reached); and the objective response rate was 17.1% (95% CI, 7.2-32.1). Common treatment-related adverse events were dermatitis acneiform, diarrhea, and paronychia; there were no treatment-related grade 4 or 5 adverse events. Pharmacokinetic parameters of dacomitinib in Korean patients were similar to those reported in Western patients. By patient report, NSCLC symptoms "cough" and "pain" showed improvement within 3 weeks of initiating treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Dacomitinib was well tolerated and had antitumor activity in Korean patients with NSCLC who had previously progressed on chemotherapy and an epidermal growth factor receptor tyrosine kinase inhibitor.

Effects of erlotinib in EGFR mutated non-small cell lung cancers with resistance to gefitinib.

PURPOSE: Most lung cancers with activating epidermal growth factor receptor (EGFR) mutations respond to gefitinib; however, resistance to this tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) invariably ensues. The T790M mutation occurs in 50% and MET amplification in 20% of TKI-resistant tumors. Other secondary mutations (D761Y and L747S) are rare. Our goal was to determine the effects of erlotinib 150 mg/d in EGFR mutated patients resistant to gefitinib 250 mg/d, because the EGFR TKI erlotinib is given at a higher biologically active dose than gefitinib. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN: Retrospective review of 18 EGFR mutated (exon 19 deletions, L858R, and L861Q) patients that were given gefitinib and subsequently erlotinib. Seven patients had tumor resampling after TKI therapy and were analyzed for secondary EGFR mutations and MET amplification. RESULTS: Most patients (14 of 18) responded to gefitinib with median progression-free survival of 11 months (95% confidence interval, 4-16). After gefitinib resistance (de novo or acquired), 78% (14 of 18) of these patients displayed progressive disease while on erlotinib with progression-free survival of 2 months (95% confidence interval, 2-3). Six of 7 resampled patients acquired the T790M mutation, and 0 of 3 had MET amplification. Only 1 gefitinib-resistant patient with the acquired L858R-L747S EGFR, which in vitro is sensitive to achievable serum concentrations of erlotinib 150 mg/d, achieved a partial response to erlotinib. CONCLUSIONS: In EGFR mutated tumors resistant to gefitinib 250 mg/d, a switch to erlotinib 150 mg/d does not lead to responses in most patients. These findings are consistent with preclinical models, because the common mechanisms of TKI resistance (T790M and MET amplification) in vitro are not inhibited by clinically achievable doses of gefitinib or erlotinib. Alternative strategies to overcome TKI resistance must be evaluated.