Fléchon, Aude

5060 Background: Rucaparib significantly improved radiographic progression-free survival (rPFS) in men with BRCA-mutated chemotherapy-naïve metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) vs a control arm of physician’s choice of therapy (docetaxel or androgen-receptor pathway inhibitor [ARPI] therapy: abiraterone acetate or enzalutamide) in the randomized, multicenter, open-label, phase 3 TRITON3 (NCT02975934) study. Herein, we conducted an analysis to determine the impact of germline vs somatic mutation status on the efficacy of rucaparib. Methods: Patients were randomized 2:1 to receive rucaparib 600 mg BID or physician’s choice of docetaxel or ARPI following progression while on 1 prior second-generation ARPI in any setting. The primary endpoint was rPFS. Color Health did genetic testing. Treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) were reported for the BRCA subgroup. Results: In the rucaparib arm, 201/270 patients had BRCA mutations, and in the physician’s choice arm, 101/135 patients had BRCA mutations. Of patients with BRCA mutations: in the rucaparib arm, 80/201 (40%) were germline and 116/201 (58%) were somatic with 5/201 (2%) BRCA mutation status unknown, while in the physician’s choice arm, 39/101 (39%) were germline and 48/101 (48%) were somatic with 14/101 (14%) BRCA mutation status unknown. rPFS was significantly improved with rucaparib treatment vs physician’s choice in both the germline and somatic mutation groups (germline: HR, 0.52 [95% CI, 0.32–0.84]; somatic: HR, 0.38 [95% CI, 0.25–0.59]). Incidence rates of TEAEs were similar overall between patients with germline and somatic BRCA mutations in both arms. Conclusions: Rucaparib improves progression-free survival for patients with mCRPC with either germline or somatic BRCA mutations with a manageable safety profile. These data support the use of rucaparib as a beneficial treatment option for patients with BRCA-mutated mCRPC with germline or somatic mutations. Clinical trial information: NCT02975934 .

Abstract Purpose: The three-arm, phase III KEYNOTE-361 study did not meet its dual primary endpoints of progression-free survival (PFS) or overall survival (OS) with first-line pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy versus chemotherapy in advanced urothelial carcinoma. This prespecified exploratory analysis assessed the association of tumor mutational burden (TMB) and PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) with clinical outcomes. Patients and Methods: TMB and PD-L1 CPS were determined via whole-exome sequencing and PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx, respectively. The association was evaluated in each treatment arm using logistic regression [objective response rate (ORR)] and Cox proportional hazards regression models (PFS and OS); one-sided (pembrolizumab monotherapy; pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy) and two-sided (chemotherapy) nominal P values were calculated. Significance was prespecified at α = 0.05 without multiplicity adjustment. Efficacy was evaluated by prespecified cutoffs of 175 mutations/exome (TMB) and CPS 10 (PD-L1). Results: Of the 993 treated patients, 820 (82.6%) and 993 (100%) had evaluable TMB and CPS data, respectively. Continuous TMB was positively associated with ORR, PFS, and OS for pembrolizumab monotherapy (one-sided P < 0.001, P < 0.001, and P = 0.007, respectively); PFS and OS for pembrolizumab plus chemotherapy (one-sided P = 0.007 and P = 0.010, respectively); and OS for chemotherapy alone (two-sided P = 0.040). Continuous PD-L1 CPS showed evidence of anticipated association with ORR and PFS for pembrolizumab monotherapy. The subgroup with TMB ≥175 mutations/exome and PD-L1 CPS ≥10 had the highest PFS and OS improvements with pembrolizumab alone or with chemotherapy versus chemotherapy alone. Conclusions: These data suggest that TMB may be predictive of the response to pembrolizumab alone or with chemotherapy in advanced urothelial carcinoma.

540 Background: The 3-arm, open-label, phase 3 KEYNOTE-361 study (NCT02853305) evaluated first-line pembro ± chemo vs chemo in advanced UC regardless of PD-L1 status. The trial did not meet its primary end points of superior PFS and OS with pembro + chemo vs chemo and thus analysis of pembro monotherapy (mono) vs chemo was exploratory. We explored the association of TMB status and PD-L1 combined positive score (CPS) with clinical outcomes in KEYNOTE-361. Methods: In pts with TMB and/or PD-L1 data, the association between TMB (via whole exome sequencing) and PD-L1 (via PD-L1 IHC 22C3 pharmDx) and clinical outcomes (ORR, PFS, and OS) was evaluated. In each treatment arm, the hypotheses regarding the associations were evaluated using logistic regression (ORR) and Cox proportional hazards regression (PFS; OS), and 1-sided (pembro; pembro + chemo) and 2-sided (chemo) P values were calculated; significance was prespecified at α = 0.05 without multiplicity adjustment. Clinical utility was assessed using prespecified cutoffs of 175 mut/exome (TMB) and CPS 10 (PD-L1). Clinical data cutoff was April 29, 2020. Results: 820/993 pts (82.6%) had evaluable TMB data (pembro, 252; pembro + chemo, 282; chemo, 286). TMB (log10) was significantly positively associated with ORR, PFS, and OS for pembro ( P < 0.001, < 0.001, and 0.007, respectively) and PFS and OS for pembro + chemo ( P= 0.007 and 0.010, respectively). The area under the receiver operating characteristics (AUROC) curve (95% CI) for discriminating response was 0.64 (0.56-0.71) for pembro, 0.53 (0.46-0.60) for pembro + chemo, and 0.52 (0.45-0.59) for chemo. Efficacy by TMB cutoff is reported in the Table. All 993 pts had PD-L1 data (pembro, 302; pembro + chemo, 349; chemo, 342). PD-L1 was significantly positively associated with PFS for pembro ( P= 0.006) and ORR for pembro + chemo ( P= 0.042) but not chemo. Efficacy by PD-L1 CPS is reported in the Table. Conclusions: Strong associations were observed between TMB and all 3 clinical outcomes (ORR, PFS, and OS) with pembro mono in the first-line setting and a reduced association was observed between TMB and clinical outcomes with pembro + chemo. No consistent associations were observed between PD-L1 and clinical outcomes with pembro mono or pembro + chemo. Clinical trial information: NCT02853305. [Table: see text]