Back to Authors

He, Philip

0000-0001-6804-1501

Mayo Clinic

AstraZeneca, Gaithersburg, MD.

Citations 3

Safety, Efficacy, and Pharmacodynamics of Tremelimumab Plus Durvalumab for Patients With Unresectable Hepatocellular Carcinoma: Randomized Expansion of a Phase I/II Study
Kelley, Robin Kate , Harris, William Proctor , Ikeda, Masafumi , Okusaka, Takuji , Kang, Yoon‐Koo , Qin, Shukui , Tai, David , Lim, Ho Yeong , Yong, Wei Peng , Cheng, Ann‐Lii , Gasbarrini, Antonio , Damian, Silvia , Bruix, Jordi , Bendell, Johanna C. , Kim, Tae‐You , He, Philip , Makowsky, Mallory, Negro, Alejandra , Gasbarrini, Antonio , Ikeda, Masafumi , Okusaka, Takuji , Kang, Yoon-Koo , Qin, Shukui , Tai, David W-M , Lim, Ho Yeong , Yong, Wei-Peng , Cheng, Ann-Lii , Damian, Silvia , Borad, Mitesh J , He, Philip , Kudo, Masatoshi , Abou-Alfa, Ghassan K , Bruix, Jordi , Sangro, Bruno , Yau, Thomas , Borad, Mitesh J. , Standifer, Nathan E. , Kudo, Masatoshi , Abou‐Alfa, Ghassan K.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | July 22, 2021 | Volume: 39 | Issue: 27 | Pages: 2991-3001

10.1200/jco.20.03555 Get It

PURPOSE This phase I/II study evaluated tremelimumab (anticytotoxic T-lymphocyte–associated antigen-4 monoclonal antibody) and durvalumab (antiprogrammed death ligand-1 monoclonal antibody) as monotherapies and in combination for patients with unresectable hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC), including a novel regimen featuring a single, priming dose of tremelimumab (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02519348 ). PATIENTS AND METHODS Patients with HCC who had progressed on, were intolerant to, or refused sorafenib were randomly assigned to receive T300 + D (tremelimumab 300 mg plus durvalumab 1,500 mg [one dose each during the first cycle] followed by durvalumab 1,500 mg once every 4 weeks), durvalumab monotherapy (1,500 mg once every 4 weeks), tremelimumab monotherapy (750 mg once every 4 weeks [seven doses] and then once every 12 weeks), or T75 + D (tremelimumab 75 mg once every 4 weeks plus durvalumab 1,500 mg once every 4 weeks [four doses] followed by durvalumab 1,500 mg once every 4 weeks). Safety was the primary end point. Secondary end points included objective response rate (ORR) by Response Evaluation Criteria in Solid Tumors v1.1 and overall survival; exploratory end points included circulating lymphocyte profiles. RESULTS A total of 332 patients were enrolled (T300 + D, n = 75; durvalumab, n = 104; tremelimumab, n = 69; and T75 + D, n = 84). Tolerability was acceptable across arms, with grade ≥ 3 treatment-related adverse events occurring in 37.8%, 20.8%, 43.5%, and 24.4%, respectively. Confirmed ORRs (95% CI) were 24.0% (14.9 to 35.3), 10.6% (5.4 to 18.1), 7.2% (2.4 to 16.1), and 9.5% (4.2 to 17.9), respectively. An early expansion of CD8+ lymphocytes was associated with response across arms, with highest proliferating CD8+ lymphocyte levels occurring in the T300 + D arm. The median (95% CI) overall survival was 18.7 (10.8 to 27.3), 13.6 (8.7 to 17.6), 15.1 (11.3 to 20.5), and 11.3 (8.4 to 15.0) months in the T300 + D, durvalumab, tremelimumab, and T75 + D arms, respectively. CONCLUSION All regimens were found to be tolerable and clinically active; however, the T300 + D regimen demonstrated the most encouraging benefit-risk profile. The unique pharmacodynamic activity and association with ORR of the T300 + D regimen further support its continued evaluation in HCC.
Phase III Open-Label Randomized Study of Eribulin Mesylate Versus Capecitabine in Patients With Locally Advanced or Metastatic Breast Cancer Previously Treated With an Anthracycline and a Taxane
Awada, Ahmad , Twelves, Chris, Yelle, Louise, Perez, Edith A. , Velikova, Galina , Olivo, Martin, He, Yi, Dutcus, Corina E. , Cortés, Javier , He, Philip , Kaufman, Peter A. , Olivo, Martin S, Awada, Ahmad , He, Philip , Cortés, J.

Journal of Clinical Oncology | January 21, 2015 | Volume: 33 | Issue: 6 | Pages: 594-601

10.1200/jco.2013.52.4892 Get It

Purpose This phase III randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00337103) compared eribulin with capecitabine in patients with locally advanced or metastatic breast cancer (MBC). Patients and Methods Women with MBC who had received prior anthracycline- and taxane-based therapy were randomly assigned to receive eribulin or capecitabine as their first-, second-, or third-line chemotherapy for advanced/metastatic disease. Stratification factors were human epidermal growth factor receptor-2 (HER2) status and geographic region. Coprimary end points were overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS). Results Median OS times for eribulin (n = 554) and capecitabine (n = 548) were 15.9 and 14.5 months, respectively (hazard ratio [HR], 0.88; 95% CI, 0.77 to 1.00; P = .056). Median PFS times for eribulin and capecitabine were 4.1 and 4.2 months, respectively (HR, 1.08; 95% CI, 0.93 to 1.25; P = .30). Objective response rates were 11.0% for eribulin and 11.5% for capecitabine. Global health status and overall quality-of-life scores over time were similar in the treatment arms. Both treatments had manageable safety profiles consistent with their known adverse effects; most adverse events were grade 1 or 2. Conclusion In this phase III study, eribulin was not shown to be superior to capecitabine with regard to OS or PFS.