Gravis, Gwenaelle

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.

136 Background: Patients with a low burden of metastatic disease and who relapse after localized therapy with curative intent have a longer overall survival. It is unclear whether these patients benefit from early docetaxel (D). Methods: Patients in GETUG-AFU15 (N = 385, median follow-up 84 mo) and CHAARTED (N = 790, median follow up 54 mo) were randomized to ADT alone or ADT + D and outcomes described using the same definition of high volume (HV) and low volume (LV) disease. (HV: visceral metastases and/or 4 or more bone metastases with at least one outside the axis) and whether the patients had prior local therapy or not. Results: Table 1 details across both studies that de novo HV group treated with ADT alone has the shortest overall survival and D has a consistent effect in improving OS. In contrast, in both studies patients with LV disease had a much longer OS with no evidence that D improved OS. Conclusions: There was no apparent survival benefit in CHAARTED and GETUG-15 studies with D for LV whether patients had prior local treatment or not. Across both studies, early D had a consistent effect and improved OS in HV pts especially those with no prior local therapy. Partial Support and drug supply by Sanofi. Clinical trial information: NCT00104715, NCT00309985. [Table: see text]

Purpose Ipilimumab increases antitumor T-cell responses by binding to cytotoxic T-lymphocyte antigen 4. We evaluated treatment with ipilimumab in asymptomatic or minimally symptomatic patients with chemotherapy-naive metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer without visceral metastases. Patients and Methods In this multicenter, double-blind, phase III trial, patients were randomly assigned (2:1) to ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo every 3 weeks for up to four doses. Ipilimumab 10 mg/kg or placebo maintenance therapy was administered to nonprogressing patients every 3 months. The primary end point was overall survival (OS). Results Four hundred patients were randomly assigned to ipilimumab and 202 to placebo; 399 were treated with ipilimumab and 199 with placebo. Median OS was 28.7 months (95% CI, 24.5 to 32.5 months) in the ipilimumab arm versus 29.7 months (95% CI, 26.1 to 34.2 months) in the placebo arm (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95.87% CI, 0.88 to 1.39; P = .3667). Median progression-free survival was 5.6 months in the ipilimumab arm versus 3.8 with placebo arm (hazard ratio, 0.67; 95.87% CI, 0.55 to 0.81). Exploratory analyses showed a higher prostate-specific antigen response rate with ipilimumab (23%) than with placebo (8%). Diarrhea (15%) was the only grade 3 to 4 treatment-related adverse event (AE) reported in ≥ 10% of ipilimumab-treated patients. Nine (2%) deaths occurred in the ipilimumab arm due to treatment-related AEs; no deaths occurred in the placebo arm. Immune-related grade 3 to 4 AEs occurred in 31% and 2% of patients, respectively. Conclusion Ipilimumab did not improve OS in patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer. The observed increases in progression-free survival and prostate-specific antigen response rates suggest antitumor activity in a patient subset.