Iuliu Hațieganu University of Medicine and Pharmacy
Citations 6
Neoadjuvant and adjuvant enfortumab vedotin plus pembrolizumab for participants with muscle-invasive bladder cancer who are eligible for cisplatin: Randomized, open-label, phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 study.
4614 Background: Enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab (pembro) is the established first-line standard of care for locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma and represents a novel neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment strategy for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The randomized phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15/EV-304 study (NCT04700124) evaluates neoadjuvant EV + pembro followed by radical cystectomy plus pelvic lymph node dissection (RC + PLND) and adjuvant EV + pembro vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by RC + PLND in participants (pts) with MIBC who are eligible for cisplatin-based therapy. Methods: Pts with clinical stage T2-T4aN0M0 or T1-T4aN1M0 MIBC (confirmed by central pathology and central imaging assessment) who were eligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy and RC + PLND were randomized 1:1 to receive either 4 cycles neoadjuvant EV 1.25 mg/kg IV on days 1 and 8 + pembro 200 mg IV on day 1 Q3W, followed by RC + PLND, and adjuvant 5 cycles EV + 13 cycles pembro (EV + pembro arm) vs 4 cycles neoadjuvant gemcitabine 1000 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8 + cisplatin 70 mg/m 2 on day 1 Q3W, followed by RC + PLND (cis + gem arm). The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS) by blinded independent central review. Key secondary endpoints were pathological complete response (pCR) rate by blinded central pathological review and overall survival (OS). Safety was a secondary endpoint; AEs of special interest were based on distinct prespecified lists for each drug. Results: A total of 405 and 403 pts were randomized to EV + pembro and cis + gem, respectively. Median time from randomization to the data cutoff date of October 27, 2025 was 33.6 months (range, 22.5–53.6). Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between groups. EV + pembro significantly improved EFS (median NR vs 48.5 mo; 24-mo estimated EFS rate 79.4% vs 66.2%; HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41–0.70; 1-sided P <.0001), OS (median NR vs NR; 24-mo estimated OS rate 86.9% vs 81.3%; HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48–0.89; 1-sided P =.0029), and pCR rate (55.8% vs 32.5%; estimated difference 23.4%, 95% CI 16.7–29.8; 1-sided P <.0001) vs cis + gem. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs occurred in 75.7% of pts with EV + pembro and 67.2% with cis + gem. Most common grade ≥3 drug-related AE of special interest for EV was skin reactions (14.1%); most common grade ≥3 AE of special interest for pembro was severe skin reactions (13.9%). Conclusions: Neoadjuvant and adjuvant EV + pembro significantly improved EFS, OS, and pCR rate compared with neoadjuvant gem + cis in pts with MIBC who were eligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The safety profile of EV + pembro was consistent with prior experience with the combination. These results support EV + pembro as an effective perioperative treatment option in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT04700124 .
Neoadjuvant and adjuvant enfortumab vedotin (EV) plus pembrolizumab (pembro) for participants with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are eligible for cisplatin: Randomized, open-label, phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15 study.
LBA630 Background: Enfortumab vedotin (EV) + pembrolizumab (pembro) is the established first-line standard of care for locally advanced/metastatic urothelial carcinoma and represents a novel neoadjuvant and adjuvant treatment strategy for patients with muscle-invasive bladder cancer (MIBC) who are ineligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The randomized phase 3 KEYNOTE-B15/EV-304 study (NCT04700124) evaluates neoadjuvant and adjuvant EV + pembro followed by radical cystectomy plus pelvic lymph node dissection (RC + PLND) vs neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by RC + PLND in participants (pts) with MIBC who are eligible for cisplatin-based therapy. Methods: Pts with clinical stage T2-T4aN0M0 or T1-T4aN1M0 MIBC (confirmed by central pathology and central imaging assessment) who were eligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy and RC + PLND were randomized 1:1 to receive either 4 cycles neoadjuvant EV 1.25 mg/kg IV on days 1 and 8 + pembro 200 mg IV on day 1 Q3W, followed by RC + PLND, and adjuvant 5 cycles EV + 13 cycles pembro (EV + pembro arm) vs 4 cycles neoadjuvant gemcitabine 1000 mg/m 2 on days 1 and 8 + cisplatin 70 mg/m 2 on day 1 Q3W, followed by RC + PLND (cis + gem arm). The primary endpoint was event-free survival (EFS) by blinded independent central review. Key secondary endpoints were pathological complete response (pCR) rate by blinded central pathological review and overall survival (OS). Safety was a secondary endpoint; AEs of special interest were based on distinct prespecified lists for each drug. Results: A total of 405 and 403 pts were randomized to EV + pembro and cis + gem, respectively. Median time from randomization to the data cutoff date of October 27, 2025 was 33.6 months (range, 22.5–53.6). Baseline characteristics were generally balanced between groups. EV + pembro significantly improved EFS (median NR vs 48.5 mo; 24-mo estimated EFS rate 79.4% vs 66.2%; HR 0.53, 95% CI 0.41–0.70; 1-sided P <.0001), OS (median NR vs NR; 24-mo estimated OS rate 86.9% vs 81.3%; HR 0.65, 95% CI 0.48–0.89; 1-sided P =.0029), and pCR rate (55.8% vs 32.5%; estimated difference 23.4%, 95% CI 16.7–29.8; 1-sided P <.0001) vs cis + gem. Grade ≥3 treatment-emergent AEs occurred in 75.7% of pts with EV + pembro and 67.2% with cis + gem. Most common grade ≥3 drug-related AE of special interest for EV was skin reactions (14.1%); most common grade ≥3 AE of special interest for pembro was severe skin reactions (13.9%). Conclusions: Neoadjuvant and adjuvant EV + pembro significantly improved EFS, OS, and pCR rate compared with neoadjuvant gem + cis in pts with MIBC who were eligible for cisplatin-based chemotherapy. The safety profile of EV + pembro was consistent with prior experience with the combination. These results support EV + pembro as an effective perioperative treatment option in this setting. Clinical trial information: NCT04700124 .
Acalabrutinib Plus Bendamustine-Rituximab in Untreated Mantle Cell Lymphoma
PURPOSE The combination of the Bruton tyrosine kinase inhibitor ibrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab for first-line treatment of mantle cell lymphoma (MCL) prolonged progression-free survival (PFS), but without improvement in overall survival (OS), likely because of toxicity. Acalabrutinib was shown to be efficacious and less toxic than ibrutinib in a head-to-head trial in chronic lymphocytic leukemia and therefore might lead to better outcomes in MCL. METHODS Patients 65 years and older with previously untreated MCL received acalabrutinib (100 mg twice daily) or placebo (until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity), plus six cycles of bendamustine (90 mg/m 2 once daily; days 1 and 2) and rituximab (375 mg/m 2 as a single dose; day 1) followed by rituximab maintenance in responding patients for 2 years. Crossover to acalabrutinib at disease progression was permitted. The primary end point was PFS per the independent review committee; overall response rate and OS were secondary end points. RESULTS In total, 598 patients were randomly assigned, with 299 in each arm. At a median follow-up of 49.8 months using the reverse Kaplan-Meier method, the median PFS was 66.4 months in the acalabrutinib arm and 49.6 months in the placebo arm (hazard ratio [HR], 0.73 [95% CI, 0.57 to 0.94]; P = .0160). Benefit was seen across all subgroups, including those with high-risk features. Overall response/complete response rates were 91.0%/66.6% and 88.0%/53.5% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. OS was not significantly different (HR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.65 to 1.13]; P = .27). Grade 3 or greater adverse events were reported in 88.9% and 88.2% in the acalabrutinib and placebo arms, respectively. CONCLUSION The combination of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab significantly improved PFS. Clinical benefit of acalabrutinib with bendamustine-rituximab was achieved with manageable toxicity.
Telisotuzumab Vedotin Monotherapy in Patients With Previously Treated c-Met Protein–Overexpressing Advanced Nonsquamous
EGFR
-Wildtype Non–Small Cell Lung Cancer in the Phase II LUMINOSITY Trial
PURPOSE Telisotuzumab vedotin (Teliso-V) is a c-Met–directed antibody-drug conjugate with a monomethyl auristatin E cytotoxic payload. The phase II LUMINOSITY trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT03539536 ) aimed to identify the optimal c-Met protein–overexpressing non–small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) population for treatment with Teliso-V (stage I) and expand the selected group for efficacy evaluation (stage II). Stage II enrolled patients with nonsquamous epidermal growth factor receptor ( EGFR )-wildtype NSCLC. METHODS Eligible patients had locally advanced/metastatic c-Met protein–overexpressing NSCLC and ≤2 previous lines of therapy (including ≤1 line of systemic chemotherapy). c-Met protein overexpression in nonsquamous EGFR -wildtype NSCLC was defined as ≥25% tumor cells with 3+ staining (high [≥50% 3+]; intermediate [≥25%–<50%]). Teliso-V was administered at 1.9 mg/kg once every 2 weeks. The primary end point was overall response rate (ORR) by independent central review. RESULTS In total, 172 patients with nonsquamous EGFR -wildtype NSCLC received Teliso-V in stages I and II. ORR was 28.6% (95% CI, 21.7 to 36.2; c-Met high, 34.6% [95% CI, 24.2 to 46.2]; c-Met intermediate, 22.9% [95% CI, 14.4 to 33.4]). The median duration of response was 8.3 months (95% CI, 5.6 to 11.3; c-Met high, 9.0 [95% CI, 4.2 to 13.0]; c-Met intermediate: 7.2 [95% CI, 5.3 to 11.5]). The median overall survival was 14.5 months (95% CI, 9.9 to 16.6; c-Met high, 14.6 [95% CI, 9.2 to 25.6]; c-Met intermediate, 14.2 [95% CI, 9.6 to 16.6]). The median progression-free survival was 5.7 months (95% CI, 4.6 to 6.9; c-Met high, 5.5 [95% CI, 4.1 to 8.3]; c-Met intermediate: 6.0 [95% CI, 4.5 to 8.1]). Most common any-grade treatment-related adverse events (AEs) were peripheral sensory neuropathy (30%), peripheral edema (16%), and fatigue (14%); the most common grade ≥3 AE was peripheral sensory neuropathy (7%). CONCLUSION Teliso-V was associated with durable responses in c-Met protein–overexpressing nonsquamous EGFR -wildtype NSCLC, especially in those with high c-Met. AEs were generally manageable.
Exploratory analysis of left- versus right-sided colorectal carcinoma in RAISE: A randomized, double-blind, phase 3 trial of ramucirumab (RAM) + FOLFIRI versus placebo (PBO) + FOLFIRI.
668 Background: Ramucirumab is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody antagonist of VEGFR-2. Overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in 2nd line FOLFIRI based treatment for metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) were improved with RAM therapy versus PBO in the RAISE trial. Recent work suggests mCRC primary tumor location is both prognostic and predictive; with improved OS and therapy-specific sensitivity observed in left (L)- vs right (R)-sided tumors. Given these findings, the RAISE trial data was subjected to post-hoc analysis to determine if sidedness influenced RAM efficacy. Methods: Primary tumor site was obtained. L-CRC was defined as the splenic flexure, descending and sigmoid colon, and rectum, while R-CRC included transverse, ascending colon and cecum. OS/PFS in L and R subgroups were analyzed via Kaplan-Meier method and unstratified log-rank test (treatments within subgroup), unstratified Cox proportional hazards model (estimate hazard ratio [HR] and 95% CI), and Wald test (treatment-by-subgroup interaction). Results: Tumor location was available for 1012/1072 (94%) patients, 699 L- and 313 R-CRC. Baseline characteristics were balanced between arms. RAM treatment enhanced L-CRC median OS by 2.5 mo (median 14.5 vs 12.0 mo) with a HR (95% CI) = 0.807 (0.675, 0.965), P = 0.019; compared to a 1.1 mo increase in median OS in R-CRC vs PBO (12.7 vs 11.6) with a HR (95% CI) = 0.971 (0.750, 1.258), P = 0.823; and, RAM enhanced L-CRC median PFS by 1.6 mo (6.0 vs 4.4 mo) and HR (95% CI) = 0.776 (0.664, 0.906), P = 0.001 compared to a 1.1 mo increase in median PFS R-CRC vs PBO (5.6 vs 4.5) with a HR (95% CI) = 0.855 (0.674, 1.084), P = 0.197. The treatment-by-subgroup interaction for both OS and PFS was not significant ( P = 0.276, 0.578, respectively). Conclusions: Despite L-CRC patients having longer OS/PFS and a seemingly stronger RAM treatment effect than R-CRC, the non-significant interaction test cannot verify sidedness as being predictive of RAM efficacy. The current study confirms ramucirumab benefits mCRC patients regardless primary tumor location. Clinical trial information: NCT01183780.
RAISE: A randomized, double-blind, multicenter phase III study of irinotecan, folinic acid, and 5-fluorouracil (FOLFIRI) plus ramucirumab (RAM) or placebo (PBO) in patients (pts) with metastatic colorectal carcinoma (CRC) progressive during or following fi
512 Background: Angiogenesis is an important therapeutic target in CRC; VEGF plays a key role in angiogenesis. RAM is a human IgG1 monoclonal antibody that targets the extracellular domain of VEGFR-2. The RAISE study evaluated the efficacy and safety of adding RAM to standard second-line treatment FOLFIRI. Methods: Eligible pts with mCRC who progressed on or after first-line combination therapy with bev, ox, and fp, had an ECOG PS of 0 or 1, and adequate organ function were randomized 1:1 (stratified by region, KRAS mutation status, and time to progressive disease [PD] after beginning first-line treatment) to receive RAM (8 mg/kg IV) plus FOLFIRI or PBO plus FOLFIRI every 2 weeks until PD, unacceptable toxicity, or death. The primary endpoint was overall survival (OS). Secondary endpoints included progression-free survival (PFS), objective response rate (ORR), and safety. Planned sample size of 1,050 pts ensured 85% power to demonstrate statistical significance at an overall two-sided alpha of 0.05, assuming a hazard ratio (HR) of 0.8. Results: Between Dec 2010 and Aug 2013, 1,072 eligible pts were randomized (RAM 536; PBO 536). Baseline pt characteristics were similar between treatment arms. The OS HR was 0.84 (95% CI: 0.73, 0.98; log-rank p=0.0219). Median OS was 13.3months (m) for RAM vs 11.7m for PBO. The PFS HR was 0.79 (95% CI: 0.70, 0.90; log-rank p = 0.0005). Median PFS with RAM was 5.7m and 4.5m for PBO. ORR was 13.4% RAM; 12.5% PBO (p = 0.6336). Subgroup results were consistent with the OS and PFS results. Grade ≥3 adverse events (AEs) occurring in >5% of pts in RAM+FOLFIRI were: neutropenia (RAM 38.4% vs PBO 23.3% ), hypertension (11.2% vs 2.8%), diarrhea (10.8% vs 9.7%), and fatigue (11.5% vs 7.8%). Conclusions: RAISE met its primary end-point, demonstrating a statistically significant improvement in OS for RAM and FOLFIRI vs PBO and FOLFIRI in second-line mCRC pts. Benefits were similar across important clinical subgroups and no unexpected AEs were identified. Clinical trial information: NCT01183780.